China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Ergonomics of Manual Handling—Part 2
Published in Waldemar Karwowski, Anna Szopa, Marcelo M. Soares, Handbook of Standards and Guidelines in Human Factors and Ergonomics, 2021
Karlheinz G. Schaub, Peter Schaefer
On their way to building up a political union, the EU Member States decided to add social components to their various branches of the community that were predominantly of economic nature for many years. It was intended that these social components should also include measurements for preventive healthcare and aspects of ergonomic workplace and product design. The adoption in 1986 of the Single European Act gave new impetus to the occupational health and safety measures taken by the community. This was the first time health and safety at work had been directly included in the EEC Treaty of 1957 and was done through the new articles 100a and 118a. Article 100a requires the harmonization of national legislation. The objective is to remove all barriers to trade in the single market and allow free movement of goods and people across borders. In principle, Article 100a does not permit Member States to set higher requirements for their products than those laid down by the directives.
Fundamentals of Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs)
Published in Uday S. Racherla, Intellectual Assets for Engineers and Scientists, 2018
According to the European Commission (EC): The Single Market Strategy8a is the European Commission’s plan to unlock the full potential of the Single Market. The Single Market is at the heart of the European project, enabling people, services, goods, and capital to move more freely, offering opportunities for European businesses and greater choice and lower prices for consumers. It enables citizens to travel, live, work, or study wherever they wish.
PRAs and European regulation
Published in Owain Johnson, The Price Reporters, 2017
Officials also expressed concern that, given the “flexibility as to their exact scope and means of implementation, Member States are likely to adopt rules at national level which would implement such principles in a divergent manner”. There was concern that this could lead to the fragmentation of the single market, given that different standards could be applied across Member States.
Maritime remote inspection technology in hull survey & inspection: A synopsis of liability issues from a European Union context
Published in Journal of International Maritime Safety, Environmental Affairs, and Shipping, 2021
Vera Alexandropoulou, Tafsir Johansson, Klimanthia Kontaxaki, Aspasia Pastra, Dimitrios Dalaklis
Quite recently, the European Union (EU) has taken the lead in developing tailor-made standards for products operated by RAS. Examples of this are ripe in the work of European Committee for Standardization (CEN), the European Committee for Electrotechnical Standardization (CENELEC) and the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI) (Johansson 2021). Parallel to these initiatives is the work of the European Union High-Level Expert Group on Artificial Intelligence that envisions the development of a horizontal foundation for AI through the establishment of trust between the producer/manufacturer and end-user (High-Level Expert Group on Artificial Intelligence 2019). However, from a European Union (EU) RIT horizontal policy perspective, there are aspects that remain shrouded with grey areas. “Liability” is one such important area that could impede the seamless integration of RIT within the EU maritime domain. A stark emphasis on safety and liability implications of RAS can be found in the 2020 report that states: At Union level, product safety and product liability provisions are two complementary mechanisms to pursue the same policy goal of a functioning single market for goods that ensures high levels of safety, i.e. minimise the risk of harm to users and provides for compensation for damages resulting from defective goods (European Commission 2020)