| Zugriffsnummer | 26970 |
| Dokumenttyp | Bericht |
| Sprache | Englisch |
| Titel | Measurement of quality infrastructure |
| Autor(in); Institution |
Harmes-Liedtke, Ulrich; Mesopartner, Buenos Aires, ARGENTINA
Oteiza Di Matteo, Juan José; ARGENTINA
|
| Quelle/Jahr | (2011), 39 S. |
| Schriftenreihe | Discussion paper. Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt, International Technical Cooperation: 5 |
| Herausgeber(in) |
Q.5, Technische Zusammenarbeit, PTB-Braunschweig
|
| URL | |
| Verlag | Braunschweig [u.a.]: Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt |
| Freie Schlagworte | quality infrastructure ; technical cooperation |
| Zusammenfassung | This paper gives an overview of the institutional framework of Quality Infrastructure (QI) with an international perspective. It develops a composite indicator to measure and compare the development and the performance of QI in a selection of 53 different nations worldwide. The indicator uses freely available data: Total Accredited Bodies of the National Quality System, number of Calibration and Measurement Capabilities certifications, ISO 9001 per country, key and supplementary comparisons carried out by National Metrology Institutes, participation in Technical Committees of International Standards Organization and membership of international organizations backing the credibility of the national QI. The paper analyzes the correlation between the Quality Infrastructure development of a nation and key economic performance indicators like GDP (per capita), Exports and Global Competitiveness and Transparency. Positive correlations were found for all four variables, supporting the expected relationship between QI development and economic performance indicators. The authors understand the proposed QI measurement indicator as just the first step in a more solid comparison between different national systems. The pragmatic approach of using only freely available data also makes the results dependent on sometimes unsatisfactory data quality. In addition, relevant qualitative differences between identical quantitative data were not analyzed in detail. Because of these limitations, the results of rankings should be interpreted carefully. Nevertheless, the quantitative comparison of national QI could be part of a broader Benchmarking and collective learning process to improve the development and performance of Quality Infrastructure bodies in the developing world. Published on behalf and with the support of the German Institute of Metrology / Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt (PTB) |
