Apec project Completion Report

APEC Project Completion Report

SECTION A: Project profile

Project number & title:	CTI 20 2015T – 11^th Conference on Standards and Conformance
Project time period:	December 2015 – January 2017	Date submitted:	31 March 2017
Committee / WG / Fora:	SCSC
Project Overseer Name / Organization / Economy:	Soraya Lastra INACAL – Peru

SECTION B: Project report and reflection

1. 
   Project description: In 3-4 sentences, please describe the project and its main objectives.
   

1. 
   To establish a clear relationship between standards and innovation used in APEC economies.
   

2. 
   To share experiences among member economies on standards innovation, including conformity assessment and metrology.
   

3. 
   To increase knowledge on standards as innovation driver, including conformity assessment and metrology as a tool to support technological change and to promote trade facilitation among APEC economies.
   

4) To actively involve business community, including MSME, in order to increase awareness of the implementation of standards.

2. 
   Meeting objectives: Describe how the project met each of its proposed objectives. Please outline any challenges you may have encountered in delivering the activity.
   

1. 
   The presentations and cases presented in the 11^th Conference on Standards and Conformance gave insights on the relation between standardization and innovation in general terms and in a specific sectors, and clearly proved why these are closely related and how standardization impact positively on innovation projects. According to the conference survey results, 97% agreed that the conference had achieved the objectives.
   

2. 
   Experiences were shared in the presentations representing 12 different economies in a 2-day Conference, which was held in the Lima Convention Center, from 18 to 19 August 2016.
   

3. 
   The knowledge was improved and it was received 100 participants from the following 19 APEC economies: Australia; Canada; Chile; China; Hong Kong, China; Indonesia; Japan; Republic of Korea; Malaysia; Mexico; Papua New Guinea; Peru; the Philippines; Russia; Singapore; Chinese Taipei; Thailand; the United States and Viet Nam. In the conference survey results, participants indicated that prior to the presentation, they had some knowledge on the topics presented, compared to after the conference, in which participants indicated that it was mostly understood by them.
   

4. 
   The information regarding this project was shared to ABAC through SCSC Program Director. In the conference it was received participants from APEC SMEWG, private and industry sector and MSMEs. On the other hand, the conference report is available for business community and public in general through the following link: http://publications.apec.org/publication-detail.php?pub_id=1831
   

3. 
   Evaluation: Describe the process undertaken to evaluate the project upon completion. (e.g. evaluation through participant surveys, peer reviews of outputs, assessments against indicators, statistics demonstrating use of outputs etc.). Provide analysis of results of evaluations conducted and where possible include information on impacts on gender. Evaluation data needs to be included as an appendix.
   

The process undertaken to evaluate the 11^th Conference on Standards and Conformance upon completion were issued two post conference surveys: Conference survey and post-conference survey.

3.1 Conference survey

A conference survey was distributed among speakers and participants in order to measure the satisfactory level from the 11^th Conference on Standards and Conformance and to get feedback from the audience. Also, if gender issues were arised appropriately was asked in the conference survey.

In general terms, the aspects covered by this survey were:

• 
  To assess qualitative perspective from participants regarding to the development of the conference.
  
• 
  To know if participants learnt or gained some knowledge in the Conference
  
• 
  To identify what actions will be done by participants in their own economies and what APEC SCSC should do as next step.
  

5. 
   The results of the Conference survey are shown in the Appendix 3 of the Conference report, which is available in the following link: http://publications.apec.org/publication-detail.php?pub_id=1831 . In this survey, identification information from participants was optional. It was received replies from 60 participants out of 100 participants that attended to the conference. Based on the results obtained, it is important to highlight:
   

1. 
   Over 90 % of respondents agree and/or strongly agree that: objectives were clearly defined, the conference achieved its intended objectives, agenda items and topics were relevant and that content was well organized and easy to follow. In the same line, 92% of respondants considered the conference mostly and/or very relevant to their economies. So, this figures show that the conference development responded to the participants’ expectatives and was important for their economies.
   

2. 
   However, there were some interesting comments for future conference such as to make incidence in policies that allow trade, when talking about technical regulations and to show case studies where performing conformity assessment depending on the risk of the product at stake. Another recommendation was to be focus on specific sectors on Standards and Conformance in order to share more economies’ experiences and best practices in the development of their standards; also, it was requested to include other fields such as medicines. In addition, it was requested more summaries every session and panel discussion so it would be easier for the audience to understand the speakers’ main ideas. Regarding, new topics to be addressed it was requested international standardization topics and innovation in co-validation of international quality certificates.
   

3. 
   88 % of the respondants agree and/or strongly agree that gender issues were sufficiently addressed during implementation.
   

4. 
   Conference survey respondants acknowledged of the speakers and moderators’ high level. In this sense, 100 % agree and/or strongly agree that; the speakers and moderators were well prepared and knowledgable about their topics and the materials distributed were useful.
   

5. 
   Even 95% of the respondants agree or strongly agree that time allotted for training was enough, comments from participants stated that there were many important topics and have more time would be important because is necessary to deep on technical training.
   

6. 
   Regarding, the conference’s achievements, participants expressed that they could get experiences from different economies and more theoretical reasons that evidence that innovation development can be achieved through quality infrastructure implementation which includes standardization, metrology, conformity assessment and accreditation. Also, it was promoted a quality culture recognizing the importance of innovation and the standards in the contribution to the economic growth.
   

7. 
   87 % of participants affirmed that increased high or very high their knowledge and skills after participating in the conference. Regarding, new skills and knowledge gained participants recognized that it was fruitful to know different experiences from economies in the field of innovation and how standardization, metrology and conformity assessment impact positively innovation. In addition, the conference gave to participants an overview of innovation technologies developed from economies, the importance of develop quality infrastructure as an important key to improve the flow trade and the economy growth.
   

8. 
   Regarding what actions participants will do in their economies; the proposals were develop: trainings, new initiatives of policies, strategies, projects and work plans related to the importance of standards and conformance in the field of innovation.
   

3.2 Post Conference survey

A post conference survey was circulated among conference participants in order to know: if the conference’ experiences where clear enough to promote their implementation, their commitment and intention to implement within their own economy any initiative learnt in the conference and their intention to disseminate the project outputs to stakeholders within their own economy. In addition, recommendations regarding initiatives and future actions that APEC could take into account for promoting the use of standards innovation, including conformity assessment and metrology, were considered.

The post conference survey has three parts:

• 
  Part A Contact detail
  
• 
  Part B: Conference content
  
• 
  Part C: Future steps
  

The total number of respondants was 25 out of 100 participants from 14 economies, from which 44% of the respondants were women and 56% were men. The respondants belongs to Sub-Committee on Standards and Conformance, Food Safety Cooperation Forum, Small and Medium Enterprises Working Group. The results of this survey are in the Appendix 4 of the Conference report, which is available in the following link: http://publications.apec.org/publication-detail.php?pub_id=1831.

From the replies received, it is important to highlight:

1. 
   The majority of participants consider that the conference content and materials were useful and clear.
   
2. 
   Regarding actions than participants have done or planning to do the principal action prioritized is to share information with and/or stakeholders, followed by to use information exchange for bilateral projects or initiatives and to apply in their economies any initiative learnt.
   
3. 
   In the same line, participants were asked for future steps and initiatives that SCSC should take into account for promoting the use of standards innovation, which includes conformity assessment and metrology. Interesting proposals were received such as: Using IT system to promote the innovation, make cross-economies studies; make more conferences in this topic applied in specific sectors, to make awareness of government agencies in order to create government policies that promote the use of standards in all economic sectors, to emphasize the importance of standards and innovation to support micro, small and medium enterprises and the role of science and technology, among others.
   

3.3 Gender issues
As it was shown in the post conference surveys women participation was promoted in this project implementation. In this sense, in the conference survey 88 % of the respondants agree and/or strongly agree that gender issues were sufficiently addressed during implementation. In the post conference survey, it was received 25 respondants out of 100 participants, from which 44% of the respondants were women.
On the other hand, 47 participants out of 100 participants in the 11^th Conference on Standards and Conformance were women. Also, women experts were encouraged to participate, so 4 speakers and 1 moderator were women.

4. 
   Output indicators: Describe the main project outputs below. This may include workshops, tools, research papers, reports, recommendations, best practices, action plans.
   

.

Indicators (Edit or Insert rows as needed)	# planned	# actual	Details or notes
# workshops / events	1	10	2 days of conference
# participants (M/F)	70	100 (53 male/ 47 female)
# economies attending	12	19	19 APEC economies: Australia; Canada; Chile; China; Hong Kong, China; Indonesia; Japan; Republic of Korea; Malaysia; Mexico; Papua New Guinea; Peru; the Philippines; Russia; Singapore; Chinese Taipei; Thailand; the United States and Viet Nam.
# speakers engaged	From 6 different economiess	18 speakers (from 12 economies)
# other organizations engaged	0	2	Project was not co-organized. However, PTB and IEC were invited as a guest speakers
# publications distributed	1	1	Final Report
# recommendations agreed on	0	3	There were 3 recommendations proposed in the Conference report, which were endorsed by the SCSC.

5. 
   Outcomes: Describe any specific medium-term changes to policy, processes or behaviour that can be attributed to result from this activity. Please include details on:
   

• 
  What indicators were used to measure medium-term impact? (Example indicators: type/number of policies/ regulations/processes changed, % of businesses conforming to new standards, change in sector’s commercial activity, # individual action plans developed, # agencies using resource or tools etc.)
  

In order to measure the impacts of the conference, a post conference survey was given to the participants. The following questions were asked regarding the content of the conference:

• 
  Question: How useful was the conference content to your institution and your economy?
  
  • 
    From 1 to 6, being 1 the lowest possible answer, and 6 the highest, the average answer was 5.28. In other words, they found the conference content more than mostly useful.
    
• 
  Question: How clear do you think that the conference contents (presentations) were?
  
  • 
    From 1 to 6, being 1 the lowest possible answer, and 6 the highest, the average answer was 5.2. In other words, they found the conference content more than mostly clear.
    
• 
  Question: How useful do you think the conference materials were?
  
  • 
    From 1 to 5, being 1 the lowest possible answer, and 6 the highest, the average answer was 4.5. In other words, they found the conference content mostly useful.
    

• 
  Monitoring plans in place and proposed indicators to measure impacts, including any impacts on gender. Please summarise relevant information.
  

The monitoring plan for the project was based on the post evaluation survey. The impact was shown in the last question.

• 
  Question: What action(s) have you done or planning to do with the initiatives learnt in the workshop within your economy? You can mark as many as you consider
  
  • 
    Most people (39.66%) answered as an action to share any information or presentations with colleagues and/or stakeholders.
    
  • 
    15.52% answered as an action to apply any conference content.
    
  • 
    10.34% answered as an action to develop new policy initiatives.
    
  • 
    8.62% answered as an action to implement totally or partially any initiative learnt.
    
  • 
    6.9% answered as an action to gather information in order to use it for bilateral projects.
    
  • 
    5.17% answered as an action to develop work plans/strategies and to develop new procedures/tools.
    

6. 
   Participants/ Speakers Summary Table (compulsory for events): Must be gender-disaggregated.
   

Economy (Insert rows as needed)	# male	# female	Total
Australia	2	2	4
Canada	1	0	1
Chile	2	0	2
China	0	1	1
Hong Kong, China	1	0	1
Indonesia	3	3	6
Japan	2	0	2
Korea	2	2	4
Malaysia	1	0	1
Mexico	3	1	4
Papua New Guinea	3	0	3
Peru	23	28	51
Philippines	0	2	2
Russia	2	0	2
Singapore	0	2	2
Chinese Taipei	1	0	1
Thailand	1	5	6
United States	1	1	2
Vietnam	2	0	2
No member	3	0	3
Speakers	15	4	19

What was the approach undertaken for participant nomination/selection and targeting? Please provide details. What follow-up actions are expected? How will participants/beneficiaries continue to be engaged and supported to progress this work?
Participants were selected based on the benefits they could receive. The participants had to benefit directly from gaining knowledge, contacts and a have a better understanding of the importance of standards innovation, including conformity assessment and metrology, as a tool to support technological change, products and process improvement. The main beneficiaries of this project were:

• 
  National Standards Body (NSB), National Standards Developer Coordinator or Executive: Because they had the opportunity to exchange experiences and learnt from the best experiences in other economies related to standards innovation. Specially, NSB from developing economies because they gained a better understanding of standards innovation concept. NSB from developing economies have limited budget to make research and studies on this topic, so it saved them time and effort.
  
• 
  Industry (including MSMEs) owners or development product/innovation responsible: They were direct beneficiaries, because increase awareness of the implementation of standards as an innovation driver will improve their products and processes.
  
• 
  Accreditation bodies (responsible to testing and product certification bodies’ accreditation), metrology institutes (responsible for scientific and industrial metrology) and conformity assessment bodies: They benefit from this project because standards innovation has a close relationship with conformity assessment and metrology, so this project contributed to strength their capacity building as well.
  
• 
  Academia and government organizations: They gained knowledge in the standardization as a driver and it is expected that they will be able to include or reference standardization, conformity assessment and metrology in their procedures or innovation programs.
  
• 
  PPSTI, SMEWG and FSCF participated in the project activities so cross-fora collaboration was strengthen.
  
• 
  APEC Specialist Regional Bodies (SRB): During project implementation PASC and APLAC participate actively as speakers in the 11^th Conference on Standards and Conformance.
  

On the other hand, Conference report is available in the link http://publications.apec.org/publication-detail.php?pub_id=1831 for participants/beneficiaries and for public in general. Up today, 187 people accessed to the report.

7. 
   Key findings: Describe 1-3 examples of key findings, challenges or success stories arising from the project (e.g. research or case studies results, policy recommendations, roadblocks to progress on an issue, impacts on gender).
   

7.1 Initial survey: Some of the key findings came from this survey given to the economies.

• 
  From 16 economies which participated in the survey, 94% agreed that the commercialization stage is where standard play a better role in an innovation project and
  

• 
  69% of the economies (eleven from sixteen economies) consider the application of standards, metrology and conformity assessment into their program or incentives.
  

• 
  75% of the economies (twelve from sixteen economies) reported to have developed or participated in project initiatives which links (involves) standards, conformity assessment and/or metrology to innovation are: Australia; Hong Kong, China; Indonesia; Japan; Malaysia; Mexico; Peru; The Philippines; Russia; Singapore; Thailand and The United States. Most economies consider their project/programs or initiatives to be replicable, sustainable and relevant for APEC economies.
  

• 
  As result of the analysis from the survey replies received, the following nine (9) economies agreed to share ten (10) successful experiences in the 11th Conference on Standards and Conformance: 2 from Australia and 1 from Indonesia; Mexico; Japan; Peru; The Philippines; Russia; Thailand and The United States.
  

7.2 Recommendations: In the Conference report was proposed the following recommendations. The Conference report was endorsed by the SCSC.
• To continue sharing experiences regarding quality infrastructure support to innovation in specific fields, so that economies can exchange practical examples in their area of interest.
• To conduct case studies of good practices in which standards and conformance support innovation together with evaluation of economic impact of such standards on innovation.

• To develop communication plans in order to adequately involve and engage stakeholders in this kind of projects.

8. 
   Next steps: Describe any planned follow-up steps or projects, such as workshops, post-activity evaluations, or research to assess the impact of this activity. How will the indicators from Question 5 be tracked? How will this activity inform any future APEC activities?
   

The proposed monitoring strategy was to have a post workshop survey, which was given to the economies in order to see what their progress has been in terms of innovation and its relationship to standardization after the meetings in APEC. Also, this project could be an input for a next project on standards innovation.

9. 
   Feedback for the Secretariat: Do you have suggestions for more effective support by APEC fora or the Secretariat? Any assessment of consultants, experts or other stakeholders to share? The Secretariat examines feedback trends to identify ways to improve our systems.
   

No comments. APEC secretariat support was very helpful and constant.

SECTION C: Budget
Appended is the detailed breakdown of the APEC-provided project budget, including:

• 
  Planned costs: (using most recently approved budget figures)
  
• 
  Actual expenditures
  
• 
  Variance notes: An explanation of any budget line under- or over-spent by 20% or more.
  

No.	Item Description	Budget	Actual	Balance	Variance Notes
1.	Speaker’s Honorarium	4,000.00	500.00	3,500.00	Only 1 of 10 speakers was eligible.
2.	Per Diem - Speakers/Experts	8,550.00	5,420.00	3,130.00	Variance of per diem; only 9 of 10 speakers attended.
3.	Per Diem - Participants/Trainees	8,550.00	8,151.00	399.00	-
4.	Airfare - Speakers/Experts	40,000.00	13,566.66	26,433.34	Variance of airfare; only 9 of 10 speakers attended.
5.	Airfare - Participants/Trainees	38,055.00	17,803.73	20,251.27	Variance of airfare.
	Project Total	99,155.00	45,441.39	53,713.61

SECTION D: Appendices
Please attach the following documentation to the report. Note that the contact list for participants/ experts/ consultants is a mandatory requirement for all Project Completion Reports.

	Appendices	Notes
x	Participant contact list, including name, email address, gender, organization (mandatory)	Document attached
x	Experts / consultants list, including name, email address, gender, organization (mandatory)	See appendix 1
x	Event Agenda	See appendix 2
x	Reports, websites or resources created: links or soft copies	The Conference report is in the following link: http://publications.apec.org/publication-detail.php?pub_id=1831
x	Post activity survey or other evaluation data (raw and/or aggregated)	See appendix 3 and 4 of the Conference report, which is in the following link http://publications.apec.org/publication-detail.php?pub_id=1831
	Other information or resources
FOR APEC SECRETARIAT USE ONLY APEC comments: Were APEC project guidelines followed? Could the project have been managed more effectively or easily by the PO?
The objectives of the project were well realized, through good management of the PO in accordance with the guidelines.

APPENDIX 1

SPEAKERS

CTI 20 2015T – 11th Conference on Standards and Conformance – Project on Standards Innovation

In order of appearance in the agenda.

• 
  Eng Soraya Lastra
  

Gender: Female

Email: [e-mail]

Senior Executive of Standardization Directorate in the National Institute of Quality – INACAL. In her position, she supports Standardization Directorate in International Cooperation Projects, Planning activities and manage the national information service for technical standards in the framework of the TBT agreement. She has been working in the Peruvian Standards Body since 2007 and have occupied different positions in the Peruvian Standards Body such as Senior Standardization Specialist and Technical Expert in the Standardization and non-tariff barriers Surveillance Commission in INDECOPI (past Peruvian Standards Body). She has master studies on Operations and Systems Research.

• 
  Dr Alexis Valqui
  

Gender: Male

E-mail: [e-mail]

Dr Alexis Valqui is the Head of the working group “Technical Cooperation in Latin America and the Caribbean”, Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt (PTB) in Germany which is the National Metrology Institute of the Federal Republic of Germany. He works on Defining and implementing the policy and strategy of the working group regarding Quality Infrastructure (metrology, standardization, conformity assessment and accreditation) projects in Latin America and the Caribbean. Dr. Alexis Valqui is an expert on quality infrastructure issues, development policy, and agriculture development and on trade issues, especially on Economic Partnership Agreements. Dr. Alexis Valqui is an Advisor to the Presidency of Inacal on the implementation of this new institution, which comprises the areas of Standardization, Accreditation, Metrology as well as fourth division for the “Strategic Development of Quality” in Perú.

• 
  Mr Stephen Head
  

Gender: Male

E-mail: [e-mail]

Mr. Stephen Head is the Manager of Strategic Policy and Sector Engagement, in the Strategy and Stakeholder Engagement Branch of the Standards Council of Canada (SCC).  His current responsibilities for the SCC include monitoring the files of the WTO Technical Barriers to Trade Committee, the APEC Subcommittee on Standards and Conformance, SCC’s input to the standardization components of Canada’s various Free Trade Agreements, and regulatory cooperation. Mr. Head provides policy advice and analysis on the international, national and regional implications of a broad range of regulatory, trade and standardization policies, initiatives, programs and practices.

• 
  Mr Ma Leju
  

Gender: Male

E-mail: [e-mail]

Mr. Ma Leju is the PPSTI Chairman Office in China. He is a Project Manager at China Science and Technology Exchange Center. With a Diplomat at Chinese Embassy in Italy. Attache’, Third Secretary, Second Secretary in Science Office of Bilateral Innovation Cooperation China-Italy and Bilateral Cooperation in Space, Environment and Energy. Mr. Ma Leju was a Project Officer at Ministry of Science and Technology of Central and Eastern Europe Affairs in Bilateral STI Cooperation with CEE economies.

• 
  Dr. Victoria Coleman
  

Gender: Female

E-mail: [e-mail]

Dr. Victoria Coleman leads the Nanometrology Section at the National Measurement Institute, Australia (NMIA), and Australia’s peak body for physical, chemical, biological and legal metrology (measurement science). Dr. Coleman is Chair-Elect of the Asia Pacific Metrology Programme (APMP)’s Technical Committee for Material Metrology (TCMM) and holds a PhD in Materials Physics from the Australian National University in Canberra.

• 
  Mr Wong Wang Wah
  

Gender: Male

E-mail: [e-mail]

Mr. Wong Wang Wah is the Executive Administrator of Hong Kong Accreditation Service (HKAS) and Product Standards Information Bureau (PSIB). Mr Wong received his BSc (Hons) in Chemistry and MSc in Environmental Management from the University of Hong Kong, and his MSc in Food Science from the University of Reading, UK. He is the Chairman of the Asia Pacific Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation (APLAC) and a member of the Executive Committee of the International Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation (ILAC). He is the delegate of Hong Kong, China to APEC SCSC, International Organization for Standardization (ISO), Pacific Area Standards Congress (PASC), ILAC, International Accreditation Forum (IAF), and Pacific Accreditation Cooperation (PAC).

• 
  Mr Mitsuo Matsumoto
  

Gender: Male

E-mail: [e-mail]

Mr Matsumoto is the Director of the Office for Economic Partnership for Standards and Conformity Assessment – Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry in Japan. Deputy Secretary-General, International Cooperation, JISC Industrial Science and Technology Policy and Environment Bureau from Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI). Mr. Matsumoto has made his career in METI in the field of industrial standardization, quality control and conformity assessment, Research & Development projects for industrial technologies, natural resources and energy policy, commerce and information policy as well as international cooperation activities in these fields. He has been also participating in international/regional meetings such as ISO/IEC, OECD, ASEAN-METI dialogue, ASEM and APEC as a head of Japanese delegate.

• 
  Mr Bernardo Alejandro Estrada Samaniego
  

Gender: Male

E-mail: [e-mail]

Planning Director of the Secretary of Economy of Mexico. He is in charge of revising the accomplishment of the programs for the Economic sector derived from the National Plan for Development 2013 – 2018 in Mexico. Licensed in Business Administration and Master in Public Administration from the University of Valle from Mexico. He has specialization studies in matters of Commercial Policy, Customs Law and Strategic Planning in the Government Entities. He participated in diverse seminars and trainings given by organisms such as the Interamerican Bank of Development, the World Trade Organization and the Integration Association of Latin America.

• 
  Mr Kent Shigetomi
  

Gender: Male

E-mail: [e-mail]

Kent Shigetomi serves as the Director for Multilateral Non-Tariff Barriers - Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) USA. Mr. Kent. Shigetomi is the U.S. lead to the APEC Subcommittee on Standards and Conformance. He also works on issues related to rules of origin and development.

• 
  Mr Erich Inguil
  

Gender: Male

E-mail: [e-mail]

Executive – National Program of Innovation for Competitively and Productivity - Innovate Peru. Mr. Inguil is a biologist with 10 years’ experience in projects of applied research and innovation, with advanced expertise in project management and quality (PMI) in management systems ISO 17025 laboratories, in formulation and management of innovation projects, and graduate studies in plant breeding.

• 
  Mr. Roslan Alias
  

Gender: Male

E-mail: [e-mail]

Mr. Roslan Alias. Senior Principal Assistant Director from Accreditation Division, Department of Standards Malaysia. Professional Experience as a Scheme Manager for Malaysia Inspection Bodies Accreditation Scheme (MIBAS). Lead Assessor for MIBAS and Malaysia Laboratory Accreditation Scheme. APLAC Evaluator for inspection field.

• 
  Eng Jovita G. Panopio
  

Gender: Female

E-mail: [e-mail]

Eng Jovita G. Panopio has graduated with the degree of Civil Engineering at the Pamantasan Ng Lungsod Ng Maynila. She further enhance her knowledge by taking up B.S Sanitary Engineering. She also has graduated from Business Management and she has graduated of Master in Engineering Management and Master in Business Administration. At present, she is the Division Manager at the Housing Technology Development Office and the Secretariat Head of the AITECH INTER-AGENCY COMMITTEE, the Inter-Agency Committee responsible for the evaluation of new construction technologies. Eng. Jovita G. Panopiois also the Head of the Evaluation group responsible for the Technical evaluation of the New Technologies which were applied for AITECH Accreditation.

• 
  Mr Vimal Mahendru
  

Gender: Male

E-mail: [e-mail]

Mr. Mahendru is the President of Legrand-India, a subsidiary of the French multi-national Legrand. An engineer with 27 years’ experience in manufacturing, supply chain, finance and international business. Mr. Mahendru is a prominent member of the Indian electrical equipment industry and He was President of the industry association, IEEMA in 2010-2011. He is on several committees of the Government of India, including of the Bureau of Indian Standards, where he chairs the committee for standards development and maintenance for LT and HT fuses. Mr. Mahendru is an elected member of the IEC Standardization Management Board (SMB) for a period of three years. Simultaneously, he is the Convenor of the IEC SEG 4 for LVDC (Low Voltage Direct Current).

• 
  Mr Donny Purnomo
  

Gender: Male

E-mail: [e-mail]

Mr Donny Purnomo is the Acting Director of Accreditation of Certification Bodies from the National Standardization Agency of Indonesia (BSN). Engineering Physics in the Bandung Institute of Technology, Indonesia. Mr. Donny Purnomo has an experience as a Manager for Product and Person Certification Body Accreditation and Scientific Officer for Calibration Laboratory Accreditation Centre for Accreditation of Certification Body from the National Standardization Agency of Indonesia. Mr. Donny Purnomo has an International experience in the Laboratory Technical Assessor in IEC Conformity Assessment System for Electric and Electronic Equipment (IECEE CB Scheme) and Asia Pacific Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation (APLAC) peer- evaluator for Testing and Calibration.

• 
  Eng. Wilber Aragonéz
  

Gender: Male

E-mail: [e-mail]

Mr. Aragonéz is the President of Directive Council - Technological Innovation Center (CITE) Energy. CEO of Silicon Technology SAC. He actively participates in the management and direction of Silicon Technology SAC from 2001. It is the first Peruvian enterprise for the design and production of high voltage polymer insulators and main manager for the development of silicon coatings and the implementation of ABB electric equipment, promoting the focus of the company in the local and international expansion of the activity, especially in the medium and high voltage sector.

• 
  Dr Sivinee Sawatdiaree
  

Gender: Female

E-mail: [e-mail]

Dr Sivinee Sawatdiaree is the Head of International Relations Officer from the National Institute of Metrology Thailand. Dr. He studied science and specialized in theoretical physics. Dr. Sivinee has developed skills to formulate policy and recommendation based on her scientific and critical thinking. He has successfully introduced a concept of quality culture into the third National Master Plan on Metrology Development. She drafted a proposal that called for a reform of the infrastructure in Thailand.

• 
  Mr Nikita Utkin
  

Gender: Male

E-mail: [e-mail]

Mr Nikita Utkin is the Head of corporate development of Russian Venture Company (RVC). Mr. Utkin works in the technological sphere with focus on strategic management, investments and business planning since 2008. He has experience of consulting in the sphere of strategy and investments of the Russian innovative companies. He also contributes in standardization, being Governor of groups of national standardization: WG1 on Internet of Things, WG 2 on Smart Cities and WG3 on Big Data (based on TC 098).

• 
  Mr Adrian O’Connell
  

Gender: Male

E-mail: [e-mail]

Mr Adrian O’Connell is Deputy CEO at Standards Australia. Mr. O’Connell has extensive career experience in leading and managing professional service and membership based organizations across a range of private and public sector industries. He has made a proactive and constructive contribution to the work of ISO Technical Management Board (TMB) to support ISO and its members in effectively addressing current and future issues and challenges.

• 
  Mr. Byung-Goo Kang
  

Gender: Male

E-mail: [e-mail]

Mr. Byung-Goo Kang is the General Director for the Bureau of Standard Policy, Korean Agency for Technology and Standards (KATS) of Korea. He is Member of ISO Council, Member of the Accreditation system committee, KOLAS (Korea Laboratory Accreditation Scheme) and President of the Research Council for Standards Management. In addition, Mr. Byung-Goo Kang is the Chairman of KAB (Korea Accreditation Board) Deliberation Commission.
APPENDIX 2
Committee on Trade and Investment

Sub-Committee on Standards and Conformance

Agenda

11^th Conference on Standards and Conformance
Day 1: 18 August 2016
8:00 h – 9:00 h Registration

9:00 h – 9:10 h Welcoming remarks

Mrs Rocío Barrios, SCSC Chair, Executive President of National Institute of Quality (INACAL), Peru

9:10 h – 9:20 h Official photo

9:20 h – 9:30 h Business arrangements
Opening session

9:30 h – 10:00 h APEC survey on Standards Innovation

Mrs Soraya Lastra – Project Overseer of CTI 20 2015T – 11th Conference on Standards and Conformance

10:00 h – 10:30 h Are Standards Innovation Drivers?

Dr Alexis Valqui - Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt (PTB)

10:30 h – 11:00 h Driving Innovation Through Standardization

Mr Stephen Head - Manager, Strategic Policy and Sector Engagement - Standards Council of Canada

Canada

11:00 h - 11:10 h Q & A session

11:10 h – 11:40 h Coffee break

Session 1: APEC Approach on Innovation related to standards, conformity assessment and metrology
Moderator: Kent Shigetomi - Director for Multilateral Non-Tariff Barriers - Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) – USA
11:40 h – 12:10 h Policy Partnership on Science, Technology and Innovation

Mr. Ma Leju – PPSTI Chair’s representative

12:10 h - 12:40 h APMP’s strategy to foster and support innovation by strengthening measurement capabilities within the Asia Pacific

Dr Victoria Coleman – APMP representative

12:40 h – 13:10 h Accreditation and Conformity Assessment. Assisting Regulators and Specifiers

Mr Wong Wang Wah - APLAC Chair

13:10 h – 13:20 h Q & A session

13:20 h – 13:30 h Conclusions of Session 1 – Moderator

13:30 h – 14:30 Lunch

Session 2: Discussion Policy on Innovation

Moderator: Mr. Vimal Mahendru – IEC Ambassador

14:30 h – 15:00 h Supporting Development of Standards in the Area of Cutting-edge Technology

Mr Mitsuo Matsumoto - Director, Office for Economic Partnership for Standards and Conformity Assessment – Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry

Japan

15:00 h – 15:30 h Mexico´s Program of Innovative Development for 2013-2018 (PRODEINN)

Mr Bernardo Alejandro Estrada Samaniego – Planning Director – Ministry of Economy

Mexico

15:30 h – 15:40 h Q & A session

15:40 h – 16:10 h Coffee break

16:10 h – 16:40 h Strategy for American Innovation

Mr Kent. Shigetomi - Director for Multilateral Non-Tariff Barriers - Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR)

USA

16:40 h – 17:10 h Increasing competitiveness in companies through innovation projects cofinancing and Quality Management Systems certifications

Mr. Erich Inguil – Executive – National Program of Innovation for Competitively and Productivity

Peru

17:10 h – 17:20 h Q & A session

17:20 h – 17:30 h Conclusions of Session 2 – Moderator

17:30 h – 17:40 h Conclusions of Day 1
Day 2: 19 August 2016
8:00 h – 9:00 h Registration

9:00 h – 9:10 h Review of the first day and next steps

Mrs Soraya Lastra – Project Overseer of CTI 20 2015T – 11th Conference on Standards and Conformance
Session 3: Accreditation supporting Innovation
Moderator: Mr Wong Wang Wah - APLAC Chair
9:10 h – 9:40 h Innovation on Accreditation - reducing regulatory burden

Mr. Roslan Alias - Senior Principal Assistant Director - Accreditation Division - Department of Standards Malaysia

Malaysia
9:40 h – 10:10 h Accreditation of Innovative Technologies for Housing

Eng Jovita G. Panopio– Secretariat Head of Accreditation of Innovative Technologies for Housing (AITECH) – National Housing Authority

The Philippines

10:40 h – 10:50 h Q & A session

10:50 h – 11:00 h Conclusions of Session 3 – Moderator

11:00 h – 11:30 h Coffee break
Session 4: Case studies on innovation – Part 1: Energy and Electro technical Sector
Moderator: Mr Mitsuo Matsumoto - Director, Office for Economic Partnership for Standards and |Conformity Assessment – Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry – Japan
11:30 h -12:00 h Electricity access for all: IEC International Standards for inclusive development

Mr. Vimal Mahendru - Convener of the IEC Systems Evaluation Group 4 (SEG4) for Low Voltage Direct Current Applications – IEC Ambassador

12:00 h – 12:30 h Gasoline to LPG converter kit for small fishing boat engine

Mr. Donny Purnomo - Acting Director of Accreditation of Certification Body - National Standardization Agency of Indonesia (BSN)

Indonesia

12:30 h – 13:00 h Importance of the lab tests and standards in the development and innovation of technical products

Eng. Wilber Aragonéz – President of Directive Council - Productive Innovation and Technological Transfer Center (CITE) Energy

Peru

13:00 h – 13:10 h Q & A session

13:10 h – 13:20 h Conclusions of Session 4 – Moderator

13:20 h – 14:50 h Lunch
Session 5: Case studies on innovation – Part 2: Metrology
Moderator: Eng José Dajes – Director – Directorate of Metrology – National Institute of Quality (INACAL) - Peru
14:50 h – 15:20 h The role of nano- and bio-measurement in support of innovation in Australia

Dr. Victoria Coleman, Project Leader and Acting Section Manager, Nanometrology

Australia

15:20 h – 15:50 h Driving Innovative Measurement to Support SME in Thailand

Dr. Sivinee Sawatdiaree, Head of International Relations Officer from the National Institute of Metrology

Thailand

15:50 h – 16:00 h Q & A session

16:00 h – 16:10 h Conclusion of Session 5 - Moderator

16:10 h – 16:40 h Coffee break
Session 6: Case studies on innovation – Part 3: Standards
Moderator: Mrs Rosario Uría – Director of Standardization Directorate – National Institute of Quality (INACAL) - Peru
16:40 h - 17:10 h Standardization in Smart City, IoT and Big Data areas

Mr Nikita Utkin, Head of corporate development, Russian Venture Company

Russia

17:10 h – 17:40 h Standards and Innovation – Standards as an enabler

Mr Adrian O´Connell – Deputy CEO – Standards Australia

Australia

17:40 h – 18:10 h Standards and R  D

Dr Byung-Goo Kang- Director General for the Bureau of Standard Policy - Korean Agency for Technology and Standards

Republic of Korea

18:10 h – 18:20 h Q & A session

18:20 h – 18:30 h Conclusions of Session 6 – Moderator

18:30 h – 18:40 h Conclusions of Workshop