G/TBT/46  
 
17 November 2021 
(21-8681) Page: 1/40 
Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade    
 
NINTH  TRIENNIAL REVIEW OF THE OPERATION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE 
AGREEMENT ON TECHNICAL BARRIERS TO TRADE UNDER ARTICLE 15.4  
_______________  
 
 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS  
INTRODUCTION  ................................ ................................ ................................ ...............  2 
1   GOOD REGULATORY PRACTICE  ................................ ................................ ....................  2 
2   REGULATORY COOPERATION BETWEEN MEMBERS  ................................ ......................  4 
3   TECHNICAL REGULATIONS  ................................ ................................ ..........................  7 
4   CONFORMITY ASSESSMENT PROCEDURES  ................................ ................................ ... 8 
5   STANDARDS  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..............  15 
6   TRANSPARENCY  ................................ ................................ ................................ ........  18 
7   TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE  ................................ ................................ ...........................  28 
8   COVI D-19 ................................ ................................ ................................ ..................  31 
9   OPERATION OF THE COMMITTEE  ................................ ................................ ...............  33 
ANNEX: SUBMISSIONS FROM MEMBERS BY TOPIC (NOV. 2018 – NOV. 2021)  ...............  36  G/TBT/46  
 
- 2 - 
 
  INTRODUCTION  
The Ninth  Triennial Review is being carried out in 20 21 in accordance with the mandate under 
Article  15.4 of the Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT Agreement).1 It was concluded 
on 12 November 20 21.2 The Committee's previous eight triennial reviews were completed in 1997, 
2000, 2003, 2006, 2009, 2012 , 2015 and 2018 .3 During the review period (November 201 8 – 
November 20 21), the Committee has undertaken work to fol low up on specific decisions and 
recommendations agreed in previous reviews.4  
Members recognize that the full implementation of the Committee's existing decisions and 
recommendations is a process that may span over several reviews. In this regard, Member s reiterate 
the importance of following up on previously agreed decisions and recommendations as contained 
in G/TBT/1/Rev.1 4.  
1  GOOD REGULATORY PRACTICE  
Good Regulatory Practice (GRP)  can contribute to the improved and effective 
implementation of the substantive obligations under the TBT Agreement. Effective 
implementation through best practices is seen as an important means of avoiding 
unnecessary obstacles to trade. Institutionalizin g the various mechanisms, 
processes and procedures of GRP through laws, regulations and guidance, as well 
as through the creation and designation of institutions within Member 
governments to oversee regulatory processes, is seen as a means of giving effect  
to GRP. Effective internal policy coordination, including among regulators, 
standardizing bodies and trade officials implementing the TBT Agreement, is 
stressed. Additionally, regulatory cooperation between Members is an effective 
means of disseminating G RP. 
G/TBT/1/Rev.14 , p.6 
 
1.1  Exchange  of experiences  
1.1.  During the review period, most of the Committee's exchange of experiences took place in the 
context of thematic sessions on Good Regulatory Practice (GRP), held on 5 March 201 95 and 
25 February 2020 .6 
1.2.  Members discussed the topic of domest ic committees, and other administrative 
mechanisms, to facilitate internal coordination on TBT . Kenya  explained how the Kenyan TBT 
National Consultative Committee  consults with a wide range of stakeholders on all matters related 
to the implementation of th e TBT Agreement, including assisting in coordination among ministries, 
transparency and notifications, reviewing trade barriers, and preparing national positions for 
engagement in the work of the WTO TBT Committee. The agenda and timing of meetings are ali gned 
with the WTO TBT Committee .7 Indonesia  described the workings of the National Committee on 
Internal Coordination on Technical Barriers to Trade, which brings together a broad range of 
stakeholders to make recommendations related to the implementation of the TBT Agreement and 
relevant TBT issues . It enables , inter alia , coordination, provid es scientific data  and regulatory 
 
1 Article 15.4 of the TBT Agreement states: "Not later than the end of the third year from the date of 
entry into force of the WTO Agreement and at the end of each three -year period thereafter, the Committee 
shall review the operation and implementation of this Agreement, including the provisions relating to 
transparency, with a view to recommending an adjustment of the rights and obligations of this Agreement 
where necessary to ensure mutual economic advantage and balance of rights and obligations, without 
prejudice to the provisions of Article 12. Having regard, inter alia , to the experience gained in the 
implementation of the Agreement, the Committee shall, where appropriate, submit proposals for amendments 
to the text of this Agreement to the Council for Trade in Goods".  
2 A list of submissions circulated in the TBT Committee relevant to the topics under review is contained 
in the Annex to this document (p. 26). 
3 Reports of these triennial reviews are contained in: G/TBT/5 ; G/TBT/9 ; G/TBT/13 ; G/TBT/19 ; 
G/TBT/26 ; G/TBT/32 ; G/TBT/37 ; and G/TBT/41 . 
4 A compilation of the TBT Committee's Decisions and Recommendations adopted since January  1995 is 
contained in document G/TBT/1/Rev.14 . This document also contains the Committee's Rules of Procedure, 
including Guid elines for Observer Status for Governments and International Intergovernmental Organizations.  
5 G/TBT/GEN/256 .  
6 G/TBT/GEN/287 . 
7 G/TBT/GEN/256 , paras. 1-3; and RD/TBT/267 . G/TBT/46  
 
- 3 - 
 
  impact assessment on draft regulations, and analys es potential technical barriers to trade faced by 
Indonesian industry .8 Chile explained that the National Commission on Techn ical Barriers to Trade 
brings together representatives of the ministries and agencies that develop, adapt, and apply 
technical regulations and conformity assessment procedures for fulfilment of transparency 
obligations and identification of trade concerns .9 Guatemala  mentioned the public and private 
stakeholders participating in its  National TBT Committee, which meets around the timeline of the 
WTO TBT Committee. It s committee  defines a unified national position ahead of  WTO TBT Committee 
meetings, discuss es specific trade concern ( STCs), and the business community shares its export 
interests, expansion plans, and perception of potential threats .10  
1.3.  The United States  highlighted five internal coordination mechanisms it uses to implement the 
TBT Agreement . The Office of Management and Budget, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs 
(OIRA) coordinates a pre -publication comment period for US agencies on draft technical regulations 
and conformity assessment procedures. The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), 
as the US notification authority, reviews the Federal Register daily to determine which US measures 
to notify to the WTO TBT Committee. The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) 
coordinates US Government comments o n WTO TBT Notifications related to agricultural products. 
The USTR coordinates the engagement of the US States in their regulatory activities with relevance 
for the WTO. The USTR also coordinates participation and positions to the three annual WTO TBT 
Comm ittee meetings through the Trade Policy Staff Committee, Subcommittee on Technical Barriers 
to Trade.11 New Zealand , as a small Member, does not have a formal coordination structure, such 
as a national TBT committee, and instead relies on the national TBT Enquiry Point to provide 
stakeholder outreach and manage the notification process and related enquiries.  One of the biggest 
challenges is ensuring that regulators are aware of their notification obligations, and in this regard 
New Zealand developed a Regul ator's User Guide which includes a flow chart to help regulators make 
this determination .12 Similarly, the Dominican Republic  notes that they, too, face similar challenges 
as those expressed by New Zealand. A platform to consolidate information about exist ing regulations 
and those in development could be useful.   
1.4.  China  outlined how it applies good regulatory practices at the border, by unifying 
implementation of the TBT, SPS and the Trade Facilitation Agreements. Good regulatory practices 
are an important tool to avoid unnecessary trade barriers, and China will continue  to improve its 
regulatory structure, but the pace of implementing good regulatory practices is different among 
Members and could adapt to local legislative traditions and the status of economic and social 
development.13 Australia  outlined the role of Australia's national quality infrastructure (NQI) in 
respect to Australia's TBT processes and implementation of the TBT Agreement . Australia does not 
have a formal national TBT committee . Rather, o fficials from the Department of Industry, Science, 
Energy a nd Resources (DISER) manage the government relationship with the NQI and facilitate an 
exchange of information between the NQI and a diverse range of Australian government agencies 
on developments within the NQI, mainly focused on trade -related issues. The  NQI is an important 
resource to regulators when developing policy or conformity assessment procedures, and early 
engagement with NQI ensures effective regulatory processes.14 The United States  suggested  to 
encourage Members to develop written procedures a nd maintain a process whereby all regulatory 
authorities take TBT obligations into account when developing technical regulations. This practice 
and commitment would be in line with continuing efforts by the TBT Committee to ensure that 
Members fully implem ent the TBT Agreement, to emphasize internal coordination as a core Good 
Regulatory Practice, and as an initiative to increase regulatory transparency and efficiency by WTO 
Members.15  
1.5.  Members discussed  encouraging regulatory compatibility and cooperation , with a 
specific focus on two sector s: medical devices , and new vehicle technologies.16 
 
8 G/TBT/GEN/256 , paras. 4 -6; and RD/TBT/257 . 
9 G/TBT/GEN/256 , paras. 9 -12; and RD/TBT/261 . 
10 G/TBT/GEN/256 , paras. 16-17; and RD/TBT/269 . 
11 G/TBT/GEN/256 , paras. 18 -21; and  RD/TBT/270 . 
12 G/TBT/GEN/256 , paras. 7 -8; and RD/TBT/258 . 
13 G/TBT/GEN/256 , paras. 13-15; and RD/TBT/268 . 
14 G/TBT/GEN/256 , paras. 22 -24; and RD/TBT/271 . 
15 G/TBT/W/751/Rev.1 . 
16 See: Sections 2.1.1 and 2.1.2.  G/TBT/46  
 
- 4 - 
 
  1.1.1   Other information  
1.6.  Observers  also provided relevant information. Updates were provided by ARSO17, CROSQ18, 
OECD19 and UNECE .20 
1.2  Recommendations  
1.7.  Building on this exchange as well as on previous decisions and recommendations of the 
Committee, and with a view to furthering its work in the area of GRP, the Committee  agrees:  
a. to discuss  Members ' existing procedures and processes to ensure that regulator y 
authorities take TBT obligations into account when developing technical regulations  and, 
on the basis of these discussions, consider  the need for further work in the Committee on 
this topic;  and, 
b. to hold an annual thematic session on Good Regulatory Prac tices as recommended in the 
8th Triennial Review.21 
2  REGULATORY COOPERATION BETWEEN MEMBERS  
"The Committee notes that regulatory cooperation between Members is an 
effective means of disseminating GRP. It can also build confidence between trading 
partners th rough enhancing mutual understanding of regulatory systems, thereby 
supporting efforts that aim at removing unnecessary barriers to trade. A 
fundamental component to regulatory cooperation is the promotion of dialogue 
between Members, including at senior l evel. A wide variety of approaches can be 
employed by regulators to collaborate with each other – from information sharing 
to negotiating specific agreements."  
G/TBT/1/Rev.1 4, p.10 
 
2.1  Exchang e of experiences  
2.1.  During the review period, most of the Committee's exchange of experiences took place in the 
context of a thematic session on Good Regulatory Practice (GRP), held on 25 February 2020.22 This 
thematic session, on encouraging regulatory compatibility and cooperation focused on two sectors: 
medical devices , and new vehicle technologies.  
2.1.1   Medical devices  
2.2.  Members discussed encouraging regulatory compatibility and cooperation  in the medical 
devices sector. The United States  outlined the contribution of the International Medical Device 
Regulators Forum (IMDRF) and the Medical Device Single Audit Program (MDSAP) to regulatory 
convergence, while addressing common public health regulatory challenges  and supporting 
innovation. The  MDSAP m inimizes the regulatory burden on industry, promotes more efficient and 
effective use of regulator resources, enhances global alignment of regulatory approaches and 
technical requirements, and ensures consistency, pre dictability and transparency for 
manufacturers.23 Canada  stated that regulatory cooperation in the medical devices sector takes 
place in the context of fast -paced technological development, very rapid regulatory reviews for 
market approval, and a wide dive rsity and complexity of technologies which pose challenges for 
regulators. Like other regulators, Canada was increasing its alignment with IMDRF guidance 
(e.g. IMDRF Adverse Event Terminology, IMDRF Common Table of Contents for Medical Device 
 
17 African Organization for Standardisation G/TBT/GEN/289 . 
18 CARICOM Regional Organization for Standards and Quality RD/TBT/331 . 
19 Organisation for Economic Co -operation and Development G/TBT/GEN/313 . 
20 United Nations Economic Commission for Europe G/TBT/GEN/259 ; G/TBT/GEN/267 ; G/TBT/GEN/281 ; 
and G/TBT/GEN/290 . 
21 G/TBT/41 , para. 1.7.a.i.  
22 G/TBT/GEN/287 . 
23 G/TBT/GEN/287 , para. 1.1.; and 
https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tbt_e/thematic_sessions_e/presentations_e/p1a_usa_torres_grp_25022
020_e.pdf .  G/TBT/46  
 
- 5 - 
 
  Regulatory Su bmissions), which facilitates regulator -to-regulator discussion. The MDSAP took 
several years to develop and was built from an initial pilot between the US FDA and Health Canada, 
which proved that a single audit could work and satisfy requirements of both countries.24 The 
European Union  outlined the three main stages of medical device regulation: the pre -market stage; 
the on -market stage (labelling); and the post market phase (ensuring the continued safety and 
effectiveness of device). The work of IMDRF – which is informal, non -binding, flexible, quick, and 
involves the establishment of best practices – plays an important role in convergence, and several 
new EU regulations are based on IMDRF principles.25 The United States  provided additional details 
on the MDSAP, and the role of recognized Auditing Organizations (AOs) to conduct a single audit of 
a medical device manufacturer that will satisfy the relevant requirements of the five participating 
regulatory authorities .26,27 
2.3.  The United States  introduced the In ter-American Coalition for Regulatory Convergence, which 
brings together public and private stakeholders with the aim of promoting regulatory cooperation 
and convergence across the Western Hemisphere to achieve internationally aligned medical 
technology re gulations, standards and conformity assessment requirements.28 Some of the key 
challenges facing the medical devices sector , and that cause impact to international trade in many 
cases,  include the enormous diversity of products and their related standards and regulations, the 
multiple sites involved in the manufacturing of a single medical device and the need for 
multilingual/multi -country labels, the complex and lengthy registration processes which vary 
between countries , the improper regulation of medical  devices as medicines, and the lack of TBT 
implementation within the regulatory processes of many medical device regulatory authorities .29 
Japan  noted that regulatory authorities worldwide have developed different regulations, including 
different definitio ns, categorizations, quality, non -clinical and clinical requirements, and this could 
result in overlap and deviation. Regulatory authorities around the world need to promote 
harmonization and reliance on common international standards, and WHO work on the regulatory 
system strengthening for medical products was mentioned in this regard. Japan highlighted the 
benefits of MDSAP from the view of both importing and exporting manufacturers .30 The Dominican 
Republic  expressed interest in these cooperation arrange ments in light of the regulatory challenges 
facing the sector.   
2.1.2   New vehicle technologies  
2.4.  Members discussed encouraging regulatory compatibility and cooperation  in new vehicle 
technologies. The European Union  described how the guidance of the UNECE World Fo rum for the 
harmonization of vehicle regulations (UNECE WP.29) is incorporated in EU legislation. Automated 
and connected vehicles are not yet fully regulated globally, and several issues would need to be 
considered in emerging regulations, including how t o assess new technologies such as automation, 
software updates, cybersecurity, event data recorders (accidents), awareness of "vulnerable road 
users' proximity", and measuring emissions.31 Japan  outlined its government strategy to increase 
automated drivin g towards 2025 in order to, inter alia , reduce accidents, encourage innovation and 
enable societal goals (free movement of elderly). To realize these goals, Japan is developing national 
laws compatible with automated driving, including an amendment to the Road Vehicle Law (passed 
 
24 G/TBT/GEN/287 , para. 1.2.; and 
https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tbt_e/thematic_sessions_e/presentations_e/p1b_canada_shadeed_grp_
25022020_e.pdf .  
25 G/TBT/GEN/287 , para. 1.4.; and 
https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tbt_e/thematic_sessions_e/presentations_e/p1d_eu_hansson_grp_2502
2020_e.pdf .  
26 Australia, Brazil, Ca nada, Japan, and the United States.  
27 G/TBT/GEN/288 , para. 1.7.  
28 The United States notes that the training materials developed by the Inter -American Coalition are 
available at https://www.interamericancoalition -medtech.org/regulatory -convergence/training -and-capacity -
building -resources/ . 
29 G/TBT/GEN/287 , para. 1.3.; and 
https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tbt_e/thematic_sessions_e/presentations_e/p1c_usa_amaral_grp_2502
2020_e.pdf .  
30 G/TBT/GEN/287 , para. 1.5.; and 
https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tbt_e/thematic_sessions_e/presentations_e/p1e_japan_regulatory_coop
eration_ on_medical_devices_japan.pdf .  
31 G/TBT/GEN/287 , para. 1.6.; and 
https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tbt_e/thematic_sessions_e/presentations_e/p2a_eu_grp_25022020_e. p
df.  G/TBT/46  
 
- 6 - 
 
  and enacted i n May 2019), and the domestic adoption and implementation of specific technical 
requirements set out in UNECE WP.29.32 
2.1.3   Environment and c limate change  
2.5.  Canada  suggested  the Committee hold a thematic session to share information, best practices 
and innovative  ideas related to technical regulations, standards and conformity assessment 
procedures that  support the attainment of environmental goals and contribute to addressing climate 
change, thereby contributing to achieving the goals of the Paris Agreement, whil e being the least 
trade restrictive possible.33 
2.1.4   Plastic packaging pollution  
2.6.  The United States  suggested  the Committee hold a thematic session that would explore the 
current landscape of Member and stakeholder views and actions with regard to plastic packag ing 
with a view to: understanding domestic authorities efforts to regulate plastic as a consumer use 
product or as non -hazardous plastic waste and scrap; and promoting the application of regulatory 
approaches in accordance with core TBT principles and good  regulatory practice to minimize waste 
leakage and pollution, while encouraging trade and innovation.34 
2.1.5   Digit al products  
2.7.  Canada  suggested  the Committee hold a thematic session which could focus on the impacts 
that technical barriers to trade can have on the trade in intangible digital products and how they can 
be minimized.35  
2.1.6   Cybersecurity of software -enabled and/or network connected goods  
2.8.  The United States  suggested  the Committee hold a thematic discussion that would explore the 
current landscape of Member and stakeholder views on cybersecurity regulation with a view to: 
identify ing relevant nexuses for the TBT Committee; and  promot ing the application of regulatory 
approaches in accordance with core TBT principles to maximize security, trade, and innovation 
outcomes.36 
2.1.7   Micro, Small and Medium -Sized Enterprises (MSMEs)  
2.9.  Canada  suggested  the Committee hold a thematic session exch anging national experiences 
and perspectives on working with MSMEs to ensure that they are aware and have access to the 
relevant technical information necessary to export their goods to foreign markets.37 The Dominican 
Republic  notes that it is especially important for producers in developing Members to be aware and 
have easy access to the full technical information needed to enhance participation in international 
trade.  
2.1.8   Other information  
2.10.   Observers  also provided relevant information. Updates were provided b y ARSO38, CROSQ39, 
OECD40, and UNECE .41  
 
32 G/TBT/GEN/287 , para . 1.7.; and 
https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tbt_e/thematic_ sessions_e/presentations_e/p2b_japanese_policy_and_
contribution_to_the_international_activities_on_automated_driving_japan.pdf .  
33 G/TBT/W/745 , para. 2.3.  
34 G/TBT/W/756 . 
35 G/TBT/W/745 , para. 4.5.  
36 G/TBT/W/747 . 
37 G/TBT/W/745 , para. 5.4.  
38 G/TBT/GEN/289 . 
39 RD/TBT/331 . 
40 G/TBT/GEN/313 . 
41 G/TBT/GEN/259 ; G/TBT/GEN/267 ; G/TBT/GEN/281 ; and G/TBT/GEN/290 . G/TBT/46  
 
- 7 - 
 
  2.2  Recommendations  
2.11.   Building on these exchanges as well as on previous decisions and recommendations of the 
Committee, and with a view to furthering its work and raising awareness of the importance of 
regulatory cooperation between Members, the Committee  agrees to hold themat ic sessions, with the 
purposes of sharing information42 on:  
a. best practices related to technical regulations  and standards , based on available scientific 
and technical information,  and conformity assessment procedures that support  the 
attainment of environ mental goals and contribute to addressing climate change , thereby 
contributing to achieving the goals and principles of the United Nations Framework 
Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and its Paris Agreement, while adhering to the 
disciplines of the TBT  Agreement;  
b. Member and stakeholder views on plastic regulation  and policy with a view to promoting 
the application of regulatory approaches in accordance with core TBT principles and good 
regulatory practice to minimize waste leakage and pollution  caused b y plastic waste , while 
encouraging trade and innovation;  
c. the impacts that technical barriers to trade may have on trade in intangible digital 
products  (e.g. Artificial Intelligence (AI), enterprise applications, cybersecurity, financial 
technology, health IT, telecommunications, digital media software, and software as 
medical devices), and how to minimize those impacts;  
d. Member and stakeholder views on cybersecurity  regulation with a view to promoting the 
application of regulatory approaches in accordance with core TBT principles to maximize 
security, trade, and innovation outcomes while minimizing unnecessary barriers to trade 
in goods;  and, 
e. Member experiences and p erspectives on working with MSMEs  – especially in developing 
Members - to ensure that they are aware and have access to the relevant technical 
information necessary to enhance their participation in international trade and overcome 
obstacles posed by conformity assessment procedures.   
3  TECHNICAL REGULATIONS  
3.1  Exchange of Experiences  
3.1.1   Mandatory marking and labelling  
3.1.  During the review period, most of the Committee's exchange of experiences on technical 
regulations took place in the context of a thematic sess ion on mandatory marking and labelling held 
on 27 October 2020.43 
3.2.  Members discussed the topic of how to facilitate compliance with mandatory marking and 
labelling requirements on products. The European Union  provided information on the important role 
of the CE Marking as a way of providing information to national authorities on the compliance of a 
product with the relevant requirements and of guaranteeing its free movement within the European 
Union and the European Economic Area.44 The European Union also a ddressed the practical 
compliance issues related to mandatory marking and labelling requirements on imported products 
and suggested  that the Committee develop recommendations or other guidance documents to 
support Members in the area of marking and labelli ng.45 The United States  provided some 
 
42 In the context of these thematic sessions, the Secretariat will ensure coordination with other relevant 
bodies of the WTO.  
43 G/TBT/GEN/307 . 
44 G/TBT/GEN/307 , paras. 1.1-1.2; and 
https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tbt_e/1_eu_s charling_pm_session.pdf .  
45 G/TBT/GEN/307 , paras. 1.3 -1.6; and  https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tbt_e/2 -
_eu_dg_trade.pdf . G/TBT/46  
 
- 8 - 
 
  considerations about labelling and the important role it plays in a variety of areas, such as 
consumers, marketing, and public health.46 
3.1.2   Other information  
3.3.  Mexico  and the United States  drew the Committee's attention to the work conducted by the 
Codex Alimentarius Commission on certain labelling requirements  to applicable formula food.47 
3.4.  Observers  also provided relevant information. Updates were provided by ARSO48, CODEX49, 
IEC50, OECD51, OIML52, UNECE53 and UNIDO .54 
4  CONFORMITY ASSESSMENT PROCEDURES  
"Five articles of the TBT Agreement address conformity assessment procedures, 
and establish obligations of a substantive and procedural nature. Articles 5 and 6 
contain disciplines applying to central government bodies. Articles 7, 8 and 9 relate 
to conformity assessment procedures of local government bodies, non -
governmental bodies and international and regional systems. The definition of a 
conformity assessment procedure is contained in Annex 1, Paragraph 3 of t he 
Agreement."  
G/TBT/1/Rev. 14, p.11 
 
4.1  Exchange of experiences  
4.1.  During the review period, most of the Committee's exchange of experiences took place in the 
context of thematic sessions and an informal meeting held on the topics of conformity assessment 
procedures and quality infrastructure. Thematic sessions were held on 5  March  201955, 
12-13 November 201956 and 25  February  202057, and an informal meeting was held on 
8 December  2020.58 
4.1.1   Approaches to conformity assessment  
4.2.  Members discussed post-market controls (e.g. market surveillance) and other 
pre-market controls . The United States  mentioned the various enforcement activities undertaken 
by the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC), including: surveillance in retail stores to 
ensure that banned or recalled produ cts are not on shelves; inspection of companies as part of 
regulatory enforcement programs; inspection as a follow up to a complaint or surveillance; 
inspection of companies destroying recalled products; and investigations based on consumer 
complaints invo lving products.  CPSC also conducts market surveillance in respect of voluntary 
standards.59 The European Union  explained that Regulation EC No 765/2008 provides a common 
framework and set of obligations to ensure effective market surveillance across the EU60, and 
stipulated that EU member States are responsible for enforcement of EU product legislation, through 
member State Market Surveillance Authorities (MSAs), of which there are more than 500. There are 
 
46 G/TBT/GEN/307 , paras. 1.7-1.8; and  https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tbt_e/3_ -
_us_pm_sessio.pdf . 
47 G/TBT/M/78 , paras. 5.1 -5.3. 
48 G/TBT/GEN/289 . 
49 Codex Alimentarius Commission G/TBT/GEN/258 ; G/TBT/GEN/282 ; G/TBT/GEN/291 ; and 
RD/TBT/328 . 
50 International Electrotechnical Commission RD/TBT/280 . 
51 RD/TBT/340 . 
52 International Organization of Legal Metrology G/TBT/GEN/283 . 
53 G/TBT/GEN/259 ; G/TBT/GEN/267 ; G/TBT/GEN/281 ; and G/TBT/GEN/290 . 
54 United Nations Industrial Development Organization RD/TBT/311 ; and RD/TBT/332 . 
55 G/TBT/GEN/257 . 
56 G/TBT/GEN/278 . A revised Secretariat note on the TBT Committee's work on conformity assessment 
procedures was circulated on 16 July 2020 ( JOB/TBT/224 /Rev.1 ). 
57 G/TBT/GEN/288 . 
58 JOB/TB T/395 . 
59 G/TBT/GEN/257 , para. 1.  
60 Chapter III  of Regulation EC No 765/2008 on market surveillance was replaced by Regulation 
2019/1020 as of 16 July 2021.  G/TBT/46  
 
- 9 - 
 
  several tools at the EU level to exchange informati on and promote cooperation between MSAs, such 
as RAPEX (Rapid Alert System for Products Presenting a Serious Risk) or ICSMS (Technical Database 
for Exchange of Information on Controls, Tests and Results).61 The European Union provided an 
example of how mar ket surveillance is undertaken in France through cooperation between 20 French 
MSAs (including Customs). Responsibility for market surveillance is shared between economic 
operators, importers and distributors, and MSAs.62 
4.3.  Japan  outlined the post -market mea sures applying to consumer products that are likely to 
endanger life or health (including electrical appliances and materials, town gas equipment, liquefied 
petroleum gas equipment, and general consumer products): a sampling test; on -site inspection; the 
Serious Product Accident Reporting and Disclosure Scheme; and, if necessary, orders for product 
recalls and withdrawals from the market. The number of serious product accidents declined from 
around 1,400 in 2008, to 900 in 2017. Products purchased through o nline markets, however, pose 
new policy challenges.63 The United States  said the private sector can and should be an important 
partner in aspects of market surveillance, and the choice of conformity assessment procedure has 
implications for how the burden of market surveillance will fall on different stakeholders 
(e.g. supplier's declaration of conformity places burden on government, third party on the 
certification body). Underwriters Laboratories ( UL) partners with the US Government on conformity 
assessme nt schemes and marks, including market surveillance, under the Environmental Protection 
Agency (EPA) Energy Star program, and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) 
Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratory (NRTL) program.64 Australia  explained how modern supply 
chains, which are transnational, dynamic and complex, require changes in conformity assessment 
infrastructure. It may be difficult to trace the source of fault behind non -conforming goods, and 
there also may be a corresponding lack of accountability, citing the example of non -conforming 
construction materials in Australia which raised concerns about fraudulent test reports and 
certifications.65 
4.4.  On risk assessment , China  described 2017 reforms of the China Compulsory Certification 
(CCC) system. A reduction of the product scope was undertaken based on risk assessment, which 
cut 31 low -risk products from the catalogue. Other reforms included implementation of 
science -based classification, simplification of processes and procedures, and promotion of fair 
competition.66 The United States  presented a real -time risk analytic tool used by US Food and Drug 
Administration (FDA) to assess imports entering the US. This tool, called P REDICT, electronically 
screens and assigns scores to consignments of regulated products bound for the US; consignments 
with low scores automatically enter the US, while those with higher scores are subject to further 
examination and testing by border inspe ctors. This allows FDA to focus its limited resources on 
higher -risk consignments and facilitates trade for low -risk consignments.67 Chinese Taipei  explained 
how risk assessment was conducted throughout the lifecycle of medicinal products. Based on 
guidanc e of the International Council for Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for 
Pharmaceuticals for Human Use (ICH), there are several steps in the regulatory management 
process, including pre -market approvals, from discovery to marketing. In this context, application 
of the Pharmaceutical Inspection Co -operation Scheme (PIC/S) on good manufacturing practices 
(GMP) helps to reduce trade barriers.68  
4.5.  On accreditation , Indonesia  stressed that accreditation under the framework of IAF ILAC 
MRA/MLA plays an impor tant role in trade facilitation, and it is important that WTO Members consider 
the use of this MRA/MLA for the acceptance of product conformity . In this respect, there are  a 
number of challenges, including the lack of acceptance of some conformity assessme nt results under 
the IAF ILAC framework, and the fact that some private standards do not recognize accreditation 
thereunder .69 The European Union  said the European Accreditation (EA) System, based on 
Regulation (EC) No 765/2008 on Accreditation, is premise d – among other things – on the principle 
of one national accreditation body per member state  and non -competition between national 
accreditation bodies. In the case of the EU, regulators accept conformity assessment results from 
 
61 G/TBT/GEN/257 , para. 3.  
62 G/TBT/GEN/257 , para. 5.  
63 G/TBT/GEN/257 , para. 8.  
64 G/TBT/GEN/257 , para. 10.  
65 G/TBT/GEN/257 , para. 9.  
66 G/TBT/GEN/257 , para. 2.  
67 G/TBT/GEN/257 , para. 7.  
68 G/TBT/GEN/257 , para. 6.  
69 G/TBT/GEN/278 , para. 1.1.  G/TBT/46  
 
- 10 - 
 
  bodies accredited by an ILA C or IAF MRA/MLA signatory if there is a government -to-government 
MRA or trade agreement in place which would take recourse to the ILAC and IAF agreements and 
provide for enhanced cooperation between the accreditors of the parties.70 Egypt  explained that t he 
Egyptian Accreditation Council (EGAC)  is the sole accreditation body of Egypt  and that international 
recognition by ILAC and IAF had been achieved, inter alia , for testing and calibration as well as 
medical laboratories, inspection bodies, certification  bodies for management systems, product and 
personnel besides proficiency testing providers.71 The United States  suggested  that, as part of the 
Ninth Triennial Review the TBT Committee consider how accreditation and related policies can be 
advanced to further reduce barriers to trade in goods. In particular, the United States suggested  an 
examination of Member accreditation p olicies, including regional and international systems for 
conformity assessment.  Further, as part of the TBT Committee's ongoing Eighth Triennial Review 
effort to develop guidelines for conformity assessment, the United States suggested  the Committee 
initiate work to develop guidance for Members with respect to accreditation policies as they relate 
to Mutual Recognition Agreements (MRAs), the recognition of accreditation results in the territories 
of other Members, and the national treatment of accreditatio n bodies.72 The United Kingdom  stressed 
the important role that IAF and ILAC guidance plays in encouraging cooperation between 
accreditation bodies. This cooperation is critical to ensuring consistency and harmonization  of 
accreditation, which in turn faci litates mutual recognition. The United Kingdom underscored  that an 
examination of accreditation and related policies should reflect the valuable role guidance plays, and  
reflect that there are multiple approaches to support a trusted accreditation regime.  South Africa  
supported the UK view that IAF and ILAC play a crucial role in encouraging cooperation between 
accreditation systems. The examination of WTO Members' accreditation policies has the potential of 
undermining the sovereignty of National Accredita tion Bodies including the associated legislative 
framework, and examination should rather seek an understanding of the accreditation system MRAs 
in the spirit of Article 9 of the TBT Agreement. South Africa suggested that the proposal be 
undertaken by the ILAC/IAF platform as they deal with cross -frontier accreditation cooperation in a 
transparent and inclusive manner.  
4.6.  On National Quality Infrastructure (NQI)  systems , Trinidad and Tobago  outlined the work 
underway to strengthen its NQI. A National  Quality Policy  (NQP) was being implemented through 
various initiatives to develop governance bodies, review legislation and define roles, strengthen 
institutions, and build a quality -conscious s ociety. These efforts benefit from the work of the 
CARICOM Regional Organization for Standards and Quality (CROSQ) which coordinates regional 
approaches to QI development.73 China  presented the recent reforms of its QI and regulatory 
frameworks, which stre amline and simplify procedures, improve operational efficiency, reduce 
enterprise burdens, improve the business environment, support trade development, promote 
industrial upgrading, and protect the public interest. China suggested that the WTO work on: 
(i) adopting relevant guidelines to clarify the concepts, components, basic principles, policy 
framework, status and role of QI; (ii)  more active participation in international exchanges and 
cooperation in the field of QI; and (iii)  conduct ing in-depth discus sions on various TBT -related law 
enforcement measures to promote information exchanges and cooperation in the field of market 
surveillance.74 Turkey  outlined the many changes and improvements between Turkey's 1995 NQI 
framework and the current one (2019), in terms of how they regulate accreditation, standardization, 
CAPs and metrology, in line with WTO Agreements and the Customs Union (CU) between the EU and 
Turkey. A functional quality infrastructure at the international level is crucial for the eliminatio n of 
technical barriers to trade.75 Argentina  provided an overview of its new National Quality System, 
which also created the Technical Regulators Commission (CRT) as an inter -ministerial body for 
cooperation between the various domestic regulators.76 
4.7.  The United States  explained that its NQI follows a market -based approach, and in that respect , 
the private sector plays a key role in standardization, conformity assessment and accreditation. One 
key challenge is communication and awareness on QI throughout government, and engagement 
with the actual regulatory decision makers. A second challenge is  ensuring that appropriate 
competence on QI is available and engaged by regulators in the development of technical 
 
70 G/TBT/GEN/278 , para. 1.2.  
71 G/TBT/GEN/278 , para. 1.3.  
72 G/TBT/W/748 . 
73 G/TBT/GEN/278 , para. 1.11. 
74 G/TBT/GEN/278 , para. 1.12.  
75 G/TBT/GEN/278 , para. 1.13.  
76 G/TBT/GEN/278 , para. 1.14; G/TBT/GEN/270 . G/TBT/46  
 
- 11 - 
 
  regulations.77 Mozambique  outlined technical assistance needs around quality infrastructure, to 
effectively implement the National Quality Sy stem Act (2018) and meet market demands for QI 
services delivered by the Instituto Nacional de Normalização e Qualidade  (INNOQ). Specific training, 
equipment and standards development needs were identified in the areas of certification, testing 
and inspect ion, and accreditation.78 Brazil  outlined the organization of its NQI. Brazil's current 
product safety regulatory system is quite heavy and prescriptive , hindering innovation and 
competitiveness, and is not entirely aligned with international best practice s, leading to low 
performance. A new regulatory model , currently under discussion, for products under the scope of 
INMETRO , aims at increasing product safety performance , with reduced bureaucracy, greater 
resource efficiency, simplification and flexibility .79 South Africa  presented the organization of its NQI , 
and outlined the respective mandates of the four main public entities: South African Bureau of 
Standards (SABS), the National Regulator for Compulsory Specifications (NRCS), the South African 
National  Accreditation System (SANAS) , and the National Metrology Institute of South Africa 
(NMISA) .80 
4.8.  On regional approaches to NQI , South Africa  described the SADC Technical Regulations 
Liaison Committee (SADCTRLC) approach to approximation of technical re gulations to determine 
equivalence and hence accept ance of each other's conformity assessment results. This involves 
technical comparison of SADC members' national legislation in a specific sector to determine 
convergences and divergences. Aspects for compar ison during approximation include features of the 
legislation (name, type, enforcer, and responsible institutions), administrative provisions, legal or 
provisional requirements, conformity assessments procedures, and technical requirements.81 
Vanuatu , on b ehalf of the Pacific Islands Forum, highlighted the low to non -existent level of QI 
development among Pacific Island Countries (PICs) (notably only Fiji and Papua New Guinea have 
QI institutions and systems in place) . In order to improve this situation and  enhance international 
competitiveness, the promotion of a culture of quality through QI systems was deemed a priority, 
based on the nature of trade of each PIC, and via the incremental establishment of pathways for 
those lacking physical infrastructure. A  Pacific Regional QI Workshop was held in September 2019 
to advance these efforts.82 Australia  noted that the Pacific Quality Infrastructure (PQI) Project to 
increase the capacity of Pacific region standards and conformance infrastructure is underway, with  
Standards Australia and the National Measurement Institute of Australia supporting needs 
assessment and capacity building. The United States  highlighted the role of the Quality Infrastructure 
Council of the Americas (QICA)  in strengthening the NQI of each  Member  in the Americas, promotion 
of the importance of QI services, collaboration and information sharing among peers at the national 
level, organization of regional and national activities, and cross -functional training.83 
4.9.  On approaches to conformity ass essment procedures  in general, New Zealand  
summarized the use of the "regulatory stewardship approach" for managing and developing its 
National Quality Infrastructure (NQI) and its regulatory systems. This approach emphasizes good 
regulatory practices (GRP ) like internal coordination, regulatory impact assessment (RIA), and public 
consultation. It was used to develop New Zealand's "Conformance System Strategy"84 and has 
contributed to reducing unnecessary barriers to trade.85 Australia  gave an example of ho w its NQI 
had to develop new measurement capabilities to meet energy efficiency policy objectives set by the 
Australian government.  Early and ongoing policy coordination with NQI bodies can avoid a mismatch 
between the regulatory objective and conformity a ssessment capabilities.  The NQI is an invaluable 
resource: consult early, consult often, and consult collaboratively.86 Brazil  explained the 2019 
transition of its conformity assessment (CA) framework for telecommunications products away from 
type approval/certification (with priority for accredited third -party laboratories), towards a more 
flexible system allowing the technical area to define which CA model was appropriate for each 
product type, a decision also based on a risk analysis. Furthermore , fees were reduced , and a new 
model of market surveillance was implemented. This change responds to important developments 
 
77 G/TBT/GEN/278 , para. 1.15.  
78 G/TBT/GEN/278 , para. 1.21.  
79 G/TBT/GEN/278 , para. 1.22.  
80 G/TBT/W/757 . 
81 G/TBT/GEN/278 , para. 1.23. 
82 G/TBT/GEN/278 , para. 1.24.  
83 G/TBT/GEN/278 , para. 1.25.  
84 The N ew Zealand "Conformance System Strategy" and more information are available at: 
www.mbie.govt.nz/conformance . 
85 G/TBT/GEN/278 , para. 1.8.  
86 G/TBT/GEN/278 , para. 1.9. G/TBT/46  
 
- 12 - 
 
  in the ICT  environment, such as high demand for connected devices, fast growth in equipment 
approvals and new connectivity methods  such as 5G and IoT.87 Australia  described some evolving 
influences on conformity assessment, and the shift from on-site to remote offic e assessment and 
review of certification documents,  brought on in part by the COVID -19 pandemic .88 The European 
Union  provided an overview of its approach to conformity assessment procedures, which follows a 
risk-based approach for the choice of CAP. Thus,  the selected procedure must be proportionate to 
the level of risk involved in relation to the intended use of the product and the level of safety 
required.89 
4.1.1.1   Guidelines on conformity assessment procedures  
4.10.   Pursuant to the Eighth Triennial Review mandate fo r the Committee "to initiate work  on 
developing non -prescriptive practical guidelines to support regulators in the choice and design of 
appropriate and proportionate conformity assessment procedures"90, submissions were received 
from Australia91, Canada92, China93, Colombia94, the European Union95, Japan96, South  Africa97, and 
the United States98. Members discussed submissions at various meeting s during the Review period.99 
4.1.2   Use of relevant international standards, guides or recommendations  
4.11.   Members and Observers discussed the use of relevant international standards, guides 
and recommendations . The United States  presented the work of the ISO Committee on Conformity 
Assessment (CASCO) to develo p jointly with International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) the 
ISO/IEC 17000 series of standards (also referred to as the CASCO Toolbox) . ISO/IEC Guide 60 
Conformity assessment — Code of good practice was under revision and would become 
ISO/IEC  17060 C onformity assessment — Code of good practice.100 
4.1.3   Facilitating the recognition of conformity assessment results  
4.12.   Members discussed how to facilitate the recognition of conformity assessment results . 
The United States  described how the Consumer Product Safety  Commission (CPSC) utilizes a 
combination of approaches contained in the TBT Committee's "Indicative List" to facilitate acceptance 
of conformity assessment results for children's products.101 This approach contributes to a wide 
range of participating confo rmity assessment bodies (as of late 2019, 580 laboratories have been 
accepted from 47 economies) and the effectiveness of the regulatory actions taken (the overall 
number of toy recalls has dropped from 178 in 2008 to 33 in 2014, and to 12 in 2019).102 Brazil 
accepts foreign test results for a number of products (children's products, domestic appliances 
(electrical safety), and photovoltaic panels) provided that the testing laboratory is accredited by an 
ILAC member and that tests are conducted according to requirements established in the regulation. 
With respect to certification schemes, Brazil accepts foreign results provided: (i)  the foreign 
certification body is accredited by an IAF member and has a memorandum of understanding (MoU) 
with a national certif ication body; (ii) the MoU covers acceptance of assessments and testing; and 
 
87 G/TBT/GEN/278 , para. 1.10.  
88 JOB/TBT/395 , para. 1.1.; and RD/TBT/333 . 
89 JOB/TBT/395 , para. 1.2.; and RD/TBT/334 . 
90 G/TBT/41 , para. 4.17.b.  
91 JOB/TBT/347 . 
92 JOB/TBT/358 . 
93 JOB/TBT/391 . 
94 JOB/TBT/406 . 
95 JOB/TBT/322 . 
96 JOB/TBT/349 . 
97 JOB/TBT/407 . 
98 JOB/TBT/326 ; G/TBT/GEN/280 . 
99 JOB/TBT/273/Rev.8 , Section 2.  
100 JOB/TBT/395 , para. 1.3.; and RD/TBT/335 . 
101 Using the terminology from th e Indicative List, the programme requires a Supplier's Declaration of 
Conformity (SDoC) , Use of Accreditation to Qualify Conformity Assessment Bodies  providing data supporting 
that declaration, and achieving global scale by leveraging Cooperative (Voluntar y) Arrangements between 
Domestic and Foreign Conformity Assessment Bodies (ILAC MRA).  
102 G/TBT/GEN/288 , para. 1.2.  G/TBT/46  
 
- 13 - 
 
  (iii) the national certification body issues the certificate, assuming full responsibility for the 
certification process.103  
4.13.   The European Union  presented examples of the acceptanc e of self -declaration of conformity 
(SDoC) in the European Union in the fields of machinery, electrical and radio equipment. 
Manufacturers need to ensure that products are compliant with the applicable requirements, and on 
this basis, they establish the te chnical documentation, establish and sign the declaration of 
conformity, and affix the CE marking. Involvement of notified bodies is required only in exceptional 
cases under the Radio Equipment Directive 2014/53/EU (RED) and the Machinery 
Directive  2006/42 /EC (MD), only if harmonized standards have not been applied or do not exist , or 
in the case of high -risk products.104 The United States  highlighted the example of the MDSAP, which 
allows recognized Auditing Organizations (AOs) to conduct a single audit of a medical device 
manufacturer that will satisfy the relevant requirements of the five participating regulatory 
authorities .105 The regulatory authorities perform assessments of the AOs, which involve a formal 
recognition and monitoring process (using IMDRF Criteria and ISO/IEC 17021), as well as training 
and competency requirements for auditors. The MDSAP audit model includes 90 audit tasks covering 
all ISO 13485:2016 and regulatory requirements, as well as annexes specifying the audit of technical 
documentations and considerations relative to the audit of the controls of the sterility.106 The 
International Electrotechnical Commiss ion (IEC)  described how several African countries107 have 
nationally adopted IEC international standards and thereby leverage the IECEE CB Scheme108 to 
accept certificates from foreign laboratories. Goods arriving at the border are accompanie d by an 
IECEE CB  Scheme certificate or test report, which can be authenticated by the relevant national 
certification bodies as legitimate on the IECEE online certificate system.109 
4.14.   South Africa  outlined the challenges created by Certificates of Free Sale (CoFS) for exporters 
and regulators. In this respect, South Africa mentioned various issues, including: possible 
inconsistency with WTO provisions on non -discrimination as contained in the TBT A greement and 
GATT; that CoFS are not based on relevant international guides and recommendations for conformity 
assessment procedures; that they create a de facto  ban on products manufactured for the export 
market only due to the impossibility to obtain a C oFS; the difficulty to obtain CoFS for products 
comprised of multiple components produced in global value chains; Members requiring CoFS do not 
provide information on the legitimate objective pursued; and, that CoFS improperly place product 
liability on th e exporting Member government. South Africa recommended that Members requiring 
CoFS replace them with appropriate technical regulations and conformity assessment procedures as 
a matter of urgency and seek technical assistance in this respect as needed.110 
4.1.4   Digital solutions and e -commerce  
4.15.   The European Union  suggested  the Committee hold a thematic session that would explore the 
current landscape of Member and stakeholder views and actions with regard to digital solutions for 
conformity certificates with a view  to: understand ing current Member  attempts to promote the 
digitalisation of trade processes in general, and notably of conformity certificates; and promot ing 
the application of digital regulatory approaches in accordance with core TBT principles and good 
regulatory practice to minimize trade costs while achieving the legitimate policy objectives.111 
Canada  suggested  the Committee hold a thematic session focusing on current issues and best 
practices for addressing and mitigating issues related to the conformity assessment of goods and 
services obtained through e -commerce.112 Chinese Taipei  suggested  the Committee hold a thematic 
 
103 G/TBT/GEN/288 , para. 1.4. 
104 G/TBT/GEN/288 , para. 1.5.  
105 Australia, Brazil, Canada, Japan, and the United States.  
106 G/TBT/GEN/288 , para. 1.7.  
107 Côte d’Ivoire (342 IEC standards adopted), Ethiopia (251 IEC standards adopted), Senegal (67 IEC 
standards adopted), and Togo (568 IEC standards adopted).  
108 IEC System for Conformity Assessment  Schemes  for Electrotechnical Equipment and Components 
(IECEE) Certification Body (CB)  Scheme.  
109 G/TBT/GEN/288 , para. 1.8.  
110 G/TBT/GEN/288 , para. 1.1.  
111 G/TBT/W/758 . 
112 G/TBT/W/745 , para. 1.4. G/TBT/46  
 
- 14 - 
 
  session that would allow Members to share experiences and best practices in enhancing online 
shopping product safety to protect the health and safety of online consumers.113  
4.1.5   Other information  
4.16.   On metrology , the International Bureau of Weights an d Measures (BIPM)  explained that 
metrology is essential for supporting innovation, conformity assessment activities and consumer 
protection, as well as the work of regulators. Sound measurements are achieved by ensuring 
metrological traceability to interna tionally agreed standards with the appropriate measurement 
uncertainty.114  
4.17.   Observers  also provided relevant information. U pdates were provided by ARSO115, BIPM116, 
CROSQ117, IEC118, OIML119, UNECE120 and UNIDO .121 
4.2  Recommendations  
4.18.   Building on this exchange as well as on previous decisions and recommendations of the 
Committee,  in particular the mandate from the Fifth Triennial Review122, and with a view to furthering 
its work in the area of conformity assessment procedures, the Committee  agrees:  
a. to note progress made in its work to develop  non-prescriptive practical guidelines123 aimed 
at support ing regulators in the choice and design of appropriate and proportionate 
conformity assessment procedures124, and to  finalize  this work;  
b. to hold thematic session s on: 
i. the topic of Member accreditation  and related policies, and how these policies can be 
advance d to further reduce technical barriers to trade in goods, including those on the 
use of regional and international systems for conformity assessment;  
ii. Member and stakeholder views on the use of digital solutions  for conformity 
certificates  and quality infra structure activities as a whole , with a view to: 
understanding Member efforts to promote the digitalisation of trade processes, and 
notably of conformity certificates; and  discuss  digital regulatory approaches in 
accordance with core TBT principles and good regulatory practice to minimize trade 
costs while achieving the legitimate policy objectives ;  
iii. current challenges and best practices for addressing issues related to the conformity 
assessment of goods obtained through e-commerce . This s ession will consider, inter 
alia, how Members can work to enhance safety of products purchased online in order 
to protect consumer health and safety ; and  
iv. the key role of the NQI  in Members ' regulatory systems and for implementing the 
TBT Agreement.  
 
113 G/TBT/W/753 .  
114 G/TBT/GEN/278 , para. 1.4. 
115 G/TBT/GEN/289 . 
116 G/TBT/GEN/266 ; RD/TBT/274 ; RD/TBT/279 ; RD/TBT/310 ; RD/TBT/327 ; RD/TBT/343 ; and 
RD/TBT/346 . 
117 RD/TBT/331 . 
118 RD/TBT/275 ; RD/TBT/280 ; RD/TBT/313 ; RD/TBT/329 ; and RD/TBT/341 . 
119 G/TBT/GEN/260 ; G/TBT/GEN/268 ; and G/TBT/GEN/283 .  
120 G/TBT/GEN/255 ; G/TBT/GEN/259 ; G/TBT/GEN/267 ; G/TBT/GEN/281 ; G/TBT/GEN/290 ; and 
RD/TBT/315 . 
121 G/TBT/GEN/254 ; G/TBT/GEN/261 ; RD/TBT/276 ; RD/TBT/311 ; RD/TBT/332 ; and RD/TBT/348 . 
122 G/TBT/26 , para. 19(c).  
123 The guidelines would need to remain neutral in respect of the range of approaches that exist.  
124 G/TBT/41 , para. 4.17.b.  G/TBT/46  
 
- 15 - 
 
  5  STANDA RDS 
The provisions concerning the preparation, adoption and application of standards  
are contained in Article 4 of the TBT Agreement and in the Code of Good Practice 
for the Preparation, Adoption and Application of Standards (the "Code of Good 
Practice"). In addition, Articles 2.4, 2.5, 5.4, and Paragraph F of Annex 3 of the 
Agreement promote the use of relevant international standards, guides and 
recommendations as a basis for standards, technical regulations and conformity 
assessment procedures. Articles 2.6, 5.5 and Paragraph G of Annex 3 emphasize 
the importance of Members' participation in international standardization activities 
related to products for which they have either adopted, or expect to adopt, 
technical regulations.  
G/TBT/1/Rev.14 , p.18 
 
5.1  Exchange of experiences  
5.1.  During the review period, most of the Committee's exchange of experiences on standards took 
place in the context of a thematic session held on 12 November 2019125 and a workshop on the role 
of gender in the development of standards held on 8 Dec ember 2020.126 
5.1.1   Use of standards in regulation  
5.2.  Members discussed the use of standards in regulation . Canada  explained how incorporation 
of standards by reference takes place in Canada and outlined the benefits to using standards as a 
regulatory tool.  Incorporation by reference gives binding effect to the incorporated standard, and 
can be done by "static reference" (as of a specific date and meaning that the subsequent revisions 
to the standards are not automatically incorporated into the regulation); or by "ambulatory 
reference" (no mention of a date of issue or specific version).127 Canada also noted certain 
advantages of incorporation by reference, including relying on the expertise of other bodies , 
regulatory agility  and enhanced regulatory cooperati on.128 China  outlined its standardization reform 
efforts, noting that most mandatory sector and local standards were abolished or converted into 
voluntary standards, reducing the number of mandatory national standards from 3,600 to 2,111. 
However, mandatory  standards represent an important part of China's technical laws and regulations 
and the State Administration for Market Regulation (SAMR) will continue to promote their reform .129 
The European  Union  explained how to reference standards in EU legislation an d noted that 
standardization in the EU supports the single market by eliminating unnecessary technical barriers 
to trade and facilitating the free movement of goods and services.  Under the "New Approach" to 
technical harmonization and standards, legislativ e harmonization is limited to essential 
requirements, technical specifications are laid down in harmonized European standards , and 
products manufactured in compliance with these standards benefit from a presumption of 
conformity.130 
5.3.  The United States  provid ed an overview of certain US laws and policies related to incorporation 
by reference, noting that the US National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) 
requires US federal agencies to use "voluntary consensus standards" as a means to carry out po licy 
objectives, except where they are inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impracticable. The 
United States also said that many US -domiciled organizations, including ASTM International complies 
with the WTO's Six Principles for international stan dards development.132 ASTM International has 
Memoranda of Understanding with 113  partners around the world, providing access to its full 
collection of standards as well as membership in its technical committees at no charge. There are 
references to ASTM International's standards in US federal regulations, and these are made available 
 
125 G/TBT/GEN/277  
126 G/TBT/GEN/309 . 
127 G/TBT/GEN/277 , para. 1.1.; and https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tbt_e/01_a_p1a_canada.pdf . 
128 G/TBT/GEN/277 , para. 1.6.; and 
https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tbt_e/02_b_p2b_c anada_pledge_e.pdf . 
129 G/TBT /GEN/277 , para. 1.2.; and https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tbt_e/01_b_p1b_china.pdf .  
130 G/TBT/GEN/277 , para. 1.3.; and 
https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tbt_e/01_c_p1c_eu_vaccaro.pdf . 
132 G/TBT/GEN/277 , para. 1.4.; and 
https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tbt_e/01_d_p1d_us_astm.pdf  and para. 1.5.; and 
https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tbt_e/02_a_p2a_us_owen.pdf . G/TBT/46  
 
- 16 - 
 
  at no charge in ASTM International's online reading room, in line with the federal government's 
reasonable access policy . Australia  shared its perspective on the use of standards and risk 
assessments in policy and regulation, noting that the entire technica l infrastructure should be taken 
into account when embarking on a regulatory process.  Australia's "Best Practice Guide to Using 
Standards and Risk Assessment in Policy and Regulation" supports harmonisation across levels of 
government and addresses issues such as which standards to use (preferably relevant international 
standards), where to source an appropriate standard and how to reference it in regulation (direct or 
indirect, dated or undated).131 Invited speakers also addressed the use of standards in re gulation. 
UNECE  provided an overview of its work on best practices for standards -based and risk -based rule  
making focusing on the work conducted by UNECE's Working party on Regulatory Cooperation and 
Standardization Policies and its Recommendation D on Ref erence to Standards.132 
5.1.2   Approaches to standardization  
5.4.  On approaches to standardization , Japan  outlined its standardization programme  for new 
market creation, designed by the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry to give companies – 
including SMEs – alternative paths to develop standards to promote innovative products or 
technologies.133 The United States  explained that the US standard ization system is "bottom up" – 
standards users  drive standardization activities. She said that there are different tools for the 
development of globally relevant standards, ranging from "one -country -one-vote" based on national 
participation (e.g. ISO, IEC); direct participation (e.g. ASTM, ASME); and consortia -driven 
standards. All these types of standards are applied in the US market, with users selecting the tool 
that best fits their needs. The US system endorses the six principles developed by the TBT Committee 
on international standards, and ANSI a ccreditation of standards developers reflects these 
principles.134 The European Union  explained that standards developed by CEN and CENELEC: (i)  are 
based on the national delegation principle; (ii)  represent a consensus among all interested parties, 
includi ng industry , SMEs and societal stakeholders; (iii)  are voluntary; (iv)  are developed by 
independent organizations clearly distinct from authorities; and (v)  are in compliance with the TBT 
Agreement. The European standardization model means that standards a re identical across member 
States, and there is an obligation to withdraw conflicting national standards.135 Turkey  said t he 
Turkish Standards Institute became a full member of CEN/CENELEC in 2012 and 98% of its standards 
are harmonized with EU standards.136 
5.1.3   The role of gender in the development of standards  
5.5.  Members  discussed  perspective s, experiences and best practices on including gender 
considerations in standards development.  Canada  presented several initiatives that have been 
undertaken in Canada to improve gender equality in the development of standards. At the Standards 
Council of Canada, an action plan has been developed to address the fact that standards are not 
gender responsive and are not having equitable outcomes for men and women. As evidence  of the 
disparity, Canada highlighted research demonstrating that currently standards are more effective at 
protecting the health and safety of men than women .137 South Africa  presented the gender aspect 
of its national development plan, which seeks to adva nce women's socio -economic empowerment 
and promote gender equality. It was noted that the action plan on gender equality of the South 
African Bureau of Standards, which builds on the UNECE declaration on Gender Responsive 
Standards, focuses on three key ar eas of work: gender representation, gender responsiveness, and 
outreach and advocacy.138 The European  Union  explained that, while the European Commission does 
not develop standards, the Commission does have a strong commitment towards gender equality, 
including by following the activities of the UNECE WP6 Gender -Responsive Standards Initiative.139 
The European Union also noted that CEN -CENELEC and many EU national standardi zation bodies 
 
131 G/TBT/GEN/277 , para. 1.7.; and 
https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tbt_e/02 _c_p2c_australia.pdf . 
132 G/TBT/GEN/277 , para. 1.7.; and 
https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tbt_e/02_d_p2d_canada_lorenza.pdf . 
133 G/TBT/GEN/278 , para. 1.5.  
134 G/TBT/GEN/278 , para. 1.6.  
135 G/TBT/GEN/278 , para. 1.7.  
136 G/TBT/GEN/278 , para. 1.13.  
137 G/TBT/GEN/309 , paras. 1.1-1.2; a nd 
https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tbt_e/white_parkouda_e.pdf . 
138 G/TBT/GEN/309 , paras. 1.4 -1.5; and https://www.wto.org/english/tra top_e/tbt_e/scholtz_e.pdf .  
139 G/TBT/GEN/309 , para. 1.6; and https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tbt_e/vaccaro_e.pdf .  G/TBT/46  
 
- 17 - 
 
  have signed the UNECE declaration on Gender responsive standards. CEN -CENELEC has developed 
an action plan with a focus on sharing information and collaboration, which led to the setting up of 
an informal Gender Coordination Group open to all CEN -CENELEC members.140 
5.6.  Members also shared real-world examples of how gender considera tions have been 
taken into account in standards development . The European Union  discussed the importance 
of gender considerations in the development of standards in relation to car safety. It was noted that 
women are more at risk of serious injuries and fa talities in traffic accidents compared to men because 
the standards of protection performances conducted for vehicles are not assessed for females to the 
same extent  as they are for males.141 
5.7.  Invited speakers  shared their relevant work and activities. The International Trade Centre ( ITC) 
presented insights on standards and gender drawn from ITC's SheTrades Initiative, which aims to 
connect 3 million women entrepreneurs and women -owned businesses to international markets by 
2021. The ITC highlighted three main areas of work in the initiative in relation to standards and 
gender: supporting  compliance of  women -owned businesses' to standards, supporting the 
participation of women  in trade policy design and implementation, and developing an ISO 
international workshop agreement for women in trade.142 UNECE  provided an overview of its work 
on gender responsiveness in standards and standardization, focusing on its Gender Responsive 
Standards Initiative (GRSI), which aims to strengthen the use of standards and technical regulations 
as powerful tools to attain SDG 5143, integrate a gender lens in the development of both standards 
and technical regulations, and elaborate gender indicators and criteria that could be used in 
standards development.144 
5.1.4   The Activities of the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex)  
5.8.  Colombia  suggested  a thematic session in which Members could be informed about the 
activities of standards development in the Codex – including, for example, recent standards and 
those currently u nder development. Colombia suggested  this dialogue could include sharing 
experiences among Members on how they take part in these discussions, good practices that could 
lead to a greater involvement by developing countries in these activities, as well as h ow Members 
incorporate international standards in their regulatory processes, including with respect to 
conformity assessment.145 
5.1.5   Other information  
5.9.  The United States  provided an updated on the work of the Standards Alliance.146 
5.10.   Mexico  and the United States  drew the Committee's attention to the work conducted by the 
Codex Alimentarius Commission on certain labelling requirements to applicable formula food.147 
 
140 G/TBT/GEN/309 , paras. 1.7. -1.8.; and https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tbt_e/w autier_e.pdf .  
141 G/TBT/GEN/309 , paras. 3.1.-3.2.; and https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tbt_e/linder_e.pdf . 
142 G/TBT/GEN/309 , paras. 2.1. -2.2.; and https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tbt_e/fessehaie_e.pdf .  
143 SDG 5: "Achieve Gender Equality and Empower all Women and Girls".  
144 G/TBT/GEN/309 , paras. 2.3. -2.4.; and 
https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tbt_ e/vepsalainen_e.pdf .  
145 G/TBT/W/75 2 
146 G/TBT/W/597 . 
147 G/TBT/M/78 , paras. 5.1. -5.3. G/TBT/46  
 
- 18 - 
 
  5.11.   Observers  also provided relevant information. Updates were provided by ARSO148, BIPM149, 
CODEX150, CROSQ151, IEC152, ISO153, OIML154, UNECE155 and UNIDO.156  
5.2  Recommendations  
5.12.   Building on this exchange as well as on previous decisions and recommendations of the 
Committee, and with a view to furthering its work in the area of standards, the Committee  agrees:  
a. to hold a thematic session to: inform Members about the activities of standards 
development in the Codex , including recent TBT-relevant standards and those currently 
under development; share experiences and good practices on how Members take part in 
these discussions with a view to increase participation by developing Members;  and, 
b. to hold a thematic session on how Members incorporate international standards in their 
regulatory processes, including with respect to conformity assessment.  
6  TRANSPARENCY  
"The TBT Agreement contains transparency  provisions in: Articles 2 and 3 
(technical regulations); Articles 5, 7, 8 and 9 (conformity assessment procedures); 
Annex 3, paragraphs J, L, M, N, O & P (standards); and Articles 10 (general 
transparency provisions)  and 15 (final provisions). A number of decisions and 
recommendations have been made with a view to facilitating access to information 
and further improving the implementation of transparency procedures under the 
Agreement."  
G/TBT/1/Rev.14 , p. 2 3 (emphasi s added)  
 
6.1  Exchange of experiences   
6.1.  During the review period, most of the Committee's exchange of experiences took place in the 
context of a thematic session on transparency, including the  Ninth Special Meeting on Procedures 
for Information Exchange, held on 18 -19 June 2019157, and a thematic session on transparency held 
on 4 February 2021.158 A background note was provided by the Secretariat to assist delegations in 
deliberations on the topic of transparency.159 The Secretariat provided updates  on transparency 
related activities and online tools .160 A TBT technical assistance Transparency Workshop took place 
in parallel to the TBT Committee meeting held in June 2019.161 
6.2.  Members continued to submit an increasing number of TBT notifications during the review 
period (Chart  1). During the review pe riod, 4 Members submitted their first Statement on 
Implementation and Administration of the TBT Agreement under Article 15.2 of the TBT Agreement 
(15.2 Statement ) and 4 Members submitted revisions to their statements ; further, 3 Members 
submitted supplements thereto .162 
 
148 G/TBT/GEN/289 . 
149 RD/TBT/251 ; RD/TBT/274 ; RD/TBT/279 ; G/TBT/GEN/266 ; RD/TBT/310 ; RD/TBT/327 ; and 
RD/TBT/343 . 
150 G/TBT/GEN/258 ; G/TBT/GEN/282 ; G/TBT/GEN/291 ; and RD/TBT/328 . 
151 RD/TBT/331 . 
152 RD/TBT/275 ; RD/TBT/280 ; RD/TBT/313 ; G/TBT/GEN/299 ; RD/TBT/329 ; and RD/TBT/341 . 
153 International Organization for Standardization G/TBT/M/76 , para. 6.1.; G/TBT/M/77 , para. 6.2.; 
G/TBT/GEN/269 ; G/TBT/GEN/284 ; G/TBT/GEN/292 ; and RD/TBT/342 . 
154 G/TBT/GEN/283 . 
155 G/TBT/GEN/255 ; G/TBT/GEN/259 ; G/TBT/GEN/267 ; G/TBT/GEN/281 ; and G/TBT/GEN/290 . 
156 G/TBT/GEN/254 ; G/TBT/GEN/261 ; RD/TBT/311 ; and RD/TBT/332 . 
157 G/TBT/GEN/265 . 
158 G/TBT/GEN/312 ; G/TBT/M/78 , para. 3.324.  
159 JOB/TBT/320  and JOB/TBT/320/Corr.1 . 
160 G/TBT/GEN/265 , para. 2.1; G/TBT/GEN/274 ; G/TBT/GEN/276 ; G/TBT/M/79 , para. 2.319.; 
G/TBT/M/80 , paras. 2.379. and 2.396.; and G/TBT/GEN/312 , para. 1.2.  
161 G/TBT/M/78 , para. 4.2.  
162 Figures as of 1 November 2021.  G/TBT/46  
 
- 19 - 
 
  Chart 1: Total TBT notifications per Triennial Review period163 
 
 
6.1.1   Online tools: Tracking and reacting to Members' measures and notifications  
6.3.  Member s discussed their experiences about the process of gathering, disseminating, 
tracking and responding to TBT notifications, including by utilising ePing and other online 
tools and technology .164 Australia  shared experiences on how it addresses Non -Tariff Bar riers 
(NTBs), noting that it developed a Non -Tariff Barriers Action Plan , which is  a whole -of-government 
strategy to increase efforts to improve market access through enhancing understanding of barriers 
that are legitimate and addressing barriers that are inconsistent with international trade rules. A 
gateway website was created to facilitate raising concerns for all businesses.165 Viet Nam  explained 
that its TBT National Enquiry Point, situated in the Directorate for Standards, Quality and Metrology 
(STAMEQ ) in the Ministry of Science and Technology, is responsible for notifying and responding to 
all enquiries related to TBT issues; managing and operating the TBT Viet Nam portal; and providing 
and disseminating TBT information to stakeholders. The TBT Viet  Nam Office also provides training 
on ePing.166 
6.4.  The United States  described the role of the USA TBT Enquiry Point in making notifications 
available through NotifyUS; distributing comments to agencies of the US Government and to the 
appropriate Enquiry Points  of WTO Members; responding to correspondence from WTO Members; 
providing information and guidance to US industries; and monitoring US Federal and State 
regulations to notify the WTO of potential TBTs.167 Moreover, using the toy industry as an example 
for s uccessful stakeholder engagement, the United  States described how the US engaged 
stakeholders to reduce STCs.168 The United States also underscored that the TBT process at the WTO 
is critical to the ability of the global cosmetic and personal care products industry to be informed 
about proposed regulations in a wide range of countries. By providing comments, the proposed 
regulations can be improved to avoid them becoming a trade barrier.169 
 
163 Figures as of 1 November 2021.  
164 G/TBT/GEN/265 ; G/TBT/M/79 ; G/TBT/M/80 ; G/TBT/M/82 ; G/TBT/GEN/312 . 
165 G/TBT/GEN/265 , para. 2.4.  
166 G/TBT/GEN/265 , para. 2.6.  
167 G/TBT/GEN/265 , para. 2.7.  
168 G/TBT/GEN/265 , para. 2.8.  
169 G/TBT/GEN/265 , para. 2.9.  
G/TBT/46  
 
- 20 - 
 
  6.5.  Uganda  shared its experience with the ePing platform, which is extens ively used by the private 
sector and by central and local government officials to download notifications of draft measures . 
Uganda also uses the National Discussion Forum function to facilitate discussion of notifications and 
has created sector groups for discussion of notifications that may affect a particular sector.170 
Trinidad and Tobago  laid out the challenges faced by the Trinidad and Tobago Bureau of Standards 
in its role as focal point, which include properly identifying who might be affected by a no tification. 
At the regional level, CARICOM has established a regional committee to handle matters on Technical 
Barriers to Trade, Information Management and Enquiry Points, which will use ePing as a forum for 
regional discussions amongst enquiry point offi cers and to facilitate sectorial discussions on proposed 
notifications, among other things.171 Egypt  explained the work it has undertaken in fulfilling its TBT 
Agreement transparency obligations, noting that mechanisms are in place for both outgoing and 
incoming notifications, with public and private sector involvement throughout. It was noted that 
using ePing allows stakeholders to receive email alerts of notifications of interest to them and 
facilitates the provision of comments within the timeframe.172 
6.6.  On the use and enhancement of ePing , Switzerland  noted that ePing facilitated, for 
example, information -sharing with respect to comments on notifications and replies to such 
comments. Switzerland observed that ePing could be a valuable tool to implement so me of the 
Eighth Triennial Review recommendation s, such as the recommendation encouraging Members to 
publish their comments and replies thereto .173 Switzerland encouraged Members to use ePing for 
this purpose.174 Moreover, Switzerland suggested  that the Secretariat prepare a draft document 
further clarifying the purpose and the practical steps for sharing comments and replies via ePing, 
underlining its voluntary nature as well as the benefits.175 Australia  encouraged other Members to 
make use of the ePing  features highlighted by Switzerland.176 The United States  was supportive of 
all the enhancements that had been made to ePing and strongly encouraged the WTO to continue 
enhancing that system and its integration with other TBT online systems, such as the TBT IMS. The 
United States appreciated the work of the ITC, WTO and UNDESA to make the system as useful as 
it is. ePing, it was emphasized, was a powerful tool that could strongly enhance transparency and 
facilitate information sharing – and could t hus contribute to resolving STCs.177 The European Union  
saw value in efforts to  extend the functionalities of ePing and indicated that ePing should provide a 
comprehensive support to all TBT notifications, throughout their life -cycle and allow for the compl ete 
treatment of and follow -up to TBT notifications. The European Union encouraged the Secretariat to 
pursue these efforts and remained available for any support that may be needed in the development 
and testing phases of an updated ePing tool.178 
6.7.  The Europ ean Union  noted ePing's potential as a vehicle to facilitate the implementation of the 
TBT Agreement and help the work of the TBT Committee. In particular, the European Union noted 
that, with further development, ePing could be used as a single notificatio n platform to include all 
Members' notifications, from the initial notification drafts to the notification of final texts. ePing could 
have a public face allowing the public to see how TBT works and where comments on notifications 
can be published.  In addi tion, ePing could have a restricted access area to be used by officials to 
communicate comments and replies, to request clarification on a measure and facilitate exchanges 
in general between Members. Another use for ePing could be as a repository for each notification, 
where drafts, addenda, stakeholders' contributions, comments and replies and the final texts could 
be contained in a single file. Any STC information might also be included there. The European Union 
also noted that these possible new features  would pose challenges, such as deciding how much 
information should be shared just with WTO Members and how much with the general public, and 
the treatment of delicate information and personal data.179 Switzerland  supported the EU's 
suggestions to centrali ze the Committee's work in one platform, which would help better implement 
the transparency provisions.180 The European Union  suggested  to expand the scope and 
 
170 G/TBT/GEN/265 , para. 2.10.  
171 G/TBT/GEN/265 , para. 2.11.  
172 G/TBT/GEN/265 , para. 2.12.  
173 G/TBT/M/79 , para. 2.320.  
174 G/TBT/M/80 , para. 2.393.  
175 G/TBT/M/82 , para. 2.504.  
176 G/TBT/M/80 , para. 2.394.  
177 G/TBT/M/80 , para. 2.395.  
178 G/TBT/M/82 , para. 2.505.  
179 G/TBT/GEN/312 , para. 1.3.  
180 G/TBT/GEN/312 , para. 1.4.  G/TBT/46  
 
- 21 - 
 
  functionalities of ePing .181 Brazil  suggested  some enhancements to ePing , the TBT IMS, the Trade 
Concerns Database, and future eTools .182 
6.8.  Invited speakers also addressed developments in online tools. UNCTAD  presented its Non -tariff 
Measures (NTM) programme, which covers a broad spectrum of measures including , but not limited 
to TBT and SPS measures.183 The ITC introduced the Global Trade Helpdesk , a single -entry point for 
trade -related information that aims to integrate dispersed and complex information on trade.184 
ISO provided information on its MENA STAR project, which seeks to strengthen the institutional 
infrastructure on standards and regulations to support business and industry in the Middle East and 
North Africa, and provides hands on training on ePing.185 
6.1.2   Handling  of comments – disseminating comments and replies on a voluntary basis  
6.9.  The European Union  described the process and tools used to manage and disseminate the 
increasing number of TBT notifications and related documents with their stakeholders. This process 
begins with the comment procedure, whereby the enquiry point distributes notifications received 
from the WTO database to EU Commission departments and to stakeholders. The relevant 
departments then provide technical input and assess stakeholder comments. F inally, the enquiry 
point prepares comments on behalf of the EU in cooperation with the Commission departments.186 
The United States  described FDA's process for developing and implementing new regulations to meet 
US public health objectives, whilst respecti ng established laws, policies, and trade obligations. The 
FDA's goal in the rulemaking process is to engage all stakeholders (e.g. consumers/patients, 
domestic or foreign industry, foreign or US state governments, academics/researchers) to maximize 
substan tive comments that may improve the proposed rule. It was noted that once a draft regulation 
is published in the Federal Register it is notified to the WTO, and set up for public comments by 
means of a docket on the www.regulations.gov  website. FDA reviews comments received through 
the enquiry point with USTR and works to address trading partners' concerns.187 Brazil  suggested  
that, whenever a Member submits a TBT notification with indication of a final date for comm ents, 
the notification include a website link in which all comments received by the enquiry point will be 
available.188  
6.10.   With respect to the use of ePing to disseminate comments and replies on notifications , 
the Secretariat  introduced the first draft of a p ractical document189 on the potential benefits of 
sharing comments and replies related to notifications  on a voluntary basis , as well as subsequent 
discussions in the TBT Committee meetings. The Secretariat also introduced how ePing can be used 
for this pur pose by means of a short tutorial video.190 Switzerland  observed that the centralization 
of this task on ePing  led to increased transparency in the handling of comments, the early disclosure 
of problems or their solutions, and allowed for more discussion and solution of STCs and better 
coordination between interested Members. Switzerland added that it was already using ePing to 
inform Members that comments had been submitted and that, to date, no issues had been 
encountered when using the platform for this purpose. The United States  and Canada  stated that, 
while the function of posting comments to notifications on ePing would certainly facilitate Members' 
ability to comment, certain outstanding issues should be further discussed by the Committee, such 
as how comments would be treated and the privacy of those comments.191 The United  States  
indicated that, although the re were some privacy concerns to be worked out, the developments in 
ePing were positive. Trinidad and Tobago  shared the US' concerns on privacy and suggested that 
the new ePing chat feature could be used to share more sensitive information on a one -to-one basis. 
Australia  saw considerable value in efforts to promote the practice of sharing comments on 
notifications and replies to comments via ePing. Australia also noted that the flexibility provided in 
the system was useful in managing privacy concerns expr essed, because  the document made clear 
that the comment and reply sharing practice would be voluntary and Members would determine 
 
181 G/TBT/W/736 , para.  2.2. 
182 G/TBT/W/741/Rev.1 , paras. 2.1. -2.2.; and G/TBT/W/744 , para. 2.1. 
183 G/TBT/GEN/265 , para. 2.2.  
184 G/TBT/GEN/265 , para. 2.3.  
185 G/TBT/GEN/265 , para. 2.13.  
186 G/TBT/GEN/265 , para. 3.1.  
187 G/TBT/GEN/265 , para. 3.2.  
188 G/TBT/W/743 , para. 2.1.  
189 JOB/TBT/396 . 
190 G/TBT/GEN/312 , para. 3.1. 
191 G/TBT/M/82 , paras. 2.506. -2.507.  G/TBT/46  
 
- 22 - 
 
  whether comments could be shared in whole, in part, or Members could simply indicate that 
comments were made without disclosin g the detail.192  
6.11.   Members also exchanged experiences regarding the commenting process . The European 
Union  explained its process of preparing comments on TBT notifications submitted by other WTO 
Members, noting that the EU's approach is to submit, for each T BT notification, a single comment 
on behalf of the EU. The EU's Enquiry Point coordinates the preparation of EU comments so that it 
is based on different views expressed by various EU stakeholders (member States, European 
industries, individual stakeholder s) against the background of general EU interests and policies. The 
European Union also shared the three major challenges faced when preparing comments on TBT 
notifications by other WTO Members: (i)  the lack of translation of notified measures into one of the 
official/working WTO languages; (ii)  late notifications and insufficient time for comments; and 
(iii) situations when measures are notified to both the TBT and SPS Committees, but this is not 
indicated by the notifying Member.193 The United States  prese nted how the US WTO Enquiry Point 
facilitates the sharing of comments from US industry and government on WTO Members' 
TBT notifications and of WTO Members' comments on US notifications. In essence, US  entities 
submit comments, procedural questions, other i nformation requests to the US  Enquiry Point, which 
then distributes them to appropriate WTO  Members' national Enquiry Points and also to the US 
government trade/export agencies. When WTO Members submit comments on US TBT notifications, 
the US Enquiry Point  distributes these comments to the appropriate US regulators and trade agencies 
(e.g. USTR, Department of Agriculture, Environmental Protection Agency, etc.). The United States 
listed the key benefits of commenting through its Enquiry Point and certain cha llenges, such as the 
lack of responses to requests for extensions to the comment period.194 
6.12.   China  shared its experience in how comments on TBT notifications are prepared. The TBT 
Enquiry Point receives and translates TBT notifications and selects those noti fications that may have 
an impact on Chinese exports. These notifications are then emailed to the regulatory authority for 
further study and comment. Stakeholders are encouraged to use ePing to track notifications. 
Stakeholders also make comments on the se lected notifications and submit them to the competent 
authority, which will send those approved to the Enquiry Point. The Enquiry Point translates the 
comments into English and submits them to the notifying Member. For China, the challenges include 
the fin ancial costs and time required for translating the increasing number of notifications and full 
texts, as well as not receiving a response to requests to extend the comment period, especially when 
less than 60 days had been provided.195 Russia  queried what p ercentage of comments had been 
taken into account, and which type of stakeholders were providing the most comments (industry 
associations, individual exporters, research institutions, government experts, etc.). China , the 
United States , and the European Un ion shared their relevant experiences in this regard.196 Brazil  
suggested  that, whenever another Member that presented comments so requires, the notifying 
Member explain which proposals or contributions were taken into account and incorporated into the 
final technical regulation or conformity assessment procedure.197 
6.13.   Moreover, following  up on the recommendation in the Eighth Triennial Review to develop a 
good practice guide on how to prepare a comment on a WTO notified technical regulation 
or conformity assessment procedure , Members shared views on the preparation of this good 
practice guide. Canada  noted that the main challenges that it faced include the lack of availability of 
the notified regulations in one of the three official languages of  the WTO, email addresses of Enquiry 
Points no longer being valid, and difficulties related to engaging stakeholders to provide inputs on 
notified measures.198 Peru stated that the drafting of a good practice guide should consider 
challenges related to reac hing out to stakeholders in a timely manner and the inclusion of the 
technical justification in the comments to ensure that the concerns raised are addressed in the most 
satisfactory manner.199 The European Union  suggested  that the Committee set key element s for a 
 
192 G/TBT/GEN/312 , para. 3.2.  
193 G/TBT/GEN/312 , paras. 3.3. -3.4. 
194 G/TBT/GEN/312 , paras. 3.5 -3.6. 
195 G/TBT/GEN/312 , para. 3.7.  
196 G/TBT/GEN/312 , paras. 3.8 -3.9 
197 G/TBT/W/737 , paras. 2.1 -2.2. 
198 G/TBT/GEN/312 , para. 3.11.  
199 G/TBT/GEN/312 , para. 3.12.  G/TBT/46  
 
- 23 - 
 
  good practice guide on how to improve product coverage in notifications and how to prepare a 
comment.200 
6.1.3   Functioning of enquiry points  
6.14.   Members shared experiences on the role of enquiry points in facilitating internal coordination 
and the handling, a ccepting, and transmitting of comments, and explored ways to improve their 
functioning. The Secretariat  presented update s in respect of the validation of Enquiry Point 
information at the 6 -7 March 2019 Committee meeting201, at the thematic session on 
transp arency202, and at the Committee's regular meeting held on 26 -27 February 2020.203  
6.15.   China  described the mechanisms for implementing the transparency provisions of the TBT 
Agreement in China and the process by which comments are collected from stakeholders, including 
through sector -specific research and comment centres. China also noted several  challenges for the 
Chinese Enquiry Point .204 Jamaica  said that the Bureau of Standards Jamaica (BSJ), which is the 
designated TBT National Enquiry Point, responds to enquiries and informs local stakeholders about 
export requirements in international market s, including using  ePing.205 Chinese Taipei  provided some 
insights on its process to respond to enquiries on TBT matters and noted the increasing use of the 
Enquiry Point . Chinese Taipei also indicated that the most frequent difficulties that it faces in se nding 
enquiries to other Members include lack of acknowledgement, lengthy response time, and responses 
sometimes being incomplete.206 
6.16.   The United States  indicated that increased communication between Enquiry Points could help 
to avoid, address and resolve ST Cs by exchanging information and questions on notified measures 
in between TBT Committee meetings. The United States observed that a possibility to enhance 
bilateral engagement is to look into whether ePing could be further used to facilitate such 
communic ations as it already includes a discussion forum for Enquiry Points .207 Kenya  presented its 
experience in managing notifications and comments. Kenya explained that the TBT National Enquiry 
Point covers a broad set of functions, such as the drafting and uplo ading of TBT notifications, 
responding to incoming comments on notifications and sending regular reports to the TBT National 
Committee, which is a key institution in TBT transparency matters.208 The European Union  described 
the procedure for TBT notifications in the EU, whereby EU draft measures are notified by the EU TBT 
Notification and Enquiry Point. EU member States also have individual TBT Notification and Enquiry 
Points, responsible for notifying national dra ft measures.209 
6.1.4   Timing of notifications  
6.17.   Brazil  suggested  to discuss what is an early appropriate stage to present notifications to the 
TBT Committee . Brazil also suggested that Members evaluate whether their notifications are being 
made at an early appropriate stage, when amendments can still be introduced and taken into account 
and, if not, to adjust their notifications processes .210 The United States  suggested  that Members 
notify draft technical regulations at the same time that domestic consultatio ns occur.211 The United  
Kingdom  encourage d further discussion on the timing and substance of notifications.  The European 
Union  recalled the need to engage in additional exchanges on both timing and substance of 
notifications.  South Africa  indicated that Mem bers' experiences on the timing of domestic 
consultations and notification of draft technical regulation differ and that it might not be possible for 
some Members to notify draft technical regulations at the same time that domestic consultations 
occur. Fur ther discussions on the applicability of this proposal are needed.  
 
200 G/TBT/W/736 , para. 2.2.  
201 G/TBT/M/77 , para. 3.278; G/TBT/GEN/262 , paras. 1.1 -1.4. 
202 G/TBT/GEN/265 , para. 1.1.  
203 G/TBT/M/80 , para. 2.396.  
204 G/TBT/GEN/265 , para. 1.2.  
205 G/TBT/GEN/265 , para. 1.3.  
206 G/TBT/GEN/265 , para. 1.4.  
207 G/TBT/GEN/265 , para. 1.5.  
208 G/TBT/GEN/265 , para. 1.6.  
209 G/TBT/GEN/265 , para. 2.5.  
210 G/TBT/W/742 , paras. 2.1 -2.2 
211 G/TBT/W/749 . G/TBT/46  
 
- 24 - 
 
  6.1.5   Submission of notifications (Format and Guidelines)  
6.18.   With respect to the product coverage specified in notifications , the Secretariat  provided 
an overview of key issues about the operation of the Harmonized System and the Convention on the 
Harmonized Commodity Description and Coding System established under the auspices of the World 
Customs Organization (WCO).212 An invited speaker, ISO, explained key aspects of the International 
Classification of Standards (ICS), which provides a structure for catalogues of international, regional 
and national standards and other normative documents and is used by the ISO as well as other 
standardizing b odies.213 In response to questions regarding the lack of HS Codes in notifications and 
the possible availability of a concordance table between HS and ICS Codes, the Secretariat recalled 
that only about one third of notifications had included HS Codes in th e past year while it was more 
common to see ICS Codes. To facilitate the identification of HS Codes and ICS Codes in notifications, 
the online Notification Submission System included drop -down options where Members could search 
for specific codes based on product names. In cases where the submitted notification did not include 
any HS or ICS Code, the Secretariat, more specifically the Central Registry of Notifications, assigned 
these Codes where possible. The additional codes did not appear in the official notification but were 
used to facilitate database searches and alerts, for example in the TBT IMS and ePing.214 The 
European Union  suggested  that the Committee set key elements for a good practice guide on how 
to improve product coverage in notifications an d how to prepare a comment.215 The United States  
suggested  that the WTO Secretariat build awareness and capacity by organizing a training on HS 
and ICS codes in notifications, with a focus on medical technology as a case study.216 Ecuador  
supported training on HS and ICS codes, and suggested an additional case study focusing on 
processed foods.  Chinese Taipei  suggested  to discuss, among other things, experiences and 
challenges in encouraging private sector engagement in TBT notifications a nd reasons/difficulties for 
Members in providing specific information on the products potentially impacted by notified measures, 
with special emphasis on the challenges of providing HS codes.217 The Dominican Republic  called for 
enhancing the use of HS and ICS codes in TBT notifications.  
6.19.   On other information contained in the notification format , Brazil  suggested  that 
Members provide more details of legitimate objectives pursued in notified measures.218 Canada  
suggested  that the Committee  set additional speci fic parameters and elements to be included in the 
field "Description of content" for notification of measures which are published originally in a language 
other than English, French or Spanish.219  
6.20.   On establishing whether a measure should be notified under the SPS Agreement 
and/or TBT Agreement , the Secretariat  presented its Background Note relevant to the discussion 
of whether a measure should be notified under the SPS Agreement and/or the TBT Agreement.220 
Brazil  explained certain aspect s of Brazil's regulatory framework that foster regular dialogue among 
its main regulators, international trade authorities and the TBT National Notification Authority, which 
help with the task of clarifying under which agreement a notification should be present ed. Brazil also 
noted its enhanced transparency policy of going beyond the Agreements' minimum obligations and 
notifying all regulations that have impact on trade, as well as its increasing number of "double" TBT -
SPS notifications. Brazil stressed that unc ertainties regarding under which agreement a measure 
should be notified can have negative consequences for Members, including losing time to 
communicate drafts to interested stakeholders.221 Brazil concluded with a proposal for the 
TBT Committee to " encoura ge[] Members to reflect on the benefits of notifying simultaneously to 
both [TBT and SPS] Committees ".222 Canada  described its experience with notifications of regulations 
containing SPS and TBT elements. In Canada, the submission and receipt of notificatio ns is 
performed by a single body that performs the tasks of Notification Authority and Enquiry Point for 
both TBT and SPS measures. Canada's Notification Authority and Enquiry Point and Canadian 
regulators work together to identify issues requiring notific ation and to prepare such notifications, 
 
212 G/TBT/GEN/312 , para. 2.1. 
213 G/TBT/GEN/312 , para. 2.2. 
214 G/TBT/GEN/312 , para. 2.3.  
215 G/TBT/W/736 , para. 2.2. 
216 See Section 7.1.2; G/TBT/W/750  
217 G/TBT/W/753 , Part 2.  
218 G/TBT/W/738 , paras. 2.1 -2.2. 
219 G/TBT/W/745 , para. 3.4. 
220 JOB/TBT/320 , Section 3.2 and Annex I I. 
221 G/TBT/GEN/265 , paras. 4.2 -4.3. 
222 G/TBT/GEN/265 , para. 4.3. (emphasis omitted).  G/TBT/46  
 
- 25 - 
 
  including by assessing whether elements in the regulation fall under the SPS or TBT Agreement. 
Canada concluded by making a "best practice" suggestion for Members to indicate in their notification 
if the regulation has been notified to another WTO Committee.223 The European Union  stressed the 
importance of indicating  whether a notified measure falls under both the TBT and SPS  Agreements . 
Non-simultaneous SPS and TBT notifications could prevent Members from submitting identical 
comments in such cases.  
6.21.   At the Committee meeting held on 28 -29 October 2020, the Secretariat noted that the online 
TBT Notification Submission System , through whic h 88% of TBT notifications had been 
submitted in 2019, had undergone a series of enhancements. One of the most significant changes 
related to the incorporation of more recent versions of HS Codes into the system, making it easier 
for Members to find the sp ecific codes for the products they intend to regulate.224 
6.1.6   Texts of notified technical regulations and conformity assessment procedures  
6.22.   The Secretariat  drew delegations' attention to certain recommendations dealing with final 
texts.225 Members were invited to consider the revised formats226 and provide any comments in 
writing and to provide information to the Secretariat about where (e.g. website addresses ) Members 
maintain up -to-date information regarding adopted final texts of technical regulations and applicable 
conformity assessment procedures.227 The Secretariat  updated Members on the availability of final 
texts of notified technical regulations, noting  that the annual review report for 2019 contained a list 
of the websites from Members that had come forward with information regarding where they stored 
adopted final texts at the national level.228 
6.23.   The Committee  adopted a revised Recommendation on the "Coherent use of notification 
formats ", at its 13 -15 November 2019 meeting.229 At the Committee meeting held on 28 -29 October 
2020, the Secretariat  confirmed that the revised Addendum format became operational on 
16 July 2020 following the completion of adjustments to various online systems. The main difference 
with the earlier version of the format was that when providing updates on notified measures, 
Members could now indicate the reason for the Addendum , making it easier to track the evolution 
of notified measures.230 
6.1.7   Provision of translations  
6.24.   The Philippines  suggested  that where a Member has translated into any of the official WTO 
languages the full text of another Member's notified measure/s, that Member is encouraged to 
announce the availability of the translation through ePing.231 Singapore  suggested  that the 
Secretariat explore the use of available IT tools such as translation software to enable the provision 
of translations for all notified documents in the WTO's three official languages.232 The European  
Union  stressed that in many cases inaccessibil ity of texts in the languages enumerated in Article  10.5 
of the TBT Agreement leads to the impossibility of providing comments within the set deadline. 
Machine translations may contain important errors that can lead to misinterpretations as regards 
the not ified draft measures. The European Union advocated for better cooperation on sharing the 
translations between the TBT Committee Members.  
6.1.8   Members' experience with domestic coordination  
6.25.   The United Kingdom  explained how awareness of TBT obligations was raised  through the 
United Kingdom's Regulatory Impact Assessment process in which the UK's Department for 
International Trade engaged stakeholders across Government, raising awareness of WTO obligations 
and providing training to other Departments and Regulators.233 Ecuador  presented its experience 
 
223 G/TBT/GEN/265 , para. 4.4. 
224 G/TBT/M/82 , para. 2.504.  
225 JOB/TBT/320 , paras. 2.34 –2.38. 
226 JOB/TBT/320 , Annexes III and IV.  
227 G/TBT/GEN/265 , para. 6.1.  
228 G/TBT/M/80 , para. 2.396.  
229 G/TBT/M/79 , para. 2.318.  
230 G/TBT/35/Rev.1 ; G/TBT/M/82 , para. 2.501.  
231 G/TBT/W/746/Rev.1 . 
232 G/TBT/W/755 , Section 1.  
233 G/TBT/GEN/312 , para. 4.2. G/TBT/46  
 
- 26 - 
 
  with respect to TBT notifications, the functioning of their national Enquiry Point, internal coordination 
among regulatory agencies, private sector participation, and the use of good practices.234 In 
addressing regulatory  issues in the context of emerging technologies, the United States  spoke about 
the importance of transparency, coordination, and engagement at all stages of the regulatory 
process in order to ensure that regulations effectively address legitimate policy ob jectives and do so 
in a technologically neutral manner.235 The European Union  suggested  to exchange experiences on 
good practices for domestic coordination and engagement with regulators and the private sector.236 
Chinese Taipei  shared experiences on enhancing private sector engagement in the TBT notification 
process, which included introducing an information filtering and interpretation system to facilitate 
private sector participation, as well as outreach activities to industry associations and firms .237 
6.1.9   Notification under Article 10.7 of the TBT Agreement  
6.26.   Brazil  suggested  that notifications under Article 10.7 of the TBT Agreement include 
information on mutual or unilateral recognition or harmonization foreseen in preferential trade 
agreements or their  annexes and/or in thematic, sectorial or product -specific arrangements to which 
that Member is a part.  In this respect, Brazil suggested  the format for notification under Article 10.7 
of the TBT Agreement be amended to include a "Text of the agreement/arr angement/annex" field.238  
6.1.10   Statement on Implementation and Administration of the TBT Agreement 
(Article  15.2)  
6.27.   The United States  suggested that  Members notify their National Quality Infrastructure laws 
as a good practice – and that this be done in accordance with the Article 15.2 notification (distinct 
from proposed technical regulations and conformity assessment procedures).  The United States  also 
suggested, in respect of online consultation platforms used to facilitate transparency, that Members 
notify or update the information  in their Article 15.2 notification  on where Members' comments on 
draft technical regulations could be submitted.  The United States  suggested that the Secretariat 
propose a format for notification of updated national measures that underpin or assist Members in 
meeting their TBT obligations in Article 15.2. 239 
6.1.11   Technical Assistance and Cooperation  
6.28.   The United States  described the TBT transparency -related aspects of US -Brazil and 
US-Argentina Commercial Dialogues, which promote industry -specific cooperation to address issues 
in each partner Member , and highlighted technical assistance provided by the Standards Alliance for 
TBT E nquiry Points of African Members.240 A TBT technical assistance Transparency Workshop took 
place in parallel to the TBT Committee meeting held in June 2019.241 Saint Kitts and Nevis  said that 
the Transparency Workshop had been a very useful opportunity to share ideas and discuss 
challenges.242 
 
234 G/TBT/GEN/312 , para. 4.3.  
235 G/TBT/GEN/312 , para. 4.4.  
236 G/TBT/W/736 , para. 2.2.  
237 G/TBT/GEN/312 , para. 4.1.  
238 G/TBT/W/740 , paras. 2.1 -2.2. 
239 G/TBT/W/749 /Rev.1 . 
240 G/TBT/GEN/265 , paras. 5.1-5.2. 
241 G/TBT/M/78 , para. 4.2.  
242 G/TBT/M/78 , para. 4.3.  G/TBT/46  
 
- 27 - 
 
  6.2  Recommendations  
6.29.   Building on this exchange as well as on previous decisions and recommendations of the 
Committee, and with a view to furthering its work in the area of transparency, the Committee  
agrees:  
a. with respect to online tools : 
i. to request  the Secretariat to improve  and streamline  current online TBT tools, including 
ePing, and work towards integrating  these tools into a more comprehensive centralized 
platform ; 
ii. to request the Secretariat  to explore ways of improving alerts on notifications and 
STCs; 
b. with respect to handling of comments : 
i. to encourage  Members, taking into account  their individual situations  and practices , to 
provide  more transparency on submitted comments  and replies , including through a 
website or a common platform such as ePing ; 
ii. to encourage  Members, taking into account  their individual situations  and practices , 
and upon the request of another Member, to explain whi ch comments were taken into 
account  in the final technical regulation or conformity assessment procedure ;  
c. with respect to timing of notifications : 
i. to discuss  the processes that Members follow in order to submit notifications "at an 
early appropriate stage", and, i n light of this discussion, to consider  the need to provide 
further guidance  in this regard ; 
ii. to discuss  Member practices  to the  sequencing of domesti c consultations and  the 
notification of draft technical regulations and conformity assessment procedures , to 
ensure that comments  from WTO Members  are duly taken into account ; 
d. with respect to submission of notifications  (format and guidelines) : 
i. to encourage  Members, taking into account  their individual situations , to provide 
additional details in Item 7 of the notification format243 on the legitimate objectives 
pursued by the notified measures, building on the recommendat ion of the Committee 
from the Eighth Triennial Review244; 
ii. to amend  the notification format and associated guidelines  to enable a more fulsome 
description of content under Item 6245, in particular when notified measures are 
published in a language other than English, French or Spanish;  
iii. to hold a thematic session on challenges that Members face in providing specific 
information on the product coverage of notified measures, with special emphasis on 
HS codes;  
 
243 G/TBT/1/Rev.14 , Annex 3.2.  
244 G/TBT/41 , para. 1.7. b.  
245 G/TBT/1/Rev.14 , Annex 3.2.  G/TBT/46  
 
- 28 - 
 
  e. with respect to provision of translations : 
i. to encourage  Members to announce, through ePing, the availability of the translation 
of either partial or the full text of another Member's notified measure into any of the 
official WTO languages;  
ii. to request  the Secretariat to explore the use of available IT too ls, such as translation 
software, in order to provide unofficial translations of notified documents into the three 
official WTO languages  through TBT online tools ; 
f. with respect to domestic coordination : 
i. to hold a thematic session on good practices and challenges for domestic coordination 
and engagement with regulators and the private sector, including with respect to 
notifications ; 
g. with respect to Article 10.7 notifications : 
i. to encourage  Members to notify information on mutual recognition, unilateral 
recognition or harmonization in preferential trade agreements or their annexes, and/or 
in thematic, sectorial or product -specific arrangements to which that Member is a part; 
and 
ii. to encourage  Members to provide a hyperlink to the full text of the corresponding 
agreement, arrangement or annex, and, for this purpose, to  amend  the notification 
format246 to include a "Text of the agreement/arrangement/annex" field;  
h. with respect to statements on imp lementation and administration of the TBT 
Agreement (Article 15.2) : 
i. to request  the Secretariat to develop a notification format under Article  15.2 that 
allows Members to notify information  that underpin s or assist s in the implementation 
of the TBT Agreemen t; 
ii. to encourage  Members  to noti fy, under Article 15.2, their National Quality 
Infrastructure laws  and any subsequent changes  to such laws ; and, 
iii. to also encourage  Members to notify, under Article 15.2, i nformation  on where 
Members' comments on draft technical regulations can be submitted, such as online 
consultation platforms.  
7  TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE  
Provisions on technical assistance are contained in Article 11 of the TBT 
Agreement. Technical assistance has been cons idered an area of priority work for 
the Committee since its establishment; it figures on the agenda of the Committee 
on a permanent basis. Members have regularly, on a voluntary basis, exchanged 
experiences and information on technical assistance in order to enhance the 
implementation of Article 11 of the TBT Agreement.  
G/TBT/1/Rev.14 , p. 4 9 
 
7.1  Exchange of experiences  
7.1.  During the review period, most of the Committee's exchange of experiences took place in the 
context of a thematic session on technical assistance, held on 27 October 2020247, and in the context 
of the Ninth Special Meeting on Procedures for Information Exchange, held on 18 -19 June 2019.248  
 
246 G/TBT/1/Rev.14 , Annex 4.  
247 G/TBT/GEN/306 . 
248 G/TBT/GEN/265 . G/TBT/46  
 
- 29 - 
 
  7.2.  Australia  presented the Australian perspective on capacity building in metrology to support 
participation in global frameworks for the reduction of technical barriers to trade and highlighted  the 
important role of metrology and quality infrastructure. Australia referred to technical assistance 
program mes being conducted under the two inter -governmental treaties in metrology to foster 
participation in these frameworks by Countries and Economies  with Emerging Metrology Systems  
and related programmes being undertaken at the regional level, for example in the Asia Pacific .249  
7.3.  The United States  presented its ongoing efforts to support understanding and implementation 
of the TBT Agreement under sever al capacity building mechanisms, and highlighted examples of 
work by the American National Standards Institute  (ANSI) with African countries to promote 
international standards and good regulatory practices to support clean energy and ICT technologies. 
The United States also presented the technical assistance provided through the Standards Alliance 
to build capacity on TBT Matters. In particular, it was noted that Phase 2 of the Standards Alliance 
was launched with a view to supporting the capacity of develo ping countries in the areas of legal 
and regulatory framework, standards development, conformity assessment procedures, and private 
sector engagement.250 The United States also presented an overview of the technical assistance 
program mes provided by ASTM In ternational, which aims to promote communication between ASTM 
International and national standards bodies worldwide.251  
7.4.  The European Union  provided an overview of the EU's support through technical assistance in 
the field of TBT and noted that its technica l assistance activities in this area can take different forms: 
(i) it can be embedded in a broader trade -related programme; (ii)  it can be part of a sector support 
programme; or (iii)  it can target specific components of QI.252 The European Union also  presented 
the experience of the National Board of Trade Sweden with respect to TBT technical assistance 
coordination and how their capacity building has changed as a result of the pandemic.253 Moreover, 
the European Union presented an overview of efforts in  Germany to harmonize and build capacities 
with other countries with regards to QI and highlighted that working towards a global QI is key to 
eliminating technical barriers to trade.254 
7.5.  Mozambique  outlined technical assistance needs around quality infrastru cture, to effectively 
implement the National Quality System Act (2018) and meet market demands for QI services 
delivered by the Instituto Nacional de Normalização e Qualidade  (INNOQ). Specific training, 
equipment and standards development needs were identi fied in the areas of certification, testing 
and inspection, and accreditation.255 Vanuatu , on behalf of the Pacific Islands Forum, highlighted the 
low to non -existent level of QI development among Pacific Island Countries (PICs) (notably only Fiji 
and Papua  New Guinea have QI institutions and systems in place) . In order to improve this situation 
and enhance international competitiveness, the promotion of a culture of quality through QI systems 
was deemed a priority, based on the nature of trade of each PIC, and via the incremental 
establishment of pathways for those lacking physical infrastructure. A Pacific Regional QI Workshop 
was held in September 2019 to advance these efforts.256 Australia  noted that the Pacific Quality 
Infrastructure (PQI) Project to incr ease the capacity of Pacific region standards and conformance 
infrastructure is underway, with Standards Australia and the National Measurement Institute of 
Australia supporting needs assessment and capacity building.  
7.6.  Chile257, China258, Colombia259 and Guatemala260 highlighted national workshops on TBT 
matters organized by the WTO Secretariat.  Trinidad and Tobago , speaking for the CARICOM region, 
welcomed quality infrastructure strengthening and said that many of the members of CARICOM were 
currently unde rtaking work in this respect.261 Mozambique  commended the Secretariat for the TBT 
 
249 G/TBT/GEN/306 , para. 1.1.  
250 G/TBT/M/77 , para. 5.1.; G/TBT/W/597 ; G/TBT/M/79 , para. 3.1.; G/TBT/GEN/279 ; G/TBT/GEN/306  
para. 1.7.; G/TBT/GEN/311 ; G/TBT/M/83 , para. 5.1.; and G/TBT/GEN/316 . 
251 G/TBT/GEN/306 , paras. 1.8 -1.9. 
252 G/TBT/GEN/306 , paras. 1.2-1.3. 
253 G/TBT/M/78 , para. 4.1; and G/TBT/GEN/306 , paras. 1.4 -1.5. 
254 G/TBT/GEN/306 , para. 1.6.  
255 G/TBT/GEN/278 , para.1.21.  
256 G/TBT/GEN/278 , para.1.24.  
257 G/TBT/M/77 , para. 5.1.  
258 G/TBT/M/79 , para. 3.2.  
259 G/TBT/M/79 , para. 3.2.  
260 G/TBT/M/77 , para. 5.1.  
261 G/TBT/M/79 , para. 3.4.  G/TBT/46  
 
- 30 - 
 
  Advanced Course and requested further support to address gaps in the area of quality 
infrastructure.262 
7.1.1   Technical assistance on transparency  
7.7.  The United States  described the TBT  transparency -related aspects of US -Brazil and US -
Argentina Commercial Dialogues, which promote industry -specific cooperation and good regulatory 
practices (GRP) to address issues in each partner Member . The United States  also highlighted 
technical assista nce provided by the Standards Alliance for TBT Enquiry Points of African Members 
focusing on capacity building and the development of action plans to improve the effectiveness of 
the Enquiry Points and Notification Authorities in line with the needs of eac h Member assisted.263  
7.8.  Following  up on the recommendation in the Eighth Triennial Review to develop a good practice 
guide on how to prepare a comment on a WTO notified technical regulation or conformity 
assessment procedure264, Members shared views on the preparation of this good practice guide. 
Canada  noted that the main challenges that it faced include the lack of availability of the notified 
regulations in one of the three official languages of the WTO, email addresses of Enqu iry Points no 
longer being valid, and difficulties related to engaging stakeholders to provide inputs on notified 
measures.265 Peru stated that the drafting of a good practice guide should consider challenges 
related to reaching out to stakeholders in a tim ely manner and the inclusion of the technical 
justification in the comments to ensure that the concerns raised are addressed in the most 
satisfactory manner.266 The European Union  suggested  that the Committee set key elements for a 
good practice guide on ho w to improve product coverage in notifications and how to prepare a 
comment.267 
7.9.  The United States  suggested  the WTO Secretariat build awareness and capacity by organizing 
a training on HS and ICS codes in notifications, with a focus on medical technology as  a case study. 
Following the trainings, an update should be provided to the Committee on suggestions for increasing 
the uniformity in the use of ICS and/or HS codes and/or product names used in notifications.268 
Ecuador  supported training on HS and ICS code s, and suggested an additional case study focusing 
on processed foods.  The Dominican Republic  emphasized the importance of providing  HS and ICS 
codes in notifications  in order to allow timely and coordinated provision of comments.  
7.10.   The Secretariat  informed the Committee that a TBT Transparency Workshop had taken place 
in parallel to the TBT Committee meetings held on 20 -21 June 2019. It was noted that the 
participants attended parts of t he Committee, including the transparency thematic session and also 
participated in other training sessions, including on the use of online tools and on experience -sharing 
among themselves.269 Saint Kitts and Nevis  said that the Transparency Workshop had bee n a very 
useful opportunity to share ideas and discuss challenges. For example, experiences showed that it 
paid off to submit notifications using the NSS, and that ePing was a useful tool for enquiry points as 
well as industry. At the national level, worki ng on guidelines helped Enquiry Points stay up to date, 
respond to notifications, and focus on quality rather than quantity of notifications.270 
7.1.2   Other information  
7.11.   The Secretariat  provided information on its TBT technical assistance activities.271 The 
Secret ariat updated the Committee  on technical assistance related to quality infrastructure, and the 
 
262 G/TBT/M/79 , para. 3.5.  
263 G/TBT/GEN/265 , paras. 5.1 -5.2. 
264 G/TBT/41 , para. 7.12. c.  
265 G/TBT/GEN/312 , para. 3.11.  
266 G/TBT/GEN/312 , para. 3.12.  
267 G/TBT/W/736 , para. 2.2.  
268 G/TBT/W/750 . 
269 G/TBT/M/78 , para. 4.2. 
270 G/TBT/M/78 , para. 4.3.  
271 G/TBT/M/77 , para. 5.2.; G/TBT/GEN/262 ; G/TBT/M/78 , para. 4.2.; G/TBT/M/79 , para. 3.3.; 
G/TBT/M/80 , paras. 4.1. -4.2.; G/TBT/M/82 , para. 4.1.; and G/TBT/GEN/305 .  G/TBT/46  
 
- 31 - 
 
  mandate from the Eighth Triennial Review.272 In addition, the Secretariat introduced the Third Edition 
of the WTO Agreements Series Technical Barriers to Trade Ha ndbook.273 
7.12.   Observers  also provided relevant information. Updates were provided by ARSO274, BIPM275, 
CROSQ276, IEC277, ISO278, OECD279, OIML280, UNECE281 and UNIDO .282  
7.2  Recommendations  
7.13.   Building on this exchange as well as on previous decisions and recommendations of the 
Committee, and with a view to furthering its work in the area of technical assistance, the Committee  
agrees:  
a. to request  the Secretariat to organize training s on HS and IC S codes in notifications, 
starting with a focus on medical technology as a case study; and, in light of these 
discussions, to request  the Secretariat to provide an update to the Committee on 
suggestions for increasing the uniformity in the use of ICS and/o r HS codes and/or product 
names used in notifications;  and 
b. to develop  a good practice guide on how to improve product coverage in notifications, and 
how to prepare a comment on notifications, building on the recommendation of the 
Committee from the Eighth Triennial Review.283 
8  COVID -19 
8.1  Exchange of experiences  
8.1.  During the review period, most of the Committee's exchange of experiences took place in the 
context of an informal meeting held on 8 December 2020.284 The Secretariat issued two TBT -related 
COVID -19 information notes.285 Members submitted a total of 179 COVID -19-related 
TBT notifications.286 These notifications covered, inter alia , streamlining conformity assessment 
procedures for essential medical goods; ensuring that medical goods are safe; making f ood available 
by relaxing technical regulations; and announcing implementation delays due to the COVID -19 
pandemic.287 
8.2.  The United States  outlined the partnerships supported by the US Medical Technology Sector to 
assist the global COVID -19 response through r egulatory convergence and implementation of the 
TBT Agreement.288 China  described measures it took to help manufacturers of protective clothing, 
masks and other epidemic prevention products for export, while, at the same time, strictly 
guaranteeing the qual ity of export products by strengthening supervision. The market regulation 
 
272 G/TBT/GEN/275 ; G/TBT/41 , para. 7.12. b.  
273 G/TBT/M/83 , para. 5.2.  
274 G/TBT/GEN/289 . 
275 G/TBT/GEN/266 ; RD/TBT/310 ; RD/TBT/327 ; and RD/TBT/343 . 
276 RD/TBT/331 . 
277 RD/TBT/313 ; RD/TBT/329 ; and RD/TBT/341 . 
278 G/TBT/GEN/269 ; G/TBT/GEN/284 ; G/TBT/GEN/292 ; and G/TBT/GEN/314 . 
279 G/TBT/GEN/313 . 
280 G/TBT/GEN/260 ; and G/TBT/GEN/283 . 
281 G/TBT/GEN/259 ; G/TBT/GEN/267 ; G/TBT/GEN/281 ; G/TBT/GEN/290 ; and RD/TBT/315 . 
282 G/TBT/GEN/261 ; RD/TBT/276 ; RD/TBT/311 ; RD/TBT/332 ; and RD/TBT/348 . 
283 G/TBT/41 , para. 7.12. c.  
284 JOB/TBT/395 . 
285 JOB/TBT/395 , paras. 2.1 -2.2. " Standards, Regulations and COVID -19 - what actions taken by WTO 
Members " and " Developing & delivering COVID -19 vaccines around the world ". Available on the WTO webpage 
dedicated to the topic of "COVID -19 and world trade". 
(https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e /covid19_e/covid19_e.htm ).  
286 Figures as of 1 November 2021. The first COVID -19 related TBT notification was submitted on 
16 March 2020. For the full list of COVID -19 related notifications, see: 
https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/covid19_e/notifications_e.htm .  
287 See "Standards, Regulations and COVID -19 - what actions taken by WTO Members " available on the 
WTO webpage dedicated to the topic of "COVID -19 and world trade". 
(https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/covid19_e/covid19_e.htm ). See also G/TBT/M/84 , para. 4.473.  
288 JOB/TBT/395 , para. 2.3.; RD/TBT/336 . G/TBT/46  
 
- 32 - 
 
  department investigated promptly and strictly any cases of illegality so as to safeguard the quality 
of such products.289 The European Union  highlighted the joint communication by th e Ottawa Group 
– "COVID -19 and Beyond: Trade and Health "290 – and the importance of enhancing regulatory 
alignment with the aim of facilitating trade and reducing adaptation costs for manufacturers of 
essential medical goods, including through work in the T BT Committee.291 The European Union  
described measures taken in the context of the COVID -19 pandemic for medical devices.292 
The European Union  also explained its conformity assessment requirements for personal protective 
equipment (PPE), and adjustments made in the COVID -19 context.293 Brazil  outlined some of the 
temporary measures it had  taken in the context of the pandemic to improve access to medical goods, 
such as the simplification of documentation and registration procedures (e.g. for certificates), or the 
acquisition of pulmonary ventilators and in vitro diagnostic tests without registration as long as these 
products were regulated and mark eted in one of the members of the International Medical Device 
Regulators Forum.294 Australia  described some evolving influences on conformity assessment, and 
the shift from on-site to remote office assessment and review of certification documents,  brought 
on in part by the COVID -19 pandemic .295 Regarding lessons learnt during the COVID -19 crisis, the 
European Union  suggested  that the Committee set best practices on key aspects of streamlining 
conformity assessment procedures to facilitate trade in essential products, and international 
regulatory cooperation.296 
8.1.1   Other information  
8.3.  Observers  also provided relevant information. Updates were provided by BIPM297, CODEX298, 
CROSQ299 and UNIDO .300 
8.2  Recommendations  
8.4.  Building on this experience as well as on previous decisions and recommendations of the 
Committee, the Committee  agrees:  
a. with a view to improving future pandemic preparedness, to examine  and compile  best 
practices for : understanding international standards ; streamlining conformity assessment 
procedures  (including temporary or emergency alternative s) to facilitate trade in select 
essential medical  goods , including vaccines,  during pandemics ; and, enhancing 
international regulatory cooperation.  
 
289 JOB/TBT/395 , para. 2.4.; RD/TBT/337 . 
290 WT/GC/223  
291 JOB/TBT/395 , para. 2.5.  
292 JOB/TBT/395 , para. 2.6.; RD/TBT/338 . 
293 JOB/TBT/395 , para. 2.7.; RD/TBT/339 . 
294 JOB/TBT/395 , para. 2.8.  
295 JOB/TBT/395 , para. 1.1.; and RD/TBT/333 . 
296 G/TBT/W/736 , para. 3.3.  
297 RD/TBT/327 . 
298 RD/TBT/298  and RD/TBT/328 . 
299 RD/TBT/331 . 
300 RD/TBT/332  and RD/TBT/348 . G/TBT/46  
 
- 33 - 
 
  9  OPERATION OF THE COMMITTEE  
Operation of the Committee.  Pursuant to Article 13 of the TBT Agreement, the 
TBT Committee was established with the purpose of: "affording Members the 
opportunity of consulting on any matters relating to the operation of this 
Agreement or the furtherance of its objectives,  and shall carry out such 
responsibilities as assigned to it under this Agreement or by the Members". Since 
its first meeting, Members have used the TBT Committee as a forum to discuss 
issues related to specific measures (technical regulations, standards or conformity 
assessment procedures) maintained by other Members. These are referred to as 
"specific trade concerns" (STCs) and relate normally to proposed draft measures 
notified to the TBT Committee or to the im plementation of existing measures.  The 
Committee also holds thematic sessions that address cross -cutting issues related 
to the implementation and operation of the TBT Agreement.   
G/TBT/1/Rev.14 , p. 55.  
 
9.1  Exchange of experiences  
9.1.  During the review period the Committee held nine regular meetings, from March 2019 to 
November 2021.301 A total of 131 new specific trade concerns (STCs) were raised in the review 
period, whilst over the same period, 435 previously raised STCs were also discussed (Chart 2).302 
Back to back with the regular meetings, the Committee also held thematic sessions  and informal 
meetings  that addressed the following cross -cutting issues related to the operation and 
implementation of the TBT Agreement: good regulatory practice303; regulat ory cooperation between 
Members304; technical regulations305; conformity assessment procedures306; standards307; 
transparency (the Committee's Ninth Special Meeting on Procedures for Information Exchange)308, 
technical assistance309; COVID -19 information sharing310; and the operation of the Committee.  
9.2.  The Committee  adopted a Decision on "Procedures for the inclusion of specific trade concerns 
in the annotated draft agenda of the TBT Committee", at its 20 -21 June 2019 meeting.311 These 
procedures were initially app lied on a provision basis during the March and June 2019 meetings, 
following the recommendation from the Eighth Triennial Review.312 
9.3.  Brazil  suggested  that the Committee monitor the status of implementation of all 
recommendations from triennial reviews313, especially past recommendations that have not been 
fully implemented.314 
 
301 G/TBT/M/77 , G/TBT/M/78 , G/TBT/M/79 , G/TBT/M/80 , G/TBT/M/81 , G/TBT/M/82 , G/TBT/M/83 , 
G/TBT/M/84 , and G/TBT/M/85 . 
302 Figures as of 1 November 2021. Detailed information on STCs are available in the Trade Concerns 
Database ( https://tradeconcerns.wto.org/ ). 
303 G/TBT/GEN/256 ; and G/TBT/GEN/287 . 
304 G/TBT/GEN/287 . 
305 G/TBT/GEN/307 . 
306 G/TBT/GEN/257 ; G/TBT/GEN/278 ; G/TBT/GEN/288 ; and JOB/TBT/395 . 
307 G/TBT/GEN/277 ; and G/TBT/GEN/309 . 
308 G/TBT/GEN/265 ; and G/TBT/GEN/312 ; G/TBT/M/78 , para. 3.324.  
309 G/TBT/GEN/306 . 
310 JOB/TBT/395 . 
311 G/TBT/43 ; G/TBT/M/78 , para. 3.322.  
312 G/TBT/41 , para. 8.2.b.i., and footnote 305.  
313 As compiled in the latest revision of document G/TBT/1 . 
314 G/TBT/W/739 . G/TBT/46  
 
- 34 - 
 
  Chart 2: STCs per triennial review period315 
 
9.4.  During the review period, the Committee  piloted and launched eAgenda, a collaborative online 
platform aimed at improving the efficiency and effectiveness of discussions on STCs. The platform  
simplifies Members' submission of STCs to the agenda,  increases  transparency and early notice of 
STCs giving Members more time to prepare ahead of meetings, and allows Members to share 
statements more easily with each other. The use of eAgenda allowed the Committee to continue its 
work on STCs during the COVID -19 pandem ic. On 13 June 2020, t he Committee held an informal 
meeting to gather feedback from Members  on the use of eAgenda.316 The Secretariat  updated the 
Committee on developments in eAgenda.317 Members provided additional feedback on and discussed 
their use of eAge nda.318 Singapore  suggested  that Members use eAgenda to share information on 
their engagements that relate to discussions on STCs, which are held outside of the Committee's 
regular meetings, and provide links to access the information, where available.  Clarifications that 
Members received bilaterally could be useful to other Members and could pre -empt similar issues 
from returning to the agenda of the TBT Committee, thereby improving the efficiency of discussions 
on STCs.319  
9.2  Recommendations  
9.5.  Building on this experience as well as on previous decisions and recommendations of the 
Committee, the Committee  agrees:  
a. to request  the Secretariat to monitor the status of implementation of Committee 
recommendations from triennial reviews compiled in the do cument series G/TBT/1/ *;  
b. to discuss  enhancing and optimizing the use of eAgenda, including by exploring means to 
facilitate progress towards resolving STCs ; and  
c. with respect to thematic sessions, building on the valuable experiences gained in the 
context of thematic sessions since 2012, to continue  to hold thematic sessions in 
 
315 Figures as of 1 November 2021.  
316 JOB/TBT/367 . 
317 G/TBT/M/79 , para. 2.139 and G/TBT/GEN/276 ; G/TBT/M/80 , para. 2.379; G/TBT/M/82 , para. 2.485; 
JOB/TBT/368 . 
318 G/TBT/M/80 , paras. 2.380 -2.381; and G/TBT/M/82 , para. 2.485.  
319 G/TBT/W/755 . 
G/TBT/46  
 
- 35 - 
 
  conjunction with its regular meetings during 2022 to 2024, with a view to further 
deepening the Committee's exchange of experiences on the following topics:  
i. to hold the following the matic sessions :320 
• March 202 2: conformity assessment procedures  (accreditation )321 and conformity 
assessment procedures  (digital solutions )322; 
• June 202 2: transparency323, and regulatory cooperation between Members  
(MSMEs)324; 
• November 202 2: good regulatory practice325 and standards  (standards 
development in Codex)326; 
• March 202 3: regulatory cooperation between Members  (plastic regulation )327 and 
regulatory cooperation between Members  (climate change )328; 
• June 202 3: regulatory cooperation between Members  (digital products and 
cybersecurity)329 and one additional topic to be defined in November 2022 ; 
• November 202 3: good regulatory practice330 and one additional topic to be 
defined in November 202 2; and 
• in 202 4, Members will continue to hold th ematic sessions on topics to be defined 
in November 202 3. 
 
_______________  
 
320 This listing provided below is  flexible. Members may agree to include other matters for discussion, or 
they may agree to otherwise adapt this work programme to reflect unforeseen developments and additional 
priorities. The Committee will organize these thematic sessions based on propos als from Members.  
321 See para. 4.18.b.i.  
322 See para. 4.18.b.ii.  
323 See para. 6.29.   
324 See para. 2.11.e.  
325 See para. 1.7.  
326 See para. 5.12.a.  
327 See para. 2.11.b.  
328 See para. 2.11.a.  
329 See para. 2.11.c. and 2.11.d.  
330 See para. 1.7.  G/TBT/46  
 
- 36 - 
 
  ANNEX: SUBMISSIONS FROM MEMBERS BY TOPIC (NOV. 201 8 – NOV. 20 21)1  
Member  Symbol  Date Title 
Good Regulatory Practice  
Mexico  JOB/TBT/425  27 September 
2021 Commen ts from Mexico on 
JOB/TBT/413  
Australia JOB/TBT/420  16 September 
2021 Comments from Australia on 
JOB/TBT/413  
United States  JOB/TBT/418  15 September 
2021 Comments from the United States 
on JOB/TBT/413  
Dominican 
Republic  JOB/TBT/417  15 September 
2021 Comments  from the Dominican 
Republic on JOB/TBT/413  
New Zealand  JOB/TBT/414  7 September 
2021 Comments from New Zealand on 
JOB/TBT/413  
Malaysia  JOB/TBT/412  19 July 2021  Comments on  Proposals  
United States  G/TBT/W/751/Rev.1  2 July 2021  Proposal on Improving Member 
Adherence to TBT Obligations 
through Domestic Process 
Improvements - Revision  
Australia  JOB/TBT/411  18 June 2021  Comments on Proposals  
United States  G/TBT/W/751  21 May 2021  Proposal on Improving Member 
Adherence to TBT Obligations 
through Domestic Process 
Improvements  
Regulatory Cooperation Between Members  
Paraguay  JOB/TBT/433  15 October 2021  Comments  from Paraguay on 
JOB/TBT/413/Rev.1  
China  JOB/TBT/421  16 September 
2021 Comments from China on 
JOB/TBT/413  
Australia  JOB/TBT/420  16 September 
2021 Comments from Australia on 
JOB/TBT/413  
Japan  JOB/TBT/419  16 September 
2021 Commen ts from Japan on 
JOB/TBT/413  
United States  JOB/TBT/418  15 Septe mber 
2021 Comments from the United States 
on JOB/TBT/413  
Dominican 
Republic  JOB/TBT/417  15 September 
2021 Comments from the Dominican 
Republic on JOB/TBT/413  
Canada  JOB/TBT/416  15 September 
2021 Comments from Canada on 
JOB/TBT/413  
Malaysia  JOB/TBT/412  19 July 2021  Comments on Proposals  
Australia  JOB/TBT/411  18 June 2021  Comments on Proposals  
United States  G/TBT/W/756  28 May 2021  Proposal for  Cooperation on 
Measures to address Plastic 
Packaging Pollution  
United States  G/TBT/W/747  17 May 2021  Proposal on Regulatory Cooperation 
Cybersecurity of Software -Enabled 
and/or Network Connected Goods  
 
1 Submissions are arranged by subject, in reverse chronological order. Should a submission be relevant 
to more than one topic it will appear more than o nce. More general information, such as the reports provided 
by the Chairperson on thematic sessions or information provided by Observers, is not included in this list.   G/TBT/46  
 
- 37 - 
 
  Member  Symbol  Date Title 
Canada  G/TBT/W/745  28 April 2021  Proposals on Conformity 
Assessment, Environment and 
Climate Change, Transparency, 
Digital Products, and Micro, Small 
and Medium -Sized Enterprises 
(MSME)  
Technical Regulations  
    
Conformity Assessment Procedures  
South Africa  JOB/TBT/ 436 5 November 2021 South Af rica's response to the 
United States proposal on 
Conformity Assessment Procedures  
(G/TBT/W/748 ) requesting 
examination of Members 
accreditation policies  
South Africa  JOB/TBT/435  4 November 2021  Comments  from South Africa on 
JOB/TBT/413/Rev.2  
European Union  JOB/TBT/426  29 September 
2021 Comments from the  European Union 
on JOB/TBT/413  
Brazil  JOB/TBT/424  27 September 
2021 Comments from Brazil on 
JOB/TBT/41 3 
United Kingdom  JOB/TBT/422  16 September 
2021 Comments from the United Kingdom 
on JOB/TBT/413   
China  JOB/TBT/421  16 September 
2021 Comments from China on 
JOB/TBT/413  
Australia  JOB/TBT/420  16 September 
2021 Commen ts from Australia on 
JOB/TBT/413  
Malaysia  JOB/TBT/412  19 July 2021  Comments on Proposals  
Australia  JOB/TBT/411  18 June 2021  Comments on Proposals  
Brazil  JOB/TBT/409  16 June 2021  Comments fr om Brazil on the 
Chinese Taipei Proposals on 
Enhancing Product Safety in Online 
Shopping Environment, and 
Transparency ( G/TBT/W/753 ) 
European Union  G/TBT/W/758  15 June 2021  Proposal on Digitalisation of Product 
Information  
Chinese Taipei  G/TBT/W/753  27 May 2021  Proposals on  Enhancing Product 
Safety in Online Shopping  
Environment, and Transparency  
United States  G/TBT/W/748  21 May 2021  Proposal on Conformity Assessment 
Procedures  
Canada  G/TBT/W/745  28 April 2021  Proposals on Conformity 
Assessment, Environment and 
Climate Change, Transparency, 
Digital Products, and Micro, Small 
and Medium -Sized Enterprises 
(MSME)  
European Union  G/TBT/W/736  1 February 2021  Proposals on Conformity Assessment 
Procedures, Transparency, and 
COVID -19 G/TBT/46  
 
- 38 - 
 
  Member  Symbol  Date Title 
Standards  
Australia  JOB/TBT/420  16 September  
2021 Comments from Australia on 
JOB/TBT/413  
Japan  JOB/TBT/419  16 September 
2021 Comments from Japan o n 
JOB/TBT/413  
United States  JOB/TBT/418  15 September 
2021 Comments from the United States 
on JOB/TBT/ 413 
Canada  JOB/TBT/416  15 September 
2021 Commen ts from Canada on 
JOB/TBT/413  
Australia JOB/TBT/411  18 June 2021  Comments on Proposals  
Colombia  G/TBT/W/752  26 May 2021  International Standards - Codex 
Alimentarius  
Transparency  
South Africa  JOB/TBT/ 437 5 November  2021  South Africa's response to the 
United States proposal 
(G/TBT/W/749 ) on Transparency 
Practices  
South Africa  JOB/TBT/435  4 November 2021  Comments from South Africa on 
JOB/TBT/413/Rev.2  
Paraguay  JOB/TBT/433  15 October 2021  Comments from Paraguay on 
JOB/TBT/413/Rev.1  
United States  JOB/TBT/431  15 October 20 21 Comments from the United States 
on JOB/TBT/413/Rev.1  
Mexico  JOB/TBT/430  15 October 2021  Comments from Mexico on 
JOB/TBT/413/Rev.1  
Canada  JOB/TBT/429  13 October 2021  Comments  from Canada on 
JOB/TB T/413/Rev.1  
United States  JOB/TBT/428  1 October 2021  Comments from the United States 
on JOB/TBT/ 419 
United States  JOB/TBT/427  1 October 2021  Comments from the United States 
on JOB/TBT/422  
European Union  JOB/TBT/426  29 September 
2021 Commen ts from the  European Union 
on JOB/TBT/413  
United Kingdom  JOB/TBT/422/Add.1  27 September 
2021 Comments from the United Kingdom 
on JOB/TBT/413  
Mexico  JOB/TBT/425  27 September 
2021 Comments from Mexico on 
JOB/TBT/413  
United Kingdom  JOB/TBT/422  16 September 
2021 Comments fro m the United Kingdom 
on JOB/TBT/41 3  
Japan  JOB/TBT/419  16 September  
2021 Comments from Japan on 
JOB/T BT/413  
United States  JOB/TBT/418  15 September 
2021 Commen ts from the United States 
on JOB/T BT/413  
Dominican 
Republic  JOB/TBT /417 15 September 
2021 Comments from the Dominican 
Republic on JOB/TBT/413  
Switzerland  JOB/TBT/415  15 September 
2021 Comments from Switzerland on 
JOB/TBT/413  
Malaysia  JOB/TBT/412  19 July 2021  Comments on Proposals  
Brazil  G/TBT/W/741/Re v.1 19 July 2021  Proposal on Transparency: 
Introduction of "Follow this 
Notification" and "Follow this STC" 
Tools - Revision  G/TBT/46  
 
- 39 - 
 
  Member  Symbol  Date Title 
United States  G/TBT/W/749/Rev.1  2 July  2021 Proposal on Transparency Practices - 
Revision  
Australia  JOB/TBT/411  18 June 2021  Comments on Proposals  
Philippines  G/TBT/W/746/Rev.1  17 Jun e 2021  Proposal on Transparency - Revision  
Brazil  JOB/TBT/410  16 June 2021  Comments from Brazil on the 
Singapore Proposals on 
Transparency, and the Sharing of 
Written Questions and Responses 
from Members on Specific Trade 
Concerns ( G/TBT/W/755 ) 
Singapore  G/TBT/W/755  28 May 2021  Proposals on  Transparency, and the 
Sharing of Written Questions and 
Responses from Members on 
Specific Trade Concerns  
Chinese Taipei  G/TBT/W/753  27 May 2021  Proposals on  Enhancing Product 
Safety in Online Shopping  
Environment, and Transparency  
United States  G/TBT/W/750  21 May 2021  Proposal on Enhancing the Quality 
and Uniformity of TBT Notifications  
United States  G/TBT/W/749  21 May 2021  Proposal on Transparency Practices  
Philippines  G/TBT/W/746  7 May 2021  Proposal on Transparency  
Canada  G/TBT/W/745  28 April 2021  Proposals on Conformity 
Assessment, Environment and 
Climate Change, Transparency, 
Digital Products, and Micro, Small 
and Medium -Sized Enterprises 
(MSME)  
Brazil  G/TBT/W/744  16 February 2021  Proposal on Transparency: 
Improvement of the TBT Information 
Management System (IMS)  
Brazil  G/TBT/W/743  16 February 2021  Proposa l on Transparency: 
Transparency on Comments to TBT 
Notifications received by National 
Governments  
Brazil  G/TBT/W/742  16 February 2021  Proposa l on Transparency: Notifying 
at an early appropriate stage  
Brazil  G/TBT/W/741  16 February 2021  Proposa l on Transparency: 
Introduction of "Follow this 
Notification" and "Follow this STC" 
Tools 
Brazil  G/TBT/W/740  16 February 2021  Proposa l on Transparency: 
Notification of Relevant TBT 
Provisions in Preferential Trade 
Agreements under Article 10.7  
Brazil  G/TBT/W/738  16 February 2021  Proposal on Transparency: Details of 
Legitimate Objectives Pursued in 
Notified Measure  
Brazil  G/TBT/W/737  16 February 2021  Proposal on Transparency: Taking 
Comments from All Members into 
account  
European Union  G/TBT/W/736  1 February 2021  Proposals on Conformity Assessment 
Procedures, Transparency, and 
COVID -19 G/TBT/46  
 
- 40 - 
 
  Member  Symbol  Date Title 
Technical Assistance  
Australia  JOB/TBT/420  16 September 
2021 Comments from Australia on 
JOB/TBT /413 
Dominican 
Republic  JOB/TBT/4 17 15 September 
2021 Comments from the Dominican 
Republic on JOB/TBT/413  
Malaysia  JOB/TBT/412  19 July 2021  Comments on Proposals  
Australia  JOB/TBT/411  18 June 2021  Comments on  Proposals  
United States  G/TBT/W/ 750 21 May 2021  Proposal on Enhancing the Quality 
and Uniformity of TBT Notifications  
European Union  G/TBT/W/736  1 February 2021  Proposal s on Conformity Assessment 
Procedures, Transparency, and 
COVID -19 
COVID -19 
Paraguay  JOB/TBT/433  15 October 2021  Comments  from Paraguay on 
JOB/TBT/413/Rev.1  
European Union  JOB/TBT/426  29 September 
2021 Comments from the  European Union 
on JOB/TBT/413  
United States  JOB/TBT/418  15 September 
2021 Comments from  the United States 
on JOB/TBT/413  
Dominican 
Republic  JOB/TBT/417  15 September 
2021 Comments from the Dominican 
Republic on JOB/TBT/413  
Australia  JOB/TBT/411  18 June 2021  Comments on  Proposals  
European Union  G/TBT/W /736 1 February 2021  Proposals on Conformity Assessment 
Procedures, Transparency, and 
COVID -19 
Operation of the Committee  
Japan  JOB/TBT/432  15 October 2021  Comments  from Japan on 
JOB/TBT /413/Rev.1  
United States  JOB/TBT/431  15 October 2021  Comments  from the United States 
on JOB/TBT/413/Rev.1  
Mexico  JOB/TBT/425  27 September 
2021 Comments from Mexico on 
JOB/TBT/413  
Japan  JOB/TBT/419  16 September 
2021 Commen ts from Japan on 
JOB/TBT/413  
Singapore  G/TBT/W/755  28 May 2021  Proposals on Transparency, and the 
Sharing of Written Questions and 
Responses from Members on 
Specific Trade Concerns  
Brazil  G/TBT/W/739  16 February 2021  Proposal on the Operation of the 
Committee: Reporting of Pending 
Recommendations from Triennial 
Reviews  
 
__________