Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Evaluating the Economic Feasibility of Creating National Primary Standards

  • Economic Questions of Metrology
  • Published:
Measurement Techniques Aims and scope

Work on economic aspects of metrological activity is reviewed analytically. A mathematical algorithm is set up for quantitative evaluation of the economic feasibility of creating national primary standards taking into account the expenses for stages of the cycle, such as their creation, maintenance (operation), and participation in international comparisons.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, Brussels, 05.06.2013, http://eur-lex.europa.eu, accessed 12.01.2013.

  2. L. V. Besfamil’naya et al., The Economics of Standardization, Metrology, and Production Quality, Izd. Standartov, Moscow (1988).

    Google Scholar 

  3. MI 412-86, GSI. Methods of Determining the Economic Efficiency of Metrological R&D. Basic Assumptions.

  4. N. I. Semenko and G. A. Safina, “Experience in evaluating the economic efficiency of metrological work,” Izmer. Tekhn., No. 10, 88-89 (1974); Measur. Techn., No. 10 (1974).

  5. A. I. Astashenkov and A. S. Vishenkov, “On the effect of metrology on the national economy and international trade,” Zakonodat. Prikl. Metrol., No. 4, 34-37 (2004).

  6. L. N. Bryanskii, “Are standards profitable,” Zakonodat. Prikl. Metrol., No. 5, 45-46 (2003).

  7. A. S. Doinikov and L. N. Bryanskii, “How much do standards cost?” Zakonodat. Prikl. Metrol., No. 2, 52-53 (2004).

  8. V. G. Chuiko, “The cost of the accuracy of calibrations of an initial standard,” Zakonodat. Prikl. Metrol., No. 3, 53-56 (2006).

  9. Mutual Recognition of National Measurement Standards and of Calibration and Measurement Certificates Issued by National Metrology Institutes, BIPM, Oct. 1999, www.belgim.by/uploaded/img/CIPM%20MRA.pdf, accessed 01.20.2013.

  10. Summary of NIST Laboratory Economic Impact Sstudies, www.nist.gov/director/planning/summary-studies.cfm, accessed 01.20.2014.

  11. G. Williams, “The assessment of the economic role of measurement and testing in modern society,” Europ. Measurement Project Report, July 2002, www.bis.gov.uk/assets/bispartners/nmo/docs/nms/economics_of_measurements_july2002.pdf, accessed 01.20.2014.

  12. M. MacDonald et al., “Potential economic impact of the CIPM Mutual Recognition Arrangement,” KPMG Report Submitted to BIPM (2002), www.bipm.org/utils/en/pdf/KMPGreport.pdf, accessed 01.20.2014.

  13. J. Birch, “Benefit of legal metrology for the economy and society,” CIML Report (2003), www.oiml.org?publication/E/birch/E002-e03.pdf, accessed 01.20.2014.

  14. T. Usuda, “Study on economic impact of equivalence of measurement standards,” BIPM KCDB Newsletter, No. 16, 1-2 (2011).

  15. T. Usuda and A. Henson, “Economic impact of equivalence of measurement standards,” NCSLI Measure, 7, No. 1, 62-70 (2012).

    Google Scholar 

  16. A. P. Chirkov, “The establishment and development of the metrology economy in Russia,” Zakonodat. Prikl. Metrol., No. 1, 1-6 (2010).

  17. V. V. Okrepilov, V. N. Krutikov, and G. E. Elkin, “The economic component of support for the uniformity of measurements,” Izmer. Tekhn., No. 2, 3–8 (2014).

  18. A. S. Dudolad et al., “Methods for quantitative evaluation of the economic feasibility of financing metrological activity,” Ukr. Metrol. Zh., No. 3, 3-6 (2011).

  19. MI 13.001-2000, Method for Comparative Analysis of the Economic Effectiveness of Expenses for the Creation of National Primary Standards for Individual Types of Measurements.

  20. RMU 13-056-2005, Method for Comparative Analysis of the Economic Effectiveness of Funding for the Creation of National Primary Standards for Individual Types of Measurements.

  21. L. N. Krasova and A. V. Prokopov, “Justifying the economic feasibility of creating national standards,” Ukr. Metrol. Zh., No. 4, 7-10 (2007).

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. National Scientific Center Institute of Metrology, Kharkov, Ukraine

    P. I. Neyezhmakov & A. V. Prokopov

Authors
  1. P. I. Neyezhmakov
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. A. V. Prokopov
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to P. I. Neyezhmakov.

Additional information

Vice president of COOMET (P. I. Neyezhmakov).

Translated from Izmeritel’naya Tekhnika, No. 4, pp. 3–6, April, 2014.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Neyezhmakov, P.I., Prokopov, A.V. Evaluating the Economic Feasibility of Creating National Primary Standards. Meas Tech 57, 373–377 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11018-014-0463-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11018-014-0463-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation