Long-term Actions
- Work with diverse communities to create clear rules for reviewing whether a standard should be withdrawn.
- Include technical, legal, social, and disability perspectives when making decisions.
- Ask key questions, like:
- Is the standard still being used?
- Does it still solve an important problem?
- Who would be most affected if it were removed?
- Treat withdrawal like a review process: involve the public, especially the people most impacted, to help shape the criteria.
- Make the process transparent so everyone understands how decisions are made.
- Document and share the reasoning behind any decision to withdraw a standard.
- Update the criteria regularly based on feedback and real-world impacts.
Examples
- Japan – The Japanese Industrial Standards Committee (JISC) uses a multi-criteria review that factors in legal relevance, market use, and social value. If a standard supports accessibility or public safety, it may be retained even if its original technical basis is outdated.
Related Actions
- Create an opportunity for public feedback before withdrawal
- Offer opportunities to request revisions rather than withdrawal
- Use clear language in withdrawal notices
- Provide transition guidance when withdrawing a standard