Two experts, three opinions: volatile organic compounds' testing methods and regulative systems.

As a result of the implementation of the CE-marking in the European Union, the testing method as defined in prEN 16516 is about to become the new volatile organic compounds (VOC) testing standard and replace a multitude of testing methods and regulative systems in Europe that assess the existence of VOC in building materials, including wood-based materials. The aim of this study is, first, to compile expert positions regarding testing methods and regulative systems for VOC in wood-based materials, and second, to examine the suitability of using an Argument-Delphi approach to point out consent or dissent regarding testing methods for VOC. A systematic content analysis of initial interviews with 13 experts produced 130 arguments which were subscribed to 13 categories, resulting in 6 potential positions of which 5 were actively taken by experts. While the second step was undertaken as a cross verification of the analysis, the experts were asked to choose a final position as a last step. It was observed that several experts changed their initial position to testing methods and regulative systems for VOC, but still without a consensus arising within the expert panel. Hence, the results of the study reveal that no verifiable consent exists within the group of experts-neither concerning testing methods, nor regulative systems. The Argument-Delphi approach applied constitutes a useful method in pointing out dissent between the experts towards a legal requirement like a European standard. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]