L'objectivation des qualités industrielles en discussion. Les acteurs du marché européen confrontés à l'élaboration de normes communes

Abstract

La normalisation est devenu le mode de preuve privilégié de la sécurité en Europe. Les normes servent de support à la concurrence, à travers laquelle s'affrontent les entreprises sur le marché des produits, et les laboratoires sur le marché des essais. Ces deux catégories d'acteurs se retrouvent au Comité européen de normalisation pour élaborer des normes de sécurité qui ont comme particularité, à la fois d'anticiper les usages dans leur pluralisme, et de rester flou sur la nature de l'épreuve industrielle que les produits doivent franchir. Ce jeu sur l'interprétation des normes incite les protagonistes à recourir à un certain nombre de déplacements des procédures collectives d'élaboration (participation des différents intervenants, libre parole, preuves recevables...) que ce texte se propose d'analyser.

Governing Standards: The Rise of Standardization Processes in France and in the EU

“…In fact, this is very often the case. However, it can be hypothesized that these are powerful learning tools for participants, who learn to work together (Kessous 2000, 114).…”

“…Extending involvement to the largest number of interested parties also increases the “risk of deadlock and stalemate” (Egan 2001, 165): as long as one participant rejects all or part of a proposed standard, it cannot be ratified. Hence, either the participants do not manage to agree given the number of vested interests, or some have an interest in delaying or even preventing the appearance of a standard long enough to be ready (Kessous 2000).…”

“…This competition between laboratories conflicts with the quest for homogeneous application of technical tests—a condition for equitable competition, with each business able to go to the laboratory that interprets the standard most favorably for its products. (Kessous 2000, 94)…”

Governing racial justice through standards and the birth of ‘White diversity’: a Foucauldian perspective

“…Their legitimacy is therefore twofold: scientific and/or technological, on the one hand and democratic, on the other, insofar as they rely on consensus, understood here as a general agreement characterised by the absence of strong opposition (Borraz, 2004). Norms are therefore referred to as 'technological diplomacy' (Cochoy, 2000;Hawkins, 1995) or 'technological democracy' (Kessous, 2000). Finally, they remain of voluntary application.…”