Buyers should prep for U.S. switch to metric system
By Amy Zuckerman -- Purchasing, 3/11/1999
The year 2000 has become synonymous with software glitches, computer crashes, economic damage, and even general chaos by some prognosticators. But it could also be the year that the United States finally faces up to the metric system.In dialogues with U.S. government officials and within the TransAtlantic Business Dialogue forums, European Union officials have made it clear that they firmly believe it's time the U.S. finally adopts metrication.
To a degree, the U.S. concurs, so it's not really a matter of "if," but "when." In recent months, the U.S. and the EU have been embroiled in negotiations over metric labeling. The U.S. has been jockeying to hold off forcing industry to move to metric-only labels for at least 10 years.
On Feb. 8, the European Commission proposed extending until the end of 2009 the transitional period during which units of measurement in Europe can be indicated not only in accordance with the metric system--that is, in meters, litres, grams, etc.--but also in other units.
The proposal--which would eventually become EU law--also includes a number of changes concerning certain definitions of metric units. For example, a new directive would include the International Organization for Standardization's (ISO) revised standard concerning units of plane angle and solid angle.
Martin Bangemann, the Industry Commissioner directing EU standardization efforts, offered the following statement: "With this proposal we wish to spare industry unnecessary difficulties. We are, however, of the opinion that the aim that has been pursued since 1875 of achieving a uniform worldwide system of measurement can only be achieved if the U.S.A. follows the rest of the world and adopts the international system. It is the only western industrialized country that does not use the international system even though it is one of the founding States of the Convention aimed at ensuring worldwide unification of measurements."
While this new proposal addresses metric labeling, the EU has no intention of stopping there. EU officials have made it clear that they want to create a single global system for measurement. As one high-level EC official put it, "We certainly do not intend to be faced with the same problem in ten years time."
The game plan is to spend 1999 researching European attitudes towards metrication and the U.S. Officials say they don't want to offend the U.S., which could backfire on their own industries and consumers.
Former "chief" offers insights
If anyone knows how hard it is to move the U.S. to metrication, it's Gary Carver who has served as director of the U.S. Government's Metric Program from 1991-94. He is now senior engineer, ITS Standards, for the Jet Propulsion Laboratory.
During Carver's tenure the office was moved from the U.S. Commerce Department to the National Institute of Standards and Technology (nist). Carver left his post at the Metric Program when "it became evident that there was no way to ensure that the gains could be expanded, or even maintained. Despite a Presidential order to convert government procurement to metric use, wherever feasible, there was no real support for the program in the government, except among individual dedicated government employees.
"Worst of all," he adds, "the agency metric transition plans, each signed by a cabinet-level Secretary or Administrator, were not being implemented and there was no way to apply pressure to bring about the scheduled changes. My own agency (NIST), and the Commerce Department, itself, did not want to play any visible role in metric issues."
Ironically, Carver points out that the government, by law, is supposed to work with industry to bring about the voluntary use of the metric system. What many people don't know is that under U.S. law the metric system is the "preferred measurement system for U.S. trade and commerce."
However, he explains that the executive branch has no mandate or legal basis for encouraging the public-at-large, educators, or anyone else besides business people who want to convert voluntarily to the metric system.
"Simply, I left the Metric Program because all that could be done at that time had been done. Metric was a hot potato," he adds.
"Progress was made"
However, Carver has pointed out that the following "progress" was made in the direction of moving the U.S. towards metrication in the mid-1990s:
* The Fair Packaging and Labeling Act was amended to require both metric and non-metric units on most consumer product labels. Further amendments to the act are expected this year.
* $20 billion in federal government construction was converted to metric units.
* Most of about $20 billion in federally funded highway and bridge construction was converted to metric units.
* All federal executive-branch agencies developed metric transition plans.
* A variety of federal programs, from coastal maps to certain weapons programs, were converted to all-metric use.
Following Carver's departure, the Metric Program--under the direction of Gerard Iannelli--has concentrated on building a national dialogue with the American public on the issue of metrication. According to Iannelli, the program is "very different from when Gary ran it," but no less effective.
U.S. will face metric
Both Iannelli and Carver share the concern that the U.S. public come to terms with metrication. Carver believes the U.S. will be as "metric as any other country" within 10 to 15 years, even without a shove from the EU. "No nation is entirely metric, nor can it be. Certain international markets use non-metric units, such as carets, barrels, and troy ounces, and will continue to indefinitely.
"We are at least halfway there in the commercial arena and, while there is only a little evidence of metric use among consumers and the public, metric conversion in the social arena will meet little resistance except in a few specific areas."
As it turns out, many major U.S. industries are almost entirely metric. According to Carver, these include pharmaceuticals, automobiles, construction equipment, agricultural equipment, computers and electronics, chemicals, and medical equipment. However, the automobile and computer industries don't use metric units when dealing with their customers or the public.
He adds that scientific research, nutritional labeling, environmental measurements, and many other domains are mostly metric, as are certain sports and alcoholic beverage containers except beer.
Industry opposition to metric conversion rests primarily with industries that deal with the public, or have high capital costs of equipment. Paper and steel fit into this category. Given the costs of retooling, he says it's hard to blame these industries for resisting change.
But there are answers, according to Carver. One approach is to "go through a phase of soft conversion (meaning adapting current measurements to metric) until you reach the natural life cycle and are ready to change equipment."
Public resistance must be overcome
He believes that public resistance to metric has to be overcome for any real progress to be made towards entire metrication. "In social arena," he says, "Americans have no problem buying two-liter bottles of soft drinks, talking about 5 kilometer races or 1.4 liter car engines, and taking 500 milligrams of vitamin C.
"However, without adequate preparation, they would have a big problem accepting metric highway signs, having to buy gasoline in liters, and having to order point-of-sale food items in grams. 'One- hundred gramers' are not likely to replace 'quarter pounders.'"
"None of this is logical, but there is a pattern," according to Carver. "The pattern is related to people wanting to remain in their comfort zones. Any approach or argument that does not deal with this emotional issue will not move Americans toward the metric system. Logic won't work."
He believes the way to make metric transition seem positive to the American public is through a mass-marketing effort that links metrication with some sort of new technology-based program, for example. "Such a national program would have to include things with short-term benefits. The use of metric units would have to be linked to such benefits and would have to be incidental," according to Carver.
Talkback
Related Content
Related Content
Sponsored Links
View All Blogs
Now Playing:
