European Committee for Standardization (CEN)

Cite this article as:"European Committee for Standardization (CEN)," in The Business Professor, updated November 19, 2018, last accessed October 28, 2020,


European Committee for Standardization (CEN) Definition

The European Committee for Standardization (CEN) is an international organization of 34 European countries. The CEN is aimed at accelerating and fostering European economies in global markets by providing infrastructure for trade and sets of standardization.

A Little More on What is the European Committeee for Standardization

The CEN was established in 1961 to introduce European Standards (ENs) to strengthen their internal economies and enable them to produce goods and services capable of competing in international markets.

Now, the CEN is recognized by the European Union as a European body for setting standards for European goods and services. Besides the CEN, there are other institutions which are officially recognized by European Union for setting European standards. These include the European Committee for Electro-technical Standardization (CENELESC) and the European Telecommunication Standards Institute (ETSI).
The CEN has a large network of over 460 million people. The CEN is composed of more than 60,000 technical experts from different sectors, such as business organization, trade, technical, consumer and other societal institutions. The European Parliament has opted not to combine the CEN, CENELEC and ETSI ‚ÄĒ opting instead to encourage their collaboration across functions.

The CEN consists of twenty seven member states from the European Union, three member countries from the European Free Trade Association (EFTA), and many other countries which are intended to join the European Union (EU) or European Free Trade Association (EFTA) now or in future.

The CEN sets technical standards for European Economic Area to foster trade, promote environmental protection, ensure workers safety, explore researches and development. For instance, Construction Products Directives sets minimum standards for material to be used in construction and these standards must be met by Construction Company.

Vienna Agreement

The CEN and the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) mutually agreed and signed an agreement in 1991. The agreement’s main purpose was to prevent any duplication in standards between CEN and ISO. The CEN has adopted many standards of the International Standardization Organization (ISO).

References for the European Committee for Standardization

Academic Research on the European Committee for Standardization (CEN)

  • ‚󏬆¬†¬†¬†¬† Developing standard approaches for recording and assessing river hydromorphology: the role of the¬†European Committee¬†for¬†Standardization¬†(CEN), Boon, P. J., Holmes, N. T., & Raven, P. J. (2010). Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems,¬†20(S1), S55-S61. This paper analyses the concept of freshwater quality, the different methodology for assessing these waters and the need for the development of new frameworks by the CEN for other European countries.
  • ‚󏬆¬†¬†¬†¬† Application of the¬†CEN¬†(European Committee¬†for¬†Standardization) small punch creep testing code of practice to a representative repair welded P91 pipe, Blagoeva, D. T., & Hurst, R. C. (2009).¬†Materials Science and Engineering: A,¬†510, 219-223. The authors highlights the usefulness of the small punch test in prediction of plant components under high temperatures. It goes on to analyse the growing interest in the use of this test for creeps in European countries. This paper briefly summarizes the EPERC round-robin work leading to the creep part of the CEN code of practice for the application and use of the small punch test and key aspects of the code. This is followed by an example of implementation of the code for studying the creep behaviour of a representative repair weld between service-exposed and virgin P91 piping.
  • ‚󏬆¬†¬†¬†¬† Determination of carbon-13 content of sugars of fruit and vegetable juices: A¬†European¬†inter-laboratory comparison, Koziet, J., Rossmann, A., Martin, G. J., & Ashurts, P. R. (1993). Analytica Chimica Acta,¬†271(1), 31-38. This paper presents a study carried out by a working group from different laboratories of the CEN/TC for determining the Carbon-13 contents of sugar fruit drinks.
  • ‚󏬆¬†¬†¬†¬† New ways to enhance the functionality of paperboard by surface treatment‚Äďa review, Andersson, C. (2008). Packaging Technology and Science: An International Journal,¬†21(6), 339-373. This review summarizes recent development of functional materials to improve the barrier properties of paperboard with emphasis on bio‚Äźbased polymers. Focus is directed to novel application techniques and water‚Äźborne, renewable coating materials.
  • ‚󏬆¬†¬†¬†¬† Standardization¬†of diagnostic PCR for the detection of foodborne pathogens, Malorny, B., Tassios, P. T., R√•dstr√∂m, P., Cook, N., Wagner, M., & Hoorfar, J. (2003).¬†International journal of food microbiology,¬†83(1), 39-48. This article focuses on the harmonization procedure and standardization criteria for detection of foodborne pathogens by polymerase chain reaction (PCR). The progress of standardization so far and future perspectives of diagnostic PCR are discussed.
  • ‚󏬆¬†¬†¬†¬† Benchmarking habitat quality: observations using River Habitat Survey on near‚Äźnatural streams and rivers in northern and western¬†Europe, Raven, P. J., Holmes, N. T., Vaughan, I. P., Dawson, F. H., & Scarlett, P. (2010). Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems,¬†20(S1), S13-S30. This paper focuses on the ecological effects of physically modifying rivers. Surveys at 278 sites on 141 near‚Äźnatural streams and rivers in northern and western Europe were carried out between 1994 and 2009 to benchmark the habitat quality assessment system used for River Habitat Survey (RHS). The objectives were to establish if RHS was suitable outside the UK, investigate if 500 m was still valid as the survey length, suggest a benchmarking strategy and recommend improvements to habitat quality assessment protocols. This paper goes on to show the impact of multi-discipline benchmarking.
  • ‚󏬆¬†¬†¬†¬† Assessing restoration effects on hydromorphology in¬†European¬†mid-sized rivers by key hydromorphological parameters, Poppe, M., Kail, J., Aroviita, J., Stelmaszczyk, M., GieŇāczewski, M., & Muhar, S. (2016).¬†Hydrobiologia,¬†769(1), 21-40. This study assesses outcomes of 20 restoration projects undertaken across central and northern Europe for a comprehensive set of hydromorphological parameters, quantified at both larger and smaller spatial scales.
  • ‚󏬆¬†¬†¬†¬† Evaluation of two simplified life cycle assessment methods, Hochschorner, E., & Finnveden, G. (2003). The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment,¬†8(3), 119. This research compares two simplified Lifecycle assessment methods with a quantitative assessment.
  • ‚󏬆¬†¬†¬†¬† The testing of disinfectants, Reybrouck, G. (1998). International biodeterioration & biodegradation,¬†41(3-4), 269-272.¬† This paper explores and compares different techniques for the testing of disinfectant.
  • ‚󏬆¬†¬†¬†¬† From the Internet of Computers to the Internet of Things, Mattern, F., & Floerkemeier, C. (2010). From the Internet of Computers to the Internet of Things. (pp. 242-259). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. This paper discusses the vision, the challenges, possible usage scenarios and technological building blocks of the ‚ÄúInternet of Things‚ÄĚ. In particular, we consider RFID and other important technological developments such as IP stacks and web servers for smart everyday objects. The paper concludes with a discussion of social and governance issues that are likely to arise as the vision of the Internet of Things becomes a reality.

Was this article helpful?