This project was established to set up a close network of industrial energy efficiency experts, energy management and standards experts, policy makers and regulators in APEC economics, and provide the effective platform to share the experiences, best practices and different ideas. The goals of this project were as follows:

• To establish the network for the communication and cooperation among the relevant shareholders for MSE standards in APEC economies, so they can jointly promote the harmonization of MSE standards.
• Through the communication and discussion on international harmonization of MSE standards, successful experience and the best practices will be shared effectively, which will help the harmonization of MSE standard in the Region, shorten the development period, reduce development costs, and put the MSE standard into force earlier, to save energy, improve trading and protect the environment.

The project produced the following deliverables, as property of APEC:

• A research report on MSE standard international comparison and promotion was completed.
• A database of MSE standard experts in the Region is establishing to provide technical support on the research, development, implementation, communication and harmonization of MSE standards.
• This report, Summary Comparison of Energy Management Standards, is a condensed version of a very detailed comparison that was developed by China National Institute of Standardization (CNIS).
• This document was prepared based on the existing 12 different EnMS standards from ISO and other different region and countries, and also based on the Dezhou China National Institution of Standardization workshop discussion. Through the comparison based on all important elements, the level of agreement of different standards is recommended and some of key findings are described in this report. This document is intended to highlight all the important differences of the EnMS standards from 8 countries. These 8 countries standards are not an exhaustive representation of EnMS national standards but do represent those that were most widely available at the time of this writing.