19892014

Celebrating international engineering

education standards and recognition
Acknowledgements
The Chairman and Deputy Chairman of the Washington Accord acknowledge the many
contributors whose competence and commitment contributed to the success of the
Washington Accord:

The founding signatories

The signatories and their delegates over the years for their contribution
to meetings, forums, workshops and working groups between meetings
Our predecessors as Chairman and Deputy Chairman
The various Secretariats:
Engineers Canada (19931997)
Engineers Australia (19972001)
Abet Inc (20012007)
The IEA Secretariat provided by IPENZ (2007 present)
The IEA Governing Group since 2007
Some 60 reviewers who have served on visit teams to assess applications
for signatory status and periodic review of signatories
Our colleagues in the other IEA constituent agreements.
 How do we build mutual understanding
among nations about the quality of
engineers who enter the globally
connected workplace?
George Peterson, Washington Accord Secretariat, 20012007

Neil Caughey
Contents
Foreword _______________________________________________________________________________________________________ 4

Role of the International Engineering Alliance 6

Overview _______________________________________________________________________________________________________ 8

A Brief History________________________________________________________________________________________________10

Signatories ____________________________________________________________________________________________________ 12

Graduate Attributes_________________________________________________________________________________________14

Perspectives___________________________________________________________________________________________________18

Other Accords and Agreements_________________________________________________________________________ 20

IEA Accord Signatories and Agreement Members__________________________________________________22

25 Years of the Washington Accord 3

Foreword
Basil Wakelin, Chair, IEA Governing Group
The Washington Accord is a constituent of the
International Engineering Alliance (IEA) which
comprises educational accords for professional
engineers, engineering technologists and
engineering technicians plus two professional
engineering and one engineering technologist
competency agreements. The IEA is concerned
with engineering education and competence
across the whole spectrum of engineering.

As a founding member and the most senior of the

constituents, the Washington Accord has set the
foundation and standards for graduate attributes and accreditation of programmes and
defines the educational basis for the International Professional Engineers Agreement
and APEC Engineers Agreement on competency.

The international recognition and portability of both educational qualifications and

professional competency is becoming increasingly important in this age of global
interdependence but unbalanced global development, which requires movement of
engineering skills around the world. We cannot afford to waste engineering resources
or engineering education and it is now widely recognised that the Washington Accord
has made a considerable impact on improvements in engineering education.

We are indeed grateful for the substantial but largely voluntary contributions of many
Washington Accord members to the development and maintenance of the standards
and processes to date. However, the future educational challenges are still considerable
and will continue to depend on the engineering profession to maintain the momentum
and standards.

4
Professor Hu Hanrahan, Chair, Washington Accord
For 25 years the Washington Accord has provided
a mechanism for mutual recognition of graduates
of accredited programmes among its signatories.
This period has seen significant change in
the world of engineering work in engineering
education. National accreditation systems and
the Accord itself have evolved to meet changing
needs building on the vision of the original six
signatories in 1989. The 1990s saw great debate
about engineering education in many countries,
culminating in a remarkable consensus to
move from input-focused accreditation criteria
to an output-based specification. By 2005 the Washington Accord, then with eight
signatories and soon to expand significantly in Asia, had developed its Graduate
Attributes, summarised in this brochure. These provide an exemplar of an outcomes-
based specification for programmes that provide the educational base for professional
engineers. The outcomes approach affords education providers freedom in the design
of programmes. Best practice in accreditation has been captured in the Accord Rules
and Procedures. The Washington Accord, and the associated Sydney and Dublin
Accords, are committed to providing the benchmarks for graduates and accreditation
practice as globalisation intensifies.

The ongoing development and operation of the Washington Accord rely critically
on the signatories delegates who participate in meetings and working groups as
well as the reviewers who make up the teams that evaluate applicants for signatory
status and conduct periodic monitoring of signatories. Their valuable contribution
is greatly appreciated.

25 Years of the Washington Accord 5

Role of the International
Engineering Alliance
The International Engineering Alliance (IEA) is an umbrella organisation for six
multi-lateral agreements which establish and enforce amongst their members inter-
nationally-benchmarked standards for engineering education and what is termed
entry level competence to practise engineering. The Alliance, which currently has
lead engineering organisations from 23 nations as members (including five G8 and
11 G20 nations), is expanding steadily with China being the latest to apply.

The IEAs vision is to:

Improve the global quality, productivity and mobility of engineers by being an accepted
independent authority on best practice in standards, assessment and monitoring of
engineering education and professional competence.

The Washington Accord sits under the IEA alongside the Sydney and Dublin Accords.

Quality engineers are developed with an accord-recognised degree or equivalent,

through experience after graduation to develop both professional and personal
maturity, and by meeting an agreed competence typically measured by evaluation
against 13 elements.

The IEAs core activities:

Consistent improvement of standards and mobility

Defining standards of education and professional competence
Assessment of education accreditation and evaluation of competence
Participation in activities that are driven from the engineering profession.

6
The first and
subsequent
meetings were
characterised
by a visionary
attitude and
mutual respect.
Dr Finbar Callanan,
Former Director General,
The Institution of Engineers
of Ireland

Virandra Babu
Overview
The development of a professional engineer to the level required for independent
practice or licensure/registration has two stages. The education stage, normally
provided by an externally accredited programme of four or five years post-secondary
school, is followed by a period of supervised training while gaining experience in
engineering practice. The individual may then have his or her competence assessed,
and be eligible for recognition as a competent individual engineering practitioner.

Education and Training in the Formation of a Practising Engineer

Meet standard Meet standard Observe code

of engineering for professional of conduct
education competency and maintain
competence

ACCREDITED TRAINING AND

PRACTICE
PROGRAMME EXPERIENCE

Graduate Attributes:
indicate that programme
objectives are satisfied

8
The Washington Accord is a self-governing, autonomous agreement between national
organisations (signatories) that provide external accreditation to tertiary educational
programmes that qualify their graduates for entry into professional engineering
practice. The signatories undertake a clearly-defined process of periodic peer review
to ensure each others accredited programmes are substantially equivalent and
their outcomes are consistent with the published professional engineer graduate
attribute exemplar.

Signatories agree to grant (or recommend to the relevant national registration body,
if different) graduates of each others accredited programmes the same recognition,
rights and privileges as they grant to graduates of their own accredited programmes.
By these provisions, the Accord facilitates mobility of graduates between signatory
jurisdictions and deeper understanding and recognition of their engineering education
and accreditation systems. Amongst the signatories educational providers, adherence
to local accreditation requirements that are consistent with the professional engineer
graduate attribute exemplar contributes to international benchmarking of programme
outcomes.

There are currently 15 signatories to the Washington Accord that together deliver over
7,000 programmes producing graduates that are significantly similar in competencies.

This booklet outlines the history and development of the Washington Accord, as the
leading international educational agreement for professional engineering qualifications
and as the inspiration for further educational accords and professional competence
agreements that collectively work together as the IEA.

The education stage is followed

by a period of supervised training
while gaining experience in
engineering practice.

25 Years of the Washington Accord 9

A Brief History
In 1989 the six foundation signatory organisations from Australia, Canada, Ireland,
New Zealand, the United Kingdom and United States observed that their individual
processes, policies, criteria and requirements for granting accreditation to university
level programmes were substantially equivalent. They agreed to grant (or recom-
mend to registering bodies, if different) the same rights and privileges to graduates
of programmes accredited by other signatories as they grant to their own accredited
programmes.

The signatories committed to: continue to share relevant information; allow their
representatives to participate in each others accreditation processes and attend
relevant meetings of their organisations; and to make reference to this agreement
in publications listing accredited programmes.

After rather informal operation in its early years, with bi-annual meetings in odd-
numbered years and simple rules and procedures, the growth in interest by other
organisations indicated the need for more structure and formality. Formal rules and
procedures were developed for a six-year peer-review of signatories and for admission
of new signatories, following a period in provisional status.

The Sydney and Dublin Accords for engineering technologists and engineering
technicians were initiated in 2001 and 2002, respectively. Together with the three
agreements for engineering practitioners, the IEA was formed in 2007, and the IEA
Secretariat was created to assist with the administration of the accords and agree-
ments and their development.

Washington Accord Development of New Development of

signed by six formal peer review accords and graduate attribute
organisations processes agreements exemplars

1989 1990s 19972002 2001

28 September onwards onwards

10
The admission to the Washington Accord of the accreditation organisations in Hong
Kong China and South Africa in the late 1990s and Japan, Singapore, Chinese Taipei,
Korea and Malaysia took the number of signatories to 11 by 2009. Since that year,
the accrediting organisations in Turkey and Russia have become signatories. Cur-
rently there are also five organisations with provisional status. Many of the new
and provisional signatories were mentored by established ones as they developed
their systems.

The adoption of graduate outcome specifications in tertiary education was paralleled

by the development of the specification of consensus graduate attributes for the
accords. Version 3 was adopted by the accords in 2013 as the exemplar of the edu-
cational requirements to be met by signatories.

Whilst accord recognition strictly applies only to education programmes offered within
a signatorys territorial boundaries, the need to accommodate developments in cross-
border education has required development of rules for out-of-territory accreditation
and recognition. The rules agreed to in 2008 also allow for assistance to emerging
economies that may be too small to operate their own accreditation system. The rules
are currently under review.

The Accord recognises that the members of the European Network for Accreditation
of Engineering Education (ENAEE) operate similar accreditation processes to similar
standards within Europe, and its authorised members provide the Eur-ACE label to
accredited programmes. Four of the Accord members are also authorised members of
ENAEE. There is a formal mechanism between the IEA and ENAEE to maximise mutual
understanding and potential benefits of the two organisations.

IEA Development of rules for Washington Relationship

Secretariat trans-national accreditation Accord signatories with ENAEE
established and Accord recognition reach 15

2007 2008 2012 2013

onwards onwards

25 Years of the Washington Accord 11

Signatories
The signatory for each jurisdiction is the recognised organisation for accreditation
of professional engineering qualifications. They are listed by jurisdiction, in order
of admission to the Accord, with the current operating name of the accrediting
organisation.

1989 Australia Engineers Australia

Canada Engineers Canada
Ireland Engineers Ireland
New Zealand Institution of Professional Engineers New Zealand
United Kingdom Engineering Council United Kingdom
United States Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology
1995 Hong Kong China The Hong Kong Institution of Engineers
1999 South Africa Engineering Council of South Africa
2005 Japan Japan Accreditation Board for Engineering Education
2006 Singapore Institution of Engineers Singapore
2007 Korea Accreditation Board for Engineering
Education of Korea
Chinese Taipei Institute of Engineering Education Taiwan
2009 Malaysia Board of Engineers Malaysia
2011 Turkey MUDEK (Association for Evaluation and
Accreditation of Engineering Programs)
2012 Russia Association for Engineering Education of Russia

There are currently 15 signatories to the

Washington Accord that together deliver
over 7,000 programmes.

12
 The Accord requires a body that wishes to become a signatory to first apply for
provisional status. The body must demonstrate it has an accreditation system that
meets basic requirements. To proceed to signatory status the body must demonstrate
substantial equivalence of its standards and processes in a review by a team drawn
from the signatories, and be approved by unanimous agreement of the signatories.

The following organisations hold provisional status:

Bangladesh Board of Accreditation for Engineering and Technical Education

China China Association for Science and Technology
India National Board of Accreditation
Pakistan Pakistan Engineering Council
Philippines Philippine Technological Council
Sri Lanka Institution of Engineers Sri Lanka

United Kingdom Russia

Ireland
Canada
Japan
United States Turkey
Korea

Chinese Taipei
Hong Kong

Singapore Malaysia

Australia
South Africa

New Zealand

25 Years of the Washington Accord 13

Graduate Attributes
The graduate attributes adopted by the Washington Accord signatories are generic to
the education of professional engineers in all engineering disciplines. They categorise
what graduates should know, the skills they should demonstrate and the attitudes they
should possess. The graduate attributes have been refined over more than a decade
and in 2013 were adopted by the signatories as the exemplar (or reference point)
against which substantial equivalence of their own accreditation requirements are to
be assessed. In addition, the graduate attributes are intended to assist signatories and
provisional members to develop outcomes-based accreditation criteria for use by their
respective jurisdictions.

The key features of the graduate attributes are summarised in the following tables. A
defining characteristic of professional engineering is the ability to work with complex-
ity and uncertainty, since no real engineering project or assignment is exactly the same
as any other (otherwise the solution could simply be purchased or copied). Accordingly,
the attributes place as central the notions of complex engineering problems and
complex problem solving.

The Washington Accord Graduate Attribute Profile has 12 elements, supported by

a Knowledge Profile, WK1-WK8, and a definition of the Level of Problem Solving,
WP1-WP7, both given below:

WA1: Apply knowledge of mathematics, natural science, engineering

Engineering
fundamentals and an engineering specialisation as specified in WK1 to
knowledge
WK4 respectively to the solution of complex engineering problems.

WA2: Identify, formulate, research literature and analyse complex

engineering problems reaching substantiated conclusions using first
Problem analysis
principles of mathematics, natural sciences and engineering sciences
(WK1 to WK4).

WA3: Design solutions for complex engineering problems and design

Design/
systems, components or processes that meet specified needs with
development
appropriate consideration for public health, and safety, cultural, societal
of solutions
and environmental considerations (WK5).

14
 WA4: Conduct investigations of complex problems using research-based
knowledge (WK8) and research methods including design of experiments,
Investigation
analysis and interpretation of data, and synthesis of information to provide
valid conclusions.

WA5: Create, select and apply appropriate techniques, resources and

modern engineering and IT tools, including prediction and modelling,
Modern tool usage
to complex engineering problems, with an understanding of the limi-
tations (WK6).

WA6: Apply reasoning informed by contextual knowledge to assess

The engineer and societal, health, safety, legal and cultural issues and the consequent
society responsibilities relevant to professional engineering practice and
solutions to complex engineering problems (WK7).

WA7: Understand and evaluate the sustainability and impact of

Environment and
professional engineering work in the solution of complex engineering
sustainability
problems in societal and environmental contexts (WK7).

WA8: Apply ethical principles and commit to professional ethics

Ethics
and responsibilities and norms of engineering practice (WK7).

Individual WA9: Function effectively as an individual, and as a member

and teamwork or leader in diverse teams and in multi-disciplinary settings.

WA10: Communicate effectively on complex engineering activities with

the engineering community and society at large, such as being able to
Communication
comprehend and write effective reports and design documentation,
make effective presentations and give and receive clear instructions.

WA11: Demonstrate knowledge and understanding of engineering manage-

Project
ment principles and economic decision-making and apply these to ones
management
own work as a member and leader in a team, to manage projects and in
and finance
multi-disciplinary environments.

WA12: Recognise the need for, and have the preparation and ability to
Life-long learning engage in, independent and life-long learning in the broadest context
of technological change.

25 Years of the Washington Accord 15

The Washington Accord Knowledge Profile has eight elements:

 systematic, theory-based understanding of the natural sciences applicable to the

A
WK1
discipline.

 onceptually-based mathematics, numerical analysis, statistics and formal aspects

C
WK2 of computer and information science to support analysis and modelling applicable
to the discipline.

 systematic, theory-based formulation of engineering fundamentals required in

A
WK3
the engineering discipline.

 ngineering specialist knowledge that provides theoretical frameworks and bodies

E
WK4 of knowledge for the accepted practice areas in the engineering discipline; much is
at the forefront of the discipline.

WK5 Knowledge that supports engineering design in a practice area.

 nowledge of engineering practice (technology) in the practice areas

K
WK6
in the engineering discipline.

 omprehension of the role of engineering in society and identified issues in

C
engineering practice in the discipline: ethics and the professional responsibility of
WK7
an engineer to public safety; and the impacts of engineering activity economic,
social, cultural, environmental and sustainability.

Engagement with selected knowledge in the research literature

WK8
of the discipline.

Nicki Fleury

16
Complex engineering problems have a range of attributes. At least some of the
following may be encountered within a professional engineering education
programme:

WP1: Cannot be resolved without in-depth engineering knowledge

Depth of knowledge
at the level of one or more of WK3, WK4, WK5, WK6 or WK8 which
required
allows a fundamentals-based, first principles analytical approach.

Range of conflicting WP2: Involve wide-ranging or conflicting technical, engineering

requirements and other issues.

WP3: Have no obvious solution and require abstract thinking

Depth of analysis required
and originality in analysis to formulate suitable models.

Familiarity of issues WP4: Involve infrequently encountered issues.

WP5: Outside problems encompassed by standards and codes

Extent of applicable codes
of practice for professional engineering.

Extent of stakeholder WP6: Involve diverse groups of stakeholders with widely

involvement and needs varying needs.

WP 7: High level problems including many component parts

Interdependence
or sub-problems.

The attributes of complex engineering activities, some of which might reasonably be

encountered by a professional engineering undergraduate (eg. during capstone design
or a period of industry experience):

EA1: Involve the use of diverse resources (and for this purpose
Range of resources resources include people, money, equipment, materials,
information and technologies).

EA2: Require resolution of significant problems arising from

Level of interactions interactions between wide-ranging or conflicting technical,
engineering or other issues.

EA3: Involve creative use of engineering principles

Innovation
and research-based knowledge in novel ways.

Consequences to society EA4: Have significant consequences in a range of contexts,

and the environment characterised by difficulty of prediction and mitigation.

EA5: Can extend beyond previous experiences by applying

Familiarity
principles-based approaches.

25 Years of the Washington Accord 17

Perspectives
How do we build mutual understanding among nations about the quality of engineers
who enter the globally connected workplace? The Washington Accord agreement
answered the question. Begin by building bridges toward mutual recognition of the
substantial equivalence of engineering education. The fundamental supports for this
bridge are globally accepted attributes expected of successful engineers.

The founding signatories of the Washington Accord agreed that graduates of each others
accredited programmes were expected to possess these attributes and therefore were
prepared to enter engineering practice. The Washington Accord model has become the
international gold standard for mutual recognition of engineering education.

George Peterson
Washington Accord Secretariat, 20012007

I remember my years as chair at a time of international co-operation with like-minded

colleagues. We worked together to our mutual benefit, making a global contribution to
the competence and recognition of the global engineering profession. The importance
of this and the contribution of engineers are increasingly recognised.

There are many examples of crucial team efforts but I believe the devising and
steering through of a paid standing Secretariat was very important. The Secretariat
made all other work more effective and achievable. There were two aspects of the
Washington and other Accords and forums in the Alliance that impressed me most:
the acknowledgement of each others cultures and the joint work to encourage new
members to participate in the work and leadership needed. Many Asian countries went
swiftly from applicants to active participants and leaders, improving and extending our
activities. For all these reasons I found this a most stimulating part of my career.

Dr Peter Greenwood
Washington Accord Chair, 20022007

18
When Professor Jack Levy convened the first meeting of representatives of the initial
six countries to discuss a possible accord, we hardly foresaw the international success it
would eventually become. I remember very well how the first and subsequent meetings
were characterised by a visionary attitude and mutual respect which greatly expedited
the early development of the Accord.

Another significant and lasting memory for me was chairing the meeting in Dublin
which welcomed Hong Kong into the Accord as the first new member after the original
six. It was indeed a genuine pleasure and privilege to work with so many dedicated
colleagues and good friends during those early formative years.

Dr Finbar Callanan
Former Director General, The Institution of Engineers of Ireland
(Now Engineers Ireland)

 he Washington Accord model

T
has become the international gold
standard for mutual recognition of
engineering education.

25 Years of the Washington Accord 19

Other Accords and Agreements
The IEA is a group of self-regulating educational Accords and professional competence
recognition agreements which have a substantially equivalent view of what constitutes
an acceptable professional engineering education and professional competence.

The Sydney and Dublin Accords

The Sydney Accord was signed in 2001 to cover equivalence and international recog-
nition for educational programmes for engineering technologists or incorporated
engineers (under the United Kingdom definition). Currently there are nine signatories
representing Australia, Canada, Ireland, Hong Kong China, Korea, New Zealand, South
Africa, the United Kingdom and United States, and one organisation with provisional
status (Chinese Taipei). Canada is represented by the Canadian Council of Technicians
and Technologists; all others are signatories to the Washington Accord. Most Sydney
Accord qualifications are degrees of three years duration post-secondary school. The
graduate attribute specification refers to broadly-defined engineering problems.

The Dublin Accord was signed in 2002 to cover equivalence and international
recognition of engineering technician qualifications. The current eight signatories,
for Australia, Canada, Ireland, Korea, New Zealand, South Africa, the United Kingdom
and United States, are the same organisations as the signatories to the Sydney Accord
and Washington Accord. Most Dublin Accord qualifications are diplomas of two years
duration post-secondary school. The graduate attribute specification refers to well-
defined engineering problems.

20
The Engineers Competence Agreements
The International Professional Engineers Agreement (IPEA) was originally created in
1997 as the Engineers Mobility Forum agreement and adopted its new name in 2012.
This is a multi-national agreement between engineering organisations in the member
jurisdictions. The agreement creates the framework for the establishment of an
international standard of competence for professional engineering, and then empowers
each member organisation to establish a section of the International Professional
Engineers (IntPE) register.

Members have full rights of participation in the agreement; each operates a national
section of the IntPE register; registrants on these national sections may receive credit
when seeking registration or licensure in the jurisdiction of another member.

The current 16 members are Australia*, Canada*, Chinese Taipei* (Chinese Institute of
Engineers), Hong Kong China*, India (Institution of Engineers India), Ireland, Japan*
(Institution of Professional Engineers Japan), Korea* (Korean Professional Engineers
Association), Malaysia*, New Zealand*, Singapore*, South Africa, Sri Lanka, the United
Kingdom and the United States* (National Council of Examiners for Engineering
and Surveying). There are three provisional members from Bangladesh, Pakistan
and Russia*. Where the representative member is not indicated, it is the same as the
Washington Accord signatory. Representatives marked * are also members of the
APEC Engineer agreement which operates to the same standard of competence as
the IPEA, and has, in addition, members from Indonesia, the Philippines and Thailand.
The APEC Engineer agreement was established in 2000 by the member economies of
the Asia-Pacific Economic Co-operation agreement.

The International Engineering Technologist Agreement (IETA) (formerly the Engineering

Technologist Mobility Forum) was formed by five of the foundation signatories of
the Sydney Accord to provide equivalent standards and registers for engineering
technologists. The current members represent Canada, Hong Kong China, Ireland,
New Zealand, South Africa and the United Kingdom. Australia is a provisional member.

25 Years of the Washington Accord 21

IEA Accord Signatories
and Agreement Members
As at June 2013

WA = Washington Accord SA = Sydney Accord DA = Dublin Accord

IPEA = International Professional Engineers Agreement
IETA = International Engineering Technologist Agreement
APEC = APEC Engineer agreement

= Signatory/Member = Provisional Status

Australia
Engineers Australia WA SA DA IPEA IETA APEC

Bangladesh
Bangladesh Professional Engineers, Registration Board (BPERB) WA IPEA

Canada
Engineers Canada WA IPEA APEC

Canadian Council for Technicians and Technologists (CCTT) SA DA IETA

China
China Association for Science and Technology (CAST) WA

Chinese Taipei
Institute of Engineering Education Taiwan (IEET) WA SA

Chinese Institute of Engineers (CIE) IPEA APEC

Hong Kong China

Hong Kong Institution of Engineers (HKIE) WA SA IPEA IETA APEC

22
India
National Board of Accreditation (NBA) WA

Institution of Engineers India IPEA

Indonesia
Institution of Engineers APEC

Ireland
Engineers Ireland WA SA DA IPEA IETA

Japan
Japan Accreditation Board for Engineering Education (JABEE) WA

Institution of Professional Engineers Japan (IPEJ) IPEA APEC

Korea
Accreditation Board for Engineering Education of Korea (ABEEK) WA SA DA

Korean Professional Engineers Association (KPEA) IPEA APEC

Malaysia
Institution of Engineers Malaysia (IEM) WA IPEA APEC

New Zealand
Institution of Professional Engineers WA SA DA
New Zealand (IPENZ) IPEA IETA APEC

Pakistan
Pakistan Engineering Council (PEC) WA IPEA

25 Years of the Washington Accord 23

Philippines
Philippines Technological Council (PTC) WA APEC

Russia
Association for Engineering Education of Russia (AEER) WA IPEA APEC

Singapore
Institution of Engineers Singapore (IES) WA IPEA APEC

South Africa
Engineering Council of South Africa (ECSA) WA SA DA IPEA IETA

Sri Lanka
Institution of Engineers Sri Lanka (IESL) WA IPEA

Thailand
Council of Engineers (COE) APEC

Turkey
Association for Evaluation and Accreditation
WA
of Engineering Programs (MDEK)

United Kingdom
Engineering Council (EngC) WA SA DA IPEA IETA

United States
Abet Inc WA SA DA

National Council of Examiners for

IPEA APEC
Engineering and Surveying (NCEES)

24
International Engineering Alliance Secretariat

PO Box 12 241 P +64 4 473 9444

Wellington 6144 F +64 4 474 8933
New Zealand E secretariat@ieagreements.org

www.ieagreements.org JUNE 2014 | REF 10175