apec project monitoring report docs/2745... · web viewrosario uríanational institute of quality -...

APEC Project Monitoring ReportSECTION A: Project profile

Project number & title: CTI 13 2015A (SCSC) – Supporting Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises (MSMEs) Trade Facilitation Through Standardization Activities

Time period covered in report:

February 2016 – July 2016

Date submitted: July 2016

Committee / WG / Fora: SCSC

Project Overseer Name: Organization / Economy

Rosario UríaNational Institute of Quality - INACAL – Peru

SECTION B: Project updateBriefly answer each of the questions below to a maximum of 2-3 pages. If you have submitted previous Monitoring Reports, focus on progress since the last report.

1. Current status of project: On schedule: YES / NO On budget: YES / NO On target to meet project objectives: YES / NO

If NO, provide details: How far off schedule, budget or objectives? What actions are being taken to resolve delays? What support is needed from your Committee or the Secretariat?

The delay presented is regarding the survey report, due to the following reasons:

Due to the delay in signing the contract with the consultant, survey design and distribution was extended to March, also the response of economies took more than expected time, and analysis of the survey also because in some cases had more than one survey per economy.

Although according to the work plan, the survey report should have been ready by the end of May, it has not affected the project objectives, because after the analysis of the survey and contact the economies, we have managed to identify the relevant issues and speakers from Australia, Japan, United States, Malaysia, Chinese Taipei, Korea, Thailand, Singapore, Philippines, Peru, and from, PASC in representation of Standard Regional Bodies. All of them will show their experiences in the workshop, according with the objectives.

The workshop will be held in August according with the work plan. The organization of the workshop is in progress and under control.

In conclusion, survey results has been the principal source to make the agenda and project objectives has not been affected at all.

2. Implementation: Describe progress against the project work plan and proposed objectives. Were adjustments made to the scope or timing of the project? What outputs (e.g. agenda, report, workshop, tools, best practices) have been delivered? How have/are

these outputs being utilised?

The project work plan progress has been carrying out in the following activities:

- Cross fora on line investigation related to the scope and objectives of this project was carried out in order to set a baseline and avoid overlapping activities of the project. Once the cross-fora investigation was finished, it was

socialized with our cosponsors in order to get their feedback. Cosponsors gave us their feedback which was included.

- Survey : The survey was designed and socialized with our cosponsors. Cosponsors’ comments were considered in the survey. The survey was distributed by SCSC PD to SCSC members and APEC related fora such as SMEWG. The survey was sent to APEC Economies on March 2016 and responses received from April to May 2016. Particular enquires were sent by e-mail to those surveys that showed relevant information to go in depth thinking in the aims of the workshop. The survey is on Annex 1. 12 economies answered to the survey belonging to SCSC. The data has already been analysed and the survey report is on progress to be distributed afterwards to the APEC economies.

- Draft Agenda: On May 2016 a draft agenda of the Workshop Supporting Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises (MSMEs) Trade Facilitation through Standardization Activities was prepared. The draft agenda covered two days. The day one considers speakers presentations on topics related to Regional Approach to support MSMEs through standardization activities and Initiatives to strength capacities in MSME´s for APEC members, and day two for discussion on the best practices. Draft Agenda has been circulated and updated when speakers confirmed participation.

- Workshop dissemination: Invitations has been circulated, speakers have confirmed their participation. Close work with APEC Secretariat has made in order to fund speakers and participants from travel-eligible economies.

- Financing support have been offered to some speakers following APEC guidelines for this kind of events. In that sense, APEC Secretariat is arranging details with Economies representatives.

Were adjustments made to the scope or timing of the project?

No adjustments were made by this time. The work plan is in progress.

What outputs (e.g. agenda, report, workshop, tools, best practices) have been delivered? How have/are these outputs being utilized?

- Cross-fora on line investigation: It has been finished. This research has established a baseline and will avoid work duplication made before by APEC.

- Survey: The survey design was finished with the support of our cosponsors. Also, the survey was circulated to the SCSC members and APEC related fora by SCSC PD (see Annex 1).

- Survey replies: 12 economies answered to the survey belonging to SCSC. The survey replies were used to make the agenda for the Workshop Supporting Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises (MSMEs) Trade Facilitation through Standardization Activities .

- Agenda: The Workshop Supporting Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises (MSMEs) Trade Facilitation through Standardization Activities has a high participation from APEC economies which will contribute to fulfil the objective to share experiences among member economies. In this sense, the agenda proposed has considered the participation of: 1 SRB and 10 economies (see Annex 2)

- Currently, we are collecting the presentations and short bios of the speakers will take part on the workshop and we just have finished with the national and international lists of participants for the 2-days workshop.

3. Evaluation: What are the indicators developed under the project to measure progress/success? Has baseline information or evaluation results been collected? How will any potential impacts on gender be measured? If relevant please provide details.

The project has a work plan to follow. So, the progress can be measured according to this work plan. Most of the project outputs have been delivered on time, a delay has been presented with the survey report but project objectives have not been affected. It is expected to have active participation of SCSC members and members of SMEWG.

At present, our efforts have been addressed to achieve the work plan and the desired indicators. We can show the following achievements:

The consultant was contracted by APEC The baseline information was collected in the cross-fora on line investigation. The Survey was designed and distributed; we have gathered survey responses of 12 Economies. This

outcome fulfil the indicator of having information of at least 12 Economies. China Taipei, Japan, USA, Chile, Mexico, Singapore, The Philippines, Malaysia, Korea, Peru, Australia and Thailand. The information of this survey report will be presented in the open session by the Project Overseer in the workshop will be held in Lima, Peru.

To involve in the workshop speakers from at least 6 different economies,speakers from Australia, Japan, United States, Thailand, Singapore, The Philippines, Malaysia, China Taipei, Peru and Korea have confirmed their participation in the workshop as speakers after invited. The indicator to involve at least 6 speakers of different Economies have been accomplished.

The draft agenda and invitation documents has been circulated through SCSC PD to SMEWG. Also, Peruvian contact points of this APEC fora has been invited directly in order to promote their participation.

We are expecting to receive workshop participants from at least 12 Economies so the indicator will be reached. As it mentioned in the last monitoring report, a broad participation will allow share different points of view during the second day of the workshop.

In the workshop it is expected to have at least 70 participants including APEC economies and also local participation following APEC registration procedures. The venue facilities and invitation has been made in order to allocate 100 participants, so this objective will be achieved.

Finally, at the end of the workshop, a result of survey satisfaction will be given to workshop participants and speakers in order to know the efficiency of the workshop, if the objectives were successfully achieved and the organization of the workshop was satisfactory. It is expected to receive replies from at least 60% from participants and speakers. Gender question will be included in order to measure men and women participation in the workshop and women participation in innovation issues.

Regarding the gender topic, we have encouraged women participation and feedback in all project activities, as many women work on Business and MSMEs in APEC region and also are an important asset in National Standards Body. At this stage, women participation has been as follows:

- P.O and P.O support team: P.O is a woman and supporting this Project by Executive assistant of Standardization Directorate of the National Institute of Quality in Peru, who is a woman as well.

- Survey replies: Regarding gender question, it was received the following replies:

Gender Number Percentage

Female 07 44%

Male 09 56%

Total 16 100%

Speakers: It is expected to have 13 speakers, 8 of them (62%) are women.

4. Challenges: If not covered in Q1, describe any issues which impacted (or might still impact) on the effective delivery of the project. How have these affected the objectives, deliverables, timeline or budget? What are the risk management strategies in place to manage potential or real risks

The challenges faced in the following stages will be:

One of the project outputs is a publication with APEC recommendations which will be served as a reference material from any APEC economy which require to implement suggested initiatives that NSB could apply to help MSMEs better understand the benefits of standards & conformance, and encourage adoption of standards and services by accredited conformity assessment providers and initiatives to get MSMEs more involved in the development of standards, conformity assessment and metrology businesses, so as a result of discussion on 2-day workshop, we expect to have meaningful and representative data and information of the best initiatives. We are preparing specific guidelines to lead the working groups through moderators.

Speakers and Participants arrive on time for the Conference. As they are making a long trip some delays could be presented. To avoid this APEC funded participants and speakers will arrive the day before of the Conference.

5. Engagement: Describe the engagement and roles of stakeholders in the implementation of the project, including other APEC fora, experts and participants.

Stakeholders and economies has been highly involved. So far we have received contributions from:

- APEC fora: SCSC and SMEWG.- SRB: PASC.- Co-sponsoring economies: 7 economies- 11 economies will share their initiatives - The collaboration of speakers and moderators will be relevant in the following steps.

FOR APEC SECRETARIAT USE ONLY APEC comments: Is the project management effective? How could it be improved? Are APEC guidelines being followed?

There was a delay in the process of survey, afterwards the PO has done good follow ups.

ANNEX 1

Supporting Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises (MSMEs) Trade Facilitation through Standardization Activities

The Survey Questionnaire

Survey: Supporting MSMEs Trade Facilitation through Standardization

APEC Project: CTI 13 2015A – Supporting Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises (MSMEs) Trade Facilitation through Standardization Activities

*Mandatory

1. Introduction

MSMEs are important part of APEC economies and have been an APEC’s objective to integrate them in regional and global markets. On May 2015 in the Meeting of APEC Ministers Responsible for Trade, it was recognized that micro, small and medium enterprises (MSMEs) are an important force in economic activity, growth, job creation, community resilience and innovation. Ministers engage to complement APEC’s initiatives on promoting SMEs’ participation in Global Value Chains with an agenda that will support micro and small enterprises as direct exporters. The promotion of the use of standards and conformance among MSMEs will support them to access new markets and to be part of Global Value Chains.

The primary goal of this project is to learn the Best Initiatives that National Standards Body, Conformity Assessment Bodies, Accreditation Bodies and National Metrology Institutes among the region could apply in order to help MSMEs to be more competitive and to help them to better integrate into regional and global markets.

Your contribution in this survey will be very important for the development of the Project.

Part A: Contact details

1. Name: *

2. Gender: *

Male

Female

3. Position: *

4.a. Institution/Organization: *

4.b. Type of institution/organization *

Public

Private

Other:

5. Economy *

Australia

Brunei Darussalam

Canada

People’s Republic of China

Chile

Hong Kong, China

Indonesia

Japan

Republic of Korea

Malaysia

Mexico

New Zealand

Papua New Guinea

Peru

Russia

The Philippines

Singapore

Chinese Taipei

Thailand

The United States

Viet Nam

Other:

6. Which sector/entity does your institution represent? (You can select more than one option) *

Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises

National Standards Body

National Metrology Institute

Conformity Assessment Bodies

National Accreditation Board

Other:

7. If any, which APEC fora are you representing? *

Sub Committee on Standards and Conformance (SCSC)

Small and Medium Enterprises Working Group (SMEWG)

Other:

Part B: General Information

8. In your economy, how much active involvement do women have in the following organizations/institutions? *

1. None 2. Low 3. Modest 4. Medium 5. High


Accreditation Board


Conformity Assessment Body

Micro, small and medium enterprises

9. What is the level of participation of the following organizations in supporting Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises (MSMEs)?

1. No relationship

2. Only enquiry services

3. Provide few services and/or allow

MSMEs participation

4. Provide some services and/or allow

MSMEs participation

5. Provide a lot of services

and/or promote MSMEs

participation


Accreditation Board



10. Rate the outcomes obtained through your economy’s efforts to increase MSMEs competitiveness and promote their insertion in regional and global markets.

Increase competitiveness and

promote MSMEs insertion into regional

and global markets



Accreditation Board




Part C: Your economy

11. Have you ever developed or participated in any initiative (project/program) whose core purpose was/is to support MSMEs on standards, conformity assessment and/or metrology activities? *

12. Could you briefly describe relevant information of the initiative(s) (project /program)?. You can describe more than one initiative. *

13. What was the level of MSMEs engagement as a result of this initiative (project/program)? *

Scope: The initiative is/was: _________________

When did the initiative start? (yyyy/mm/dd): ____________________

(Temporary initiative) When did the initiative end? (yyyy/mm/dd) ________________

Sector: ________________

- Human health (includes medical devices, clinical labs and all related to human health)

- Energy and energy efficiency- Electronic and electrical devices- Software & IT- Food (including processed food)- Manufacture or industry (Specify which field _____________)- Handicraft- Services (Specify which field ________________)- Other: ________________

Funding source: ______________

- Public- Private- International cooperation- Other

No (go to Q19)

Yes

MSMEs engaged to participate continually taking any services offered by National Standards Body, Metrology Institute, Conformity Assessment Bodies and/or Accreditation Bodies.

MSMEs engaged to participate in taking the services offered by National Standards Body, Metrology Institute, Conformity Assessment Bodies and/or Accreditation Bodies only for this initiative (project program).

MSMEs shown a low interest to join to the initiative

Other:

Please add additional comments as required *

Could you share the lessons learned from your experience?

14. In your initiative (project/program), how was the level of commitment and participation of the following entities that comprise infrastructure services: * Select only the applicable cases.

Entity that developed the initiative: National Standards Body

1. No coordination

2. Informative

Level

3. Low level of

involvement

4. Medium level of

involvement

5. High level of

involvement and/or

Responsible of the

initiative

Accreditation Board



Entity that developed the initiative: Accreditation Board

1. No coordination

2. Informative

Level

3. Low level of

involvement

4. Medium level of

involvement

5. High level of

involvement and/or

Responsible of the

initiative




Entity that developed the initiative: National Metrology Institute

1. No coordination

2. Informative Level

3. Low level of involvement

4. Medium level of

involvement

5. High level of involvement

and/or Responsible of the initiative


Accreditation Board


Entity that developed the initiative: Conformity assessment body

1. No coordination

2. Informative

Level

3. Low level of

involvement

4. Medium level of

involvement

5. High level of

involvement and/or

Responsible of the

initiative


Accreditation Board


15. Do you believe that your experience could be replicable? *

Yes

No

In both cases, why or why not?

16. Is your initiative (program/project) sustainable? *

Yes

No


17 Do you believe that your initiative (program/project) is relevant for APEC fora? *

Yes

No

If yes, please provide contact details (name of the project responsible and email) ; email:


Go to Q18

18. Did you measure the impact of the initiative in terms of improving competitiveness of MSMEs, access global or regional markets? *

Yes

No

Give more details. In case of Yes, How did you measure the impact on MSMEs? Were the outcomes obtained in line with the expectations?

19. Has your organization considered participating in any project/program or initiative which links (involves) standards, conformity assessment and/or metrology with (to) MSMEs? *

Yes

No

Explain your answer in question 19. Please indicate the scope and sector

End of the survey

Thank you for your cooperation

ANNEX 2

Committee on Trade and Investment

Sub-Committee on Standards and Conformance

Draft Agenda

Workshop Supporting Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises (MSMEs) Trade Facilitation through Standardization Activities

Day 1: 16 August 2016

8:00 h – 9:00 h Registration

9:00 h – 9:10 h Welcoming remarks

Mrs. Rocio Barrios, SCSC Chair, Executive President of INACAL, Peru

9:10 h – 9:20 h Business arrangements

Session 1: Opening session

9:20 h – 9:50 h Survey report among APEC Economies: “Supporting MSMEs Trade Facilitation through Standardization activities”.

Mrs. Rosario Uria – Project Overseer of CTI 13 2015A – Supporting Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises (MSMEs) Trade Facilitation through Standardization Activities

Session 2: Regional Approach to support MSMEs through standardization activities

9:50 h – 10:20 h APEC Harmonisation of Standards for Data and Information Flows Initiative: Next Steps

Mr. Adrian O Connell – Deputy CEO – Standards Australia

Australia

10:20 h- 10:50 h MSMEs Engagement in Standardization Activities in PASC Region

Ms. Aderina Uli Panggabean- PASC representative

PASC

10:50 h – 11:00 h Q & A session

11:00 h – 11:30 h Coffee break

Session 3: Initiatives to strength capacities in MSME´s for APEC members – Part 1

11:30 h – 12:00 h Japan’s initiatives to support MSMEs’ activities in standardization

Mr. Mitsuo MATSUMOTO – Director - Office for Economic Partnership for Standards and Conformity Assessment - Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI)

Japan

12:00 h – 12:30 h Efforts to help SME´s manufacturers in the USA

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

USA

12:30 h – 13:00 h Standards for Community products

Ms. Roong-Aroon Buddhanond - Chief - Regional Organizations Group - Thai Industrial Standards Institute

Thailand

13:00 h – 13:10 h Q & A session

13:10 – 14:10 h Lunch


14:10 h – 14:40 h Singapore’s Initiatives to Strengthen MSMEs’ Capabilities through Standards Adoption

Ms. Loh Soi Min – Director - Policy and Promotion - SPRING

Singapore

14:40 h – 15:10 h The importance of sound measurement as a key component of an effective quality infrastructure to support MSMEs

Dr. Victoria Coleman - Project Leader and Acting Section Manager, Nanometrology - National Measurement Institute

Australia

15:10 h – 15:40 h Integrated Management System for DOST Centers of Food Innovation in Research and Development Institute and Regional Offices

Dr. Maria Patricia V. Azanza – Director – Department of Science and Technology (DOST) – Industrial Technology Development Institute (ITDI)

The Philippines

15:40 h – 16:10 h CITEs supporting MSME´s through the quality infrastructure. Promoting MSMEs competitiveness in the Footwear sector – Technological Innovation Center of footwear (CITECCAL)

Eng. Adriana Ríos – Executive Director of CITECCAL

Peru

16:10 h – 16:20 h Q & A session

16:20 h – 16:50 h Coffee break


16:50 h – 17:20 h CITEs supporting MSME´s through the quality infrastructure. Promoting MSMEs competitiveness in the Woodwork sector – Technological Innovation Center of Woodwork (CITEMadera)

Eng. Jessica Moscoso - Executive Director of CITEMadera

Peru

17:20 h – 17:50 h National Standards Compliance Program – Malaysian experience

Mr. Feris Frederick – Senior Assistant Director –Standardization Division - Department of Standards Malaysia, Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation

Malaysia

17:50 h – 18:20 h Accreditation program of US EPA Energy Star product certification

Mr. Roger Sheng - Chief of Electric and Optical Section - Laboratory Accreditation Department -Taiwan Accreditation Foundation

Chinese Taipei

18:20 h – 18:50 h Case of Standardization of Korean MSMEs

Mun-kyu Woo - Principal Researcher - Korean Standards Association

Republic of Korea

18:50 h – 19:00 h Q & A session

19:00 h – 19:10 h Conclusions of Day 1

Day 2: 17 August 2016

8:00 h – 9:00 h Registration

9:00 h – 9:10 h Review of the first day. Instructions to follow for the working groups (WG) and expected outcomes.

9:10 h – 9:40 h Presentation: Perspectives APEC MSMEs, Where are we going as a region? How can we support MSMEs internationalization? (TBC)

9:40 h – 9:50 h Q & A session

Session 6: Discussion

9:50 h – 10:00 h Guidelines for working groups

10:00 h – 10:30 h Workshop groups on assigned topics

Group 1: How to measure the impact of the initiative in terms of improving competitiveness of MSMEs to access to global markets

Group 2: Strategies to promote interest and participation among MSMEs in using infrastructure quality services.

Group 3: How to get sustainability to maintain successful initiatives

Group 4: Challenges and opportunities to consider in initiatives focused on promoting quality infrastructure services in MSMEs

10:30 h – 11:00 Coffee Break

11:00 h – 12:30 h Preparation of Conclusions and Recommendations of WG

12:30 h – 14:00 Lunch

14:00 h – 15:30 h Presentation and discussion of results from WG 1, 2 3, and 4

15:30 h – 15:40 h Q & A session

15:40 h – 16:10 h Coffee Break

16:10 h – 16:20 h Conclusion

16:20 h – 16:30 h Closing of Workshop

apec project monitoring report docs/2745... · web viewrosario uríanational institute of quality -...

Documents