RESTRICTEDWORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONG/TBT/M/29
19 May 2003
(03-2662)
Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade
MINUTES OF THE MEETING HELD ON 20 MARCH 2003
Chairperson:  Ms. Emily Earl (New Zealand)
1. The Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade held its thirtieth meeting on 20 March 2003.
2. The following agenda, contained in WTO/AIR/2047, was adopted:
II. REQUESTS FOR OBSERVER STATUS IN THE COMMITTEE BY THE
OFFICE INTERNATIONAL DE LA VIGNE ET DU VIN (OIV), THE
BUREAU INTERNATIONAL DES POIDS ET MESURES (BIPM), THE GULF
ORGANIZATION FOR INDUSTRIAL CONSULTING (GOIC) AND THE
CONVENTION ON BIOLOGICAL  DIVERSITY (CBD)....................................................2
III. EIGHTH ANNUAL REVIEW OF THE IMPLEMENTATION AND
OPERATION OF THE AGR EEMENT UNDER ART ICLE 15.3.......................................2
IV. EIGHTH ANNUAL REVIEW OF THE CODE OF GOOD PRACTICE FOR
THE PREPARATION, ADOPTION AND APPLICATION OF STANDARDS
IN ANNEX 3 OF THE TBT AGREEM ENT..........................................................................2
V. STATEMENTS ON IMPLEMENTATION AND ADMINISTRATION OF THE
AGREEM ENT ...................................................................................................................... ....3
VI. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND FOLLOW-UP TO THE SPECIAL
WORKSHOP HELD ON  18 MARCH 2003.........................................................................11
VII. PREPARATION FOR THE THIRD TRIENNIAL REVIEW OF THE
OPERATION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TBT AGREEMENT
UNDER ARTICLE  15.4 .........................................................................................................18
VIII. UPDATING BY OBSERVERS .............................................................................................24
IX. ELECTION OF  OFFICER....................................................................................................25
ANNEX A ........................................................................................................................ ........26G/TBT/M/29
Page 2
II. REQUESTS FOR OBSERVER STATUS IN THE COMMITTEE BY THE OFFICE
INTERNATIONAL DE LA VIGNE ET DU VIN (OIV), THE BUREAU
INTERNATIONAL DES POIDS ET MESURES (BIPM), THE GULF
ORGANIZATION FOR INDUSTRIAL CONSULTING (GOIC) AND THE
CONVENTION ON BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY (CBD)
3. The Chairperson drew attention to the requests for observer status in the Committee by the
OIV (G/TBT/W/62), BIPM (G/TBT/W/135), GOIC (G/TBT/W/141) and CBD (G/TBT/W/177).  She
recalled that the Committee had been holding consultations on these requests for some time, and
further consultations had taken place at the informal meeting of the day before.  She regretted that
progress had been limited.  She recognized that the difficulties could be attributed to an unresolved
debate in the context of the General Council on observer status, or could also be due to the specific
nature of some of these organizations.
4. She drew attention to the Committee's guidelines for observer status (G/TBT/1/Rev.8) which
stated that "requests for observer status shall be considered on a case by case basis taking into account
such factors as the nature of the work of the or ganization concerned, the nature of the Membership,
the number of WTO Members in the organization, reciprocity with respect to access to its
proceedings, documents, and other aspects of observership".  She noted that five out of the17 observerships in the Committee had been granted on an ad hoc  basis.  The last cases which had
been agreed in October 1997, extended to the ACP, EFTA, and ALADI.  She invited Members to
revisit the unresolved requests, to re-familiarize themselves with the nature of each of the four
organizations, as well as to reflect on the possibility of providing them with observe status on a case
by case and ad hoc  basis in the event that the impasse at the General Council was resolved.
5. The Committee took note of the statement made.
III. EIGHTH ANNUAL REVIEW OF THE IMPLEMENTATION AND OPERATION OF
THE AGREEMENT UNDER ARTICLE 15.3
6. The Chairperson drew attention to the background documents G/TBT/12 and Corr.1.
7. The representative of the United States (US) drew attention to Item V of the Review on
"Technical Assistance" as well as to document G/TBT/W/172 containing information on the Director
General's efforts to assist participation of developing countries in standard-setting activities and
information on organizations such as the World Bank and the FAO.  She suggested to include such
information in future Reviews to further reflect the Secretariat's technical assistance activities.
8. The representative of Chile believed that it would be useful to include under Item II, all the
statements made since 1995, on the implementation and administration of the Agreement, so as to
provide an overall view of the status of implementation by Members.
9. The Chairperson recalled that this document was meant to be a review of a particular year,
and encouraged delegations who wished to obtain an overall view, to study the preceding documents.
10. The Committee took note of the statements made, and adopted  the Review.
IV. EIGHTH ANNUAL REVIEW OF THE CODE OF GOOD PRACTICE FOR THE
PREPARATION, ADOPTION AND APPLICATION OF STANDARDS IN ANNEX 3OF THE TBT AGREEMENT
11. The Chairperson drew attention to documen ts G/TBT/CS/1/Add.7, G/TBT/CS/2/Rev.9 and
the eighth edition of the WTO/TBT Standards Code Directory.  In 2002, ten standardizing bodies
from ten Members had accepted the Code, and six bodies from one Member had withdrawn from it,G/TBT/M/29
Page 3
which made up a total of 139 standardizing bodies from 101 Members having accepted the Code up
until the end of year 2002.
12. The representative of Mexico announced that an additional Mexican standardizing body
would notify the Committee of its acceptance of the Code.
13. The representative of Malaysia raised the question of whether the ISO could provide
information on the percentage of all the national standardizing bodies that had accepted the Code.
14. The representatives of Egypt, Ghana , the Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu,
Kinmen and Matsu, India , Romania , St. Vincent and the Grenadines  indicated changes of information
contained in the Standards Code Directory.
15. The Chairperson invited delegations to communicate those changes to the ISO/IEC
Information Centre.  She noted the question raised by Malaysia, and suggested that it could be dealt
with in the context of the Third Triennial Review.
16. The Committee took note of the statements made.
V. STATEMENTS ON IMPLEMENTATION AND ADMINISTRATION OF THE
AGREEMENT
17. The representative of Switzerland drew attention to a US notification (G/TBT/N/USA/32)
concerning measures proposed under the Bioterrorism Act to register food facilities and to declare
foodstuff importation (Section 305 and 307 of the Act).  Her delegation understood the concerns of
the US over terrorist attacks as well as the desire to prevent risks, and would not be against the
obligatory registration provisions to ensure traceability.  However, she raised concerns on the need to
have a preliminary declaration for the importation of foodstuffs.  She had difficulty in seeing the
positive effects of such a measure for the security of population.  This requirement would hamperexports entering into the US.  She noted that it would apply only to imported foodstuffs, and no
analogue provision had been made for US products.  She considered it out of proportion and a
violation of the least trade restrictiveness obligation.  She recalled that the US had notified the
measures under both the TBT and the SPS Agreements, and questioned why the TBT notification was
limited to the registration of food installations, but not to the declaration of foodstuffs importationwhich was notified under the SPS Agreement.  Her delegation would submit written comments to the
US within the established deadline.
18. The representative of Mexico recalled that on 12 June 2002, the US Congress had approved
the Act for Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response.  In Section 305 of
that law, two obligations had been established:  (i ) to register equipment or installations that would
manufacture, process, pack or store foodstuffs in its final or temporary destination within the US
territory;  and (ii) to notify to the US authorities of the importation of such products before suchoperations were made.  12 December 2003 had been set as the date for the entry into force of the
requirements, and detailed procedures had been established for their compliance.  Notifications of
both measures had been made to the SPS Committee on 7 February 2003 (G/SPS/N/USA/690 and
691).  The notification concerning the registration for food installation was made to the
TBT Committee on 13 February 2003 (G/TBT/N/USA/32), and the final date for comments was on4 April 2003.  He pointed out that, despite the fact that it was a technical regulation as defined under
Annex 1, the measure on prior notice of importation had not been notified under the TBT Agreement,
and he requested the US to do so.
19. His delegation recognized the rights of Members to adopt measures necessary for certain
legitimate objectives, and agreed with the need to establish a legal mechanism to protect public heathand security, particularly after the US tragic events of 11 September 2001.  However, he raisedG/TBT/M/29
Page 4
concerns on the trade impact of those measures on Mexican foodstuff exports into the US market, as
well as on the scope of that legislation.  He believed that other less trade restrictive options existed
which could fulfil the legitimate objectives.  He noted that the trade flows of foodstuffs between the
US and Mexico had doubled since the entry into force of NAFTA, which reached 6.2 billion dollars
per year.  He thanked the US for providing the opportunity for comments.  His authorities werereviewing the legislation and would submit comments within the deadline.
20. The representative of Argentina noted that the US notified measures would require domestic
and foreign companies that produced, stored, packed foodstuffs for animal and human consumption in
the US to be registered under the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).  His government understood
and shared the US's objectives to prevent terrorist attacks by introducing contaminants in foodstuffs.
However, he raised concerns on the trade implications of the measures, as well as the complexity of
their implementation (e.g. the system for the electronic registration, the information to be brought tothe FDA and the procedures for issuing a registration number).  He raised questions on the scope of
the system, and whether it would include all owners, operators, agents, producers processing
foodstuffs or just the exporters of such products.  His authorities had expressed concerns, and would
re-submit comments to the US contact point.  He a ppealed to the US to ensure that these measures
would be applied in consistency with the TBT Agreement and would not become trade barriers.
21. The representative of Australia shared a number of the concerns raised by the previous
speakers on the trade impact of the US Bioterrorism Act.  She also shared the concerns that the Act
was designed to address.  Her delegation would submit comments to the US, and looked forward to
working with US agencies to make this regulation as least costly and burdensome as possible.
22. The representative of the European Communitie s (EC), while recognizing the legitimacy of
the objectives pursued, shared certain concerns raised by the previous speakers on the US draft
regulation, and believed it might be, in part, more trade restrictive than necessary.  He sought
clarification on the scope of the measure and on the products to be covered.  He noted that the
registration requirement would be introduced at the end of year 2003, and was concerned about the
difficulties which could be faced by exporters.  He also queried the fact that two relevant notificationshad been made to the SPS Committee and only one to the TBT Committee.  The EC had raised
concerns to the US and would submit further comments on the notifications.
23. The representative of Brazil recognized the legitimacy of the objective, but had concerns on
the trade impact of the measure, and requested the US to implement it in a least trade restrictive
manner.
24. The representative of Malaysia agreed that the measure should be implemented in the least
trade restrictive manner, given its impact on trade.  She noted that the scope of the regulation was
wide and captured a large number of companies.  She sought clarifications on whether the registration
would be done on an automatic basis, or whether a longer time-frame would be provided to exporting
companies, particularly small companies in developi ng countries, which could encounter difficulty in
complying to it in such a short time-frame.
25. The representative of Indonesia shared the concerns raised.  He requested the comment period
to be extended, given the need to coordinate with the numerous technical institutions and associations
on the matter.
26. The representative of the United States recalled that two notifications had been made to the
SPS Committee and only one to the TBT Committee.  Her authorities had intended to notify both
under the TBT Agreement, but due to human failure it had not happened.  However, both proposalswere out for comments.  The Bioterrorism Act was signed on 12 June 2002, which required the FDA
to develop regulations in four areas:  the registration of food facilities;  the establishment of records;
the prior notice of imported food shipments;  and the administrative detention.  Unless exempted, theG/TBT/M/29
Page 5
provisions would apply to all facilities for all types of food products regulated by the FDA.  Detailed
information on the law and on the anticipated regulations could be found on the FDA's website
(www.cfsen.fda.gov).  The FDA had been consulting with stakeholders extensively in the preparation
of these regulations.  She could not provide substantive reactions to the comments made, but
encouraged Members to take the opportunity to submit written comments prior to the deadline of4 April 2003.  Her authorities were not able to extend the comment period due to the legislative
constraints.  However, she ensured that efforts w ould be made to take the comments into account, and
that the final rules would be consistent with the obligations under the TBT Agreement.
27. The representative of Australia, speaking on behalf of Australia and New Zealand, raised
concerns on the EC regulation 753/2002 on wine labelling.  She recalled that both countries had
commented in detail on the regulation (notified in  G/TBT/N/EEC/15) at Committee meetings of June
and October 2002, and had submitted written comments to the EC Enquiry Point requestingconsultations.  Technical discussions had taken place in October 2002 with officials of the
Commission.  However, a formal written response was still awaited.  Her delegation had had concerns
on the potential trade impact of the EC's policies in this area since 1998.  In November 2002, the
Commission had announced that the implementation of the regulation would be deferred until August
2003.  Both Australia and New Zealand had welcomed the step, and had called for the EC to use theextra time to take third countries' comments into account in amending or abandoning the regulation.
She raised concerns about the regulation's consiste ncy with the principles of the TBT Agreement, in
particular, the obligation to avoid unnecessary barriers to trade, and to ensure that regulations were
not more trade restrictive than necessary to fulfil  a legitimate objective.  She requested the EC to
comply with its obligations under the Agreement, in particular, under Article 2.5, that Members, uponthe request of another Members, explain the justification for the regulation, and under Article 2.9.4, to
discuss Members' written comments upon request and to take those comments and results of
discussions into account.
28. She encouraged the EC to be more flexible in its approach to wine labelling requirements,
recognizing that there could be alternative means of pursing legitimate public policy objectives undera Member's label system.  She was disappointed that the EC had not provided answers to the
questions raised five months earlier.  The regulation continued to generate uncertainty for exporters.
She noted that the implementation date (1 August 2003) was imminent, and urged the EC to repeal the
regulation until all outstanding concerns of Members were addressed.
29. The representative of Mexico shared a number of comments made by the previous speaker,
and expressed his disappointment on the lack of response to the comments made on EC Regulation.
He recalled that his authorities had made comments addressing issues and problems in the Regulation.He hoped that a written response would be received, and that those comments could be taken into
account for the amendment of the Regulation to make it more flexible.
30. The representative of the United States associated her delegation with the comments made by
Australia, New Zealand and Mexico.  She recalled that those issues had been discussed at the June
and October 2002 Committee meetings, as well as in a plurilateral meeting with EC officials. Sheunderstood that the entry into force of the Regulation had been postponed from January 2003 to
1 August 2003.  She sought clarification on whether the transition period under which current
products could continue to be shipped until 1 August had been extended.  She raised the question on
whether and when the EC would respond to the concerns and questions raised, and if the response
would be in a written format.  She did not see how producers could be expected to comply with the
Regulation, if no response to the questions was provided.
31. The representative of Argentina endorsed the views of Mexico, New Zealand and Australia,
and informed the Committee that her delegation had not received a response to the comments made
on the EC regulation.G/TBT/M/29
Page 6
32. The representative of Uruguay echoed the concerns expressed on the EC wine labelling
regulation.  Her delegation saw the need for flexibility in the approach and the application of the
regulation, as well as the need to receive responses and the justification thereof.
33. The representative of the European Communities recalled that Regulation 753/2002 had been
notified on 10 June 2002, with a date of entry into force of 1 January 2003.  Following third country's
requests, the deadline for comments had been extended to 30 September 2002, allowing a comment
period of 3 and a half months.  His authorities had received a number of detailed comments.  A
number of bilateral discussions had taken place, and an informal discussion had been held on
16 October 2002 with the participation of EC experts.  Subsequently, the EC had decided to postpone
the date of entering into force until 1 August 2003.  He ensured the Committee that the EC was
studying all the comments made, including the one by the US on transition period, and was ready to
take up this issue with interested Members in the coming months.
34. The representative of Canada raised concerns on the US country of origin labelling
requirement under the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002.  He noted that the guidelines
were to become regulations in autumn 2003.  The stated objective of the requirement was to provide
industry and consumers with a workable voluntary pr ogram that would carry out the intent of the law.
He believed that the guidelines were unworkable and would put an unreasonable onerous burden onindustry.  Technical regulations based on these guidelines would have the effect of restricting
Canada's exports to the US, which would harm not only suppliers, but also US importers and
consumers.  He encouraged the US to reconsider this requirement, should it not be withdrawn, given
the wide reaching consequences of the measure.  Canada would continue to monitor developments of
the regulation to assess its consistency with the US international trade obligations.
35. The representative of the United States noted that the guidelines which had been notified were
voluntary ones, but would become mandatory at some  point.  The US Department of Agriculture had
extended the comment period from 21 January to 21 February 2003, and comments received were
being studied.  Her authorities at the Department of  Agriculture's Agricultural Marketing Service were
planning to conduct a number of listening sessions in the US at the beginning of May 2003 in order toobtain additional feedback and ideas for drafting the proposed mandatory regulations.  Details of
those meetings would be announced, and they would be open to the public, including foreign
representatives.  She ensured that her authorities w ould continue to consult on those guidelines and
would appreciate any feedback.
36. The representative of the United States recalled her delegation's concerns on the European
White Paper on chemicals.  She believed the approach would have significant impact on trade, and
that its economic implications had not been adequately assessed by the EC.  It had the potential toimpact production and trade in chemicals and downstream products from autos to textiles.  The
proposal lacked priority-setting and its implementation appeared to be overly burdensome and costly
to industry, governments and consumers.  Environmentally sound management of chemicals could be
achieved through approaches of better balanced risk and economic considerations.  She recalled that
her authorities had promoted cooperative engagement and supported international efforts to enhanceregulatory harmonization and coherence in this area.  She urged the EC to give consideration to the
input from transatlantic stakeholders and the US Government.  She underscored the importance of
transparency, openness, and accountability throughout regulatory processes.  She understood that the
EC would soon come out with a concrete proposal available for comments on the Internet.  She
sought further information on this, as well as whether a notification would be made.
37. The representative of Japan supported the objectives of the policy which included protection
of human health and of the environment.  However, he believed that the draft regulation developed
under the EC White Paper might lead to a huge increase in costs for industry of chemical goods and
would affect almost all products that use chemical  goods.  This had a great influence on trade flows
and investment.  The EC policy, even at this early stage of the regulatory process, showed a wideG/TBT/M/29
Page 7
range of problems (e.g. regarding the much data needed for registration and the authorization system
for risk assessment).  He questioned the conformity of these measures with the TBT disciplines, in
particular, the one which stipulated that technical regulations should not be more trade restrictive than
necessary to fulfill a legitimate objective.  He appreciated the opportunity provided by the EC for
comments through the Internet.  His delegation would submit comments in due course.  He urged theEC to develop its policy taking into account its obligations to the TBT or other WTO Agreements.
38. The representative of Australia shared the views of the US and Japan on the EC chemical
policy.  She recalled the concern amongst industry that the EC proposals could act as non-tariff trade
barriers for companies exporting to the European Union (EU).  The proposals stood in contrast to the
objective of the APEC and the International Council of Chemical Regulation for global harmonization
of chemical regulations.  The White Paper went beyond the chemical management regime of any
other OECD country.  It could entail significant compliance costs for SMEs, and might not be theleast trade restrictive approach to meet legitimate health, safety and environmental objectives.  She
raised concerns about the mandatory substitution, as well as issues related to competitiveness,
confidentiality and applicability to component chemicals used in manufacture.
39. The representative of Canada associated his delegation with the comments made by the
previous Members.  His delegation had had discussions with the EC where comments had been
submitted.  However, he continued to be concerned on the trade impact of the proposals, and looked
forward to an early notification from the EC.
40. The representative of the People's Republic of China shared the views expressed by the
previous speakers.  She believed the EC policy could bring adverse effects to China's chemical
exports as well as the exports of downstream products (e.g. toys and textiles) which were of greattrade interests to China.  Her delegation would fo llow the development of such EC regulations, and
wished to be informed of future progress.
41. The representative of Brazil shared the concerns expressed by the previous speakers.
42. The representative of Korea associated his delegation with the comments made.  He urged the
EC to provide a reasonable time period (such as five years) for traders and manufacturers to adapt to
this new regime.
43. The representative of Malaysia shared the concerns raised, and noted the consequences of this
proposal in terms of costs and trade, in particular, for SMEs in developing countries.  She urged the
EC to take into account the development interests of developing countries in the chemical sector, and
to reassess the proposed regulations so that they were not more trade restrictive than necessary.  She
was concerned that even with the adjustment time, the costs involved could be prohibitive and would
lead to the closure of some firms.
44. The representative of the European Communities recalled that the Commission had published
in February 2001, a White Paper on the strategy for the future policy regarding chemical substances.
This publication had led to an intense consultation period, during which the Council of Ministers and
the European Parliament adopted conclusions, a nd Member states communicated views, as well as
those of third countries and NGOs.  She in formed the Committee that in April 2003, debates would be
held for a Communities' position, and that her authorities would notify the draft text of the regulation
under the TBT Agreement.  A period of consultation on the Internet would be launched, which would
enable the EC to set up, in transparency, the policy regarding chemical products.
45. The representative of the United States drew attention to a EC notification on sardines
(G/TBT/N/EEC/26) made on 10 March 2003.  Her delegation had made comments on this draft
regulation within the short comment period provided.  She was willing to share those comments with
interested delegations.  She believed that the draft raised issues of compliance by the EC with itsG/TBT/M/29
Page 8
obligations under the TBT Agreement.  It was more trade restrictive than necessary to fulfil its
objectives of consumer information and market transparency, and it created difficulties for non-EC
source sardine species to enter into the European market.  She urged the EC to amend the draft
regulation to permit non-trade restrictive labelling requirements for non-European sardine species, as
well as to allow other Members a period of 60 days to comment on this draft.
46. The representative of Canada echoed the US's view, and raised the same concerns with
respect to the comments period.  He recalled that the original deadline for comments was on 19 March
2003, allowing a nine day comment period, although subsequently, it had been extended by one week.
His delegation would comment on the regulation and would come back to this issue.
47. The representative of Peru recalled that a process had been underway after the Appellate
Body's report on the sardines case, and reserved Peru's right to comment on the notification.
48. The representative of Norway echoed the concerns raised by the previous speakers.  Her
delegation was examining the matter, and reserved its right to come back to the issue at a later stage.
49. The representative of Mexico supported the views expressed, in particular, those by the US
and Peru.  He urged that a precedent which conflicted the conclusion of the Appellate Body should
not be set.
50. The representative of Chile endorsed the comments made by the US and Peru, and was
concerned about the short time frame to submit comments.  He recalled that Chile had been a third
party in the dispute, and had a trade interest in the issue.  A revision of the regulation, which did not
match up with the recommendations of the Dispute Settlement Body, was against Articles 2.4 and 2.2
of the TBT Agreement.  He reserved his right for further comments on this issue.
51. The representative of Venezuela recalled that her country had been third party in the dispute
on the original regulation.  The motivation had been to seek solutions to the trade restrictive effects on
non-Mediterranean sardine products.  The proposed labelling requirement related to the use of the
word "sardine" had direct consequences on the perceived value of the products in the EU market.  She
noted that the Appellate Body was examining the amendment.  She argued that the time-frame of nine
days for comments to the amended regulation was not enough, and supported the US view for anextension of the comment period, so that comments could be taken into account.
52. The representative of Ecuador supported the positions of Mexico, Peru, Venezuela and Chile,
and requested the EC to extend the deadline for comments.
53. The representative of the European Communities recalled that the EC had made a notification
on the Draft Commission Regulation amending Counc il Regulation (EEC) No 2136/89 Laying down
Common Marketing Standards for Preserved Sardines.  He explained that the measure had been
notified for transparency purposes, although there was no obligation to notify it under Article 2.9,since it was based on an international standard.  The date of adoption was in April 2003, and it was
not possible to postpone this due to the time cons traint under Article 21.3 of the Dispute Settlement
Understanding.  Consequently, a deadline for comments had been set for 19 March 2003.  Following
requests from third countries, the deadline had been extended to 26 March 2003.  He ensured that all
comments received would be examined with a view to finding the best solution.
54. The representative of the United States recalled that Korea had notified in December 2002,
(G/TBT/N/KOR/46) its draft regulation to mandate the standard on Wireless Internet Platform for
Interoperability (WIPI).  Her delegation had provided comments to and had bilateral exchanges with
Korea on the proposal.  On 13 February 2003, during technical consultations, concerns were
expressed (e.g. on intellectual property and on the trade restrictiveness of that regulation).  Sheappreciated Korea's commitment not to turn the standard mandatory until concerns were fullyG/TBT/M/29
Page 9
resolved.  She was willing to share her concerns with other interested Members, and would appreciate
further information from Korea.  Her delegation believed that in order to be WTO compliant, Korea
should amend this proposal or simply withdraw it.
55. The representative of Korea was not sure if the TBT Committee was the right forum to
discuss this issue.  However, he was open to questions by other Members.  He believed that WIPI was
covered by the GATS, rather than by the TBT Agreement, since it was not a product standard, but a
technical interface standard that governed interconnection among networks of wireless Internet
service providers.  Korea had made the notification to the TBT Committee for transparency purposes.
He recalled that since then, only one comment had been received (i.e. from the US).  He explained
that WIPI would allow Korea to achieve the following legitimate objectives:  (i) to provide consumers
with choices by means of broad interoperability;  (ii) to ease the burden of content providers and
facilitate the market;  (iii) to neutralize the market power of dominant incumbents.  The main goalwas to ensure better consumers' rights for services, and to establish a level playing field in the Korean
wireless Internet services market.  Incompatibility among five different platforms had been the major
hurdle for further development of the market.
56. Dominant players had no incentive to voluntarily resolve problems arising from such a market
fragmentation, as they wished to maintain their dom inant market position.  Achieving interoperability
with a single standard was a way to reduce the burden on content providers, as well as to provide the
widest number of consumers with contents promptly  and cost effectively.  He ensured that his
authorities would allow reasonable time to discuss with the US, and would take the comments as well
as the results of bilateral consultations into cons ideration.  He informed the Committee that in-depth
discussions were undergoing among interested private parties of the  two countries.  He recognized the
importance of intellectual property rights (IPR), and believed IPR holders, both domestically and
abroad, should be protected.  Korea expected the issues to be resolved shortly, and looked forward to
narrowing the differences by further bilateral consultations.
57. The representative of the European Communities welcomed the notification made by the
Peoples Republic of China (G/TBT/N/CHN/5) on "Limit quantity of arsenic, cadmium, lead,
chromium, mercury content for fertilizers".  She recalled that on 29 November 2002, the EC had sent
comments and raised concerns about the low limits set, if it were to concern mineral fertilizers.  She
requested China to provide justification on this, as well as information about the scope of the
application of cadmium limits.
58. The representative of the United States recalled that her delegation had raised concerns
regarding G/TBT/N/CHN/5, and technical consultations with Chinese authorities had been held
subsequently.  She was awaiting further information from China.
59. The representative of Korea requested China to provide a written response to the comments
made by his delegation on G/ TBT/N/CHN/1 and G/TBT/N/CHN/2.
60. The representative of the People's Republic of China invited the EC to provide China with the
comments made on fertilizer at this meeting, to ensure that those would be taken into account.  She
confirmed that a technical meeting had taken place w ith the US, involving US experts in the fertilizer
sector.  Referring to the Korean comments, she re called that bilateral consultations had been held.
The misunderstanding regarding the boiler and pressure vessels notification (G/TBT/N/CHN/1) had
been clarified in the course of those meetings.  She invited Korea to submit written comments for
further clarification.  Regarding G/TBT/N/CHN/2 on food and cosmetics, she ensured that national
treatment applied to imported products under this regulation.  Chinese products had been required tomeet this requirement for some time.
61. The representative of the European Communities recalled that at the previous meeting, his
delegation had raised concerns about the Korean detailed labelling requirements on alcoholic drinksG/TBT/M/29
Page 10
(G/TBT/N/KOR/34).  He believed that although the prevention of tax evasion could be a legitimate
objective, there existed other less trade restrictive measures in line with international practices.  The
Korean measure had come into force, and was causing problems to EU exporters.  He urged Korea to
suspend the measure, and introduce less trade restrictive means to achieve its objective.
62. The representative of Korea, in reply, recalled that an explanation had been provided at the
previous meeting.  He argued that the measure had been introduced to amend a labelling requirement
put in place in 1976, in order to prevent deceptive practices in the distribution of liquors.  He did not
believe that the measure created unnecessary trade restrictions, because tax authorities had not found
other possible effective solutions for the growing concern of tax evasion.  He stated that a six month
extension of the implementation deadline had been provided for producers to adapt to the new regime.
63. The representative of the European Communities recalled that her delegation had raised
concerns on proposed US regulations on tyres (G /TBT/N/USA/8, 15 and 18), and had sent comments
to the US.  However, no reply had been received.  The US had indicated that one of the regulations
had been adopted.  Two others were still in draft forms, and comments were being considered.  She
requested the US to communicate the adopted text, and to provide a response to the comments sent.
64. The representative of the European Communities recalled that in previous meetings a number
of delegations had raised concerns on the draft EC regulation on batteries.  He noted that, while there
was no final text to notify, the EC had launched a consultation exercise, as part of an impact
assessment, on a possible revision of EC Directive 91/157/EEC.  The deadline for comments to this
exercise was on 28 April 2003, and details were available at the website of the Commission.
65. The representative of Venezuela informed the Committee that concerns raised by Mexico at
the previous meeting, on G/TBT/N/VEN/14 (registr ation of domestic manufacturers and importers of
textile clothing) had been addressed bilaterally.  She explained that the purpose of the regulation was
to provide information on labels for textile garmen ts marketed in Venezuela, whether produced in the
country or imported, to prevent misleading practices.  A three month period had been provided
between the publication of the regulation and its entry into force.  Information (e.g. on the steps to be
followed and the possibility to obtain the forms) was available on the webpage of the national bodyresponsible for the Agreement.  Requests for registration were processed expeditiously, so that
imports would not be hampered.
66. The representative of the European Communities recalled that his delegation had raised
concerns on China's "CCC" certification system under the Transitional Review Mechanism.  He
recognized the importance to protect consumer safety and the right of China to take such measures.
However, he raised concerns about the excessiveness of the system, and sought clarification on
whether components and spare parts of products needed to be certified separately.
67. The representative of the People's Republic of China recalled that an explanation on the
"CCC" system had been provided at the 2002 Transitional Review.  He would forward the question
raised by the EC to his capital, and would seek opportunities for an exchange of views.
68. The representative of Brazil informed the Committee that his authorities had replied on
28 February 2003, to the comments made by the EC on the Brazil's technical regulation on wines.
69. The representative of Mexico raised concerns on the way which Members complied with their
notification obligations.  He regarded notifications as a fundamental tool to identify measures that
might have trade impact, and believed that notifications must be made early enough in order for the
other Members to make comments.  He drew attention to the provision of the Agreement, which
stated that "notifications shall take place at an early appropriate stage, when amendments can still beintroduced and comments taken into account".  He noted a proliferation of notifications where the
dates of adoption and entry into force were prior to the date of notifications.  In some cases, theG/TBT/M/29
Page 11
deadline for comments was close to the date of notification, was not provided or was indicated "not
applicable", which led to the confusion of Member s receiving those notifications.  It also gave an
indication that comments would not be taken into account and that a decision on the regulation had
already been taken.  He doubted the usefulness of those notifications, if opportunities for comments
were not provided.  He believed Members did not interpret and implement the relevant provisionsuniformly, which gave raise to a problem of transparency in regulations being notified.  He would
revert to this matter under the Triennial Review of the Agreement.
70. The Committee took note of the statements made.
VI. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND FOLLOW-UP TO THE SPECIAL WORKSHOP
HELD ON 18 MARCH 2003
71. The Chairperson thanked Members, in particular representatives from capitals of developing
country Members, and the moderators for their contribution to a successful Workshop on
Technical Assistance held on 18 March 2003.  She drew attention to her summary report of that event
prepared based on the moderators' reports under her own responsibility (Annex A).
72. The representative of the Philippines found the Workshop useful.  She recalled that there
existed a database on technical assistance needs in the context of the Committee on Trade and
Development, which included information on possible donors and their assistance activities indifferent fields of the WTO.  She believed that duplication of work should be avoided.
73. The representative of the European Communities believed that the Reports of the Chairperson
and the moderators had well captured the discussions at the Workshop, which had come up with a
number of good points.  His delegation attached importance to the Committee's work on technical
cooperation and wished to move forward with the program.  He believed the creation of a welldefined task force could be a way to progress.  This smaller group would then report back to the
Committee.  The meetings of the task force could be organized back to back with Committee
meetings, with its regular work done either by correspondence or through email.  He supported the
enhancement of transparency in the field of technical assistance, the ideas of a structured and
sequenced approach as well as sustainability.
74. The representative of the Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu
said that the Workshop had assisted her delegation to better understand the needs of developing
countries as well as what its contribution could be.  She informed the Committee that Chinese Taipei
had provided technical assistance on a long-term basis at the request of two non-WTO Members.
Two types of technical assistance activities were provided:  secondment of experts to work with staff
of recipient countries and the placement of staff from recipient countries to domestic laboratories to
obtain hands on training.  These two types of activities had proved to be cost efficient in areasconcerning technology, and had been welcomed by the recipient countries.  She was of the view that
technical assistance was not to be given to solve problems, but to facilitate the process of
improvement.  Recipients needed to transform th e knowledge or assistance received into elements
which, could fit into their own social and cultural characteristics.
75. She believed the creation of a database was the first and most important step to be taken.  It
could contain information on the supply and demand sides, as well as channels where funding
resources could be explored.  With the database, her delegation could adjust or modify the technical
assistance provided by referencing to the needs identified.  Classification of the information might be
needed to facilitate searching through the database, and the seven areas of needs identified in the
Secretariat's paper (G/TBT/W/193) could be useful reference.  The Committee's role could becomecritical to address constraints, in cases where the needs identified were not met by any technical
assistance provider.  Her delegation could contact the Secretariat for further suggestions.G/TBT/M/29
Page 12
76. The representative of Colombia found the summary reports well structured, comprehensive
and clear.  She believed it was time to move for action, and that at the first stage, the Committee
should put forward a classification of the technical assistance and capacity building needs identified
by developing countries.  According to the short- term and long-term implementation possibilities, it
would be useful to take into account the modali ties suggested by Brazil in document G/TBT/W/156.
The programme of technical assistance should be one of the priority tasks of the Third Triennial
Review.  She supported the consolidation of a database containing information on projects of donors,
be they countries or multilateral organizations, as well as ways to access such projects.  She shared the
Philippines' view that work should not be duplicated.  She was flexible with the methodology, be it
working in a special task force, or in multilateral or plurilateral informal Committee meetings.
77. The representative of Canada thanked the Chairperson for her comprehensive report, which
had set out ideas to move forward.  He shared the view that it was important to identify the existing
databases so as to avoid duplication.  He supported the idea of a small task force taking up the issues
identified at the Workshop.  An important part of the task would be to determine what was already
existing in terms of information as well as issues which could be advanced more quickly, so as to
obtain early results.  His delegation was flexible on how the task force would operate, whether on the
margins of Committee meetings, by email or a combination thereof.
78. The representative of Japan appreciated the Workshop which had contributed to a better
understanding of the problems of developing countries as well as providing a clearer direction for
future technical assistance.  He drew attention to the documents submitted by his delegation at the
Workshop describing the APEC's and the Japanese experience in TBT-related technical assistance.
He believed it was important to make use of the various information to further develop the technicalassistance programme.  He supported the creation of a small task force and requested the Secretariat
to coordinate the process.
79. The representative of Malaysia expressed her delegation's appreciation for the Workshop and
its results.  She was of the view that the Committee could undertake follow-up work in areas such as:
to improve the transparency of technical assistance programs;  to continue its on-going work ofidentification of technical assistance needs;  to ex change national experiences;  to identify awareness
programs;  as well as to discuss its coordinating role in respect of the providers, recipients and other
international organizations.  She suggested that informal consultation by the Chair could be
undertaken with respect to the creation of a database or the setting up of a small task force.  She noted
that the Workshop had shown that there were needs in capacity building in terms of infrastructure and
institutions, where the capacity of the Committee might be limited.  Such gaps could continue to be
filled by provider governments and international organizations.  It was importance for providers toimprove coordination, so as to reduce duplication and to have a more focused approach to technical
assistance.
80. The representative of Brazil found the Workshop useful.  A number of proposals had been
raised, which would assist the Committee to move forward.  She supported the idea of a task force
which could meet back-to-back with the TBT Committee, and work through the Internet in order tooptimize resources.  However, she highlighted the issue of its composition and terms of reference.  On
the issue of sustainability, she believed that it related not only to an easy access to technical assistance
by developing countries, but also to enhancing the infrastructure of these countries.  It should take
into account the needs to develop the various TBT-related disciplines (e.g. metrology, technical
regulation, standard and conformity assessment), and to assure that these disciplines were evenlyenhanced, so that recipient countries could effectively develop their overall infrastructure.  Referring
to the database, she linked it to a Brazilian paper in the year 2001 (G/TBT/W/156), where her
delegation had suggested the creation of a website by the WTO Secretariat.  She believed the role of
the Committee could be to act as a facilitator and a provider of information of technical assistance.  It
was important to take into account the work undertaken by other international organizations.G/TBT/M/29
Page 13
81. The representative of the People's Republic of China thanked the Chairperson and the
moderators for the conduct of the Workshop, where a number of suggestions had been made (e.g. the
creation of a task force, the setting up of a database containing information on technical assistance
needs, providers and recipients).  She believed technical assistance was essential to enhance the
implementation of the TBT Agreement by developing country Members, and stressed the importanceof expediting the process.  It was important for donor countries to know the needs of developing
countries, as technical assistance should be a demand-driven process.  She supported the view that
technical assistance had to be a sustainable on-going process.  WTO Members needed to provide and
receive technical assistance continuously, so as to ensure the full and sustainable implementation of
the Agreement that regulated international trade.
82. The representative of Kenya believed the Workshop had brought up issues which called for
solutions.  He believed a task force would be useful to facilitate the identification of priorities and
appropriate technical assistance activities, either national or regional, so as to optimize the resources
available.  He stressed the importance of defining indicators during the implementation of projects to
determine their sustainability.  The task force coul d come up with guidelines in this regard. At the
national level, for the implementation of the Agreement, awareness raising should be undertaken.  At
the international level, the Committee could highlight the problems and technical assistance requiredby developing countries and LDCs.
83. The representative of Egypt found the Workshop well structured and useful.  Its program had
reflected the Committee's recognition of the importance of technical assistance as a means to enhance
developing countries' abilities to effectively impl ement, as well as benefit from the TBT Agreement.
The aim of the event was to ensure that technical assistance was targeted to specific priorities andneeds identified by individual or groups of developing countries.  The questionnaire to assist the
identification and prioritization of needs had played an important role in this regard.  He recalled that
at the Second Triennial Review (G/TBT/9), the Committee had recognized the importance of
dissemination of information and knowledge as a key element of capacity building, and referred to a
number of areas of concern to developing countri es (e.g. notification and information exchange).
Information technology had been recognized as a possible way to address certain problems.  He
highlighted certain parts of that report related to technical assistance that had yet to be implemented.
Paragraph 44 contained various forms of technical assistance deliveries.  The most effective
approaches were those of long term and technical natures, such as internships, missions, consultancies
and training of experts.  He stressed that close contacts with other international organizations were
required (such as the ISO) to raise awareness of international standards and other TBT issues.  The
goal of technical assistance programs should be to respond to the real needs and priorities ofbeneficiary countries.  He found the proposal for the creation of a database useful.  However, he
highlighted the importance to coordinate with other organizations so as to benefit from the existing
information and databases.  He believed that the creation of a task force was important to implement
technical assistance efficiently.
84. The representative of United States thanked the Chairperson, the moderators and the speakers
for their contributions to the Workshop.  It had generated ideas, such as the importance of the
dissemination of knowledge and exchange of information among Members, and for that, the
Committee would continue to be the important forum.  She was not clear about the idea to create a
task force, or about its mandate.  She was cautious that the task force could take away the discussions
that should take place in the Committee.  She imagined that focussed discussions could be held amonginterested Members to generate ideas which might not be possible in a broader setting.  However, this
needed to be linked with the work of the Committee and in the context of the completion of its work
programme on technical assistance under the Triennial Review.  She shared the view with the others
about the database, and emphasised the importance of  coordination and avoidance of duplication.  She
noted that in certain databases, information coul d be categorized differently from the information
compiled in the Committee, and further work might be needed.  She reiterated that technical
assistance should be focussed on the effective implementation of the Agreement.G/TBT/M/29
Page 14
85. The representative of India appreciated the discussions at the Workshop and its reports.  He
believed that a number of elements had been developed (e.g. in terms of future strategies and the role
of the Committee), and the Committee should not lose the momentum to move forward to achieve the
ultimate objective of this process.  He shared the view that the main purpose of the exercise was to
assist developing countries in implementing the Agreement and to benefit from it.  The Workshop hadprovided an opportunity for Members to share information and discuss developing countries' needs
based on the responses to the questionnaire.  He found the Secretariat's categorization of the
prioritized needs in seven categories useful.  Since data on developing countries' needs was made
available, a focus should be put on the delivery of assistance through the various channels bilaterally
or multilaterally.  In this context, the creation of a database was useful to capture information on both
the demand and supply sides, such as on the various programmes and funding.  However, he shared
the view that duplication of work should be avoide d.  He took note of the elements in the report of
session four of the Workshop on future strategies.  These included issues of awareness, sustainability,
structured approach and transparency.  He sought suggestion from other delegations on how to handle
the issue of information gaps.  He did not yet have a position on the creation of a task force, but
welcomed any informal discussion on that approach.
86. The representative of Australia was mindful of the limited resources of the Committee in the
area of technical assistance, and believed that it could best contribute in the areas of transparency and
coordination.  The Committee could serve as a forum for information exchange on national
experiences, on technical assistance programmes of providers, as well as the needs and priorities of
recipients.  It could also consider ways to provide Members with information on TBT-related
technical assistance activities of other multilateral agencies.  For that, she was drawn to the idea of adatabase which listed countries' needs as well as technical assistance programmes that were underway
or completed, preferably with the identification of donor organizations.  She agreed that any
duplication of work should be avoided.  Her delegation was reflecting on the idea of a task force, and
took note of the concerns raised by Brazil and the US on its mandate and participation.
87. The representative of Panama appreciated the Workshop and the assistance received
regarding the participation of her capital-based delegate.  She drew attention to document
G/TBTW/193, and noted that, among the seven categories of needs, infrastructure and capacity
building were areas where most needs had been identified.  She stressed the importance of coherence
in technical assistance programmes by international or ganizations, so as to better target the priorities
identified and to avoid the repetition of the same  kind of assistance as well as wasting the limited
resources.  She urged that WTO documents should be translated in time to facilitate active
participation by delegations in discussions.  She recommended that the Report of the Workshopshould be transmitted to capitals, and that it could be used as a reference to strengthen technical
assistance programmes.
88. The representative of Saint Lucia appreciated the assistance provided to her by the WTO to
participate in the Workshop and Committee meetings.  She supported the view that the Committee
should move forward with its technical cooperation programme, given the many issues involved in theimplementation of and benefiting from the Agreement by developing country Members.  For that, she
supported the ideas of a well structured database and a task force with specific terms of reference.
She stressed the importance of awareness-building among policy makers, since they set the agenda in
their respective countries.
89. The representative of Mauritius associated his delegation to other Members in appreciating
the Workshop.  He recognized the complexity of th e Agreement, the different levels of development
among Members, and, therefore, the different assistance needed by them.  He supported the setting up
of a task force with well-identified terms of reference.  The task force could focus on the provision of
experts/resource persons and materials as well as the designing of courses for the training of trainers
that could lead to a well designed, comprehensive awareness programme.  He believed thatunstructured technical assistance provided in an ad hoc basis would not be effective.  The task forceG/TBT/M/29
Page 15
could also come up with a comprehensive policy on technical regulations, which would assist
Members to put in place non-trade restrictive practices.
90. The representative of Mexico believed that technical assistance was a broad field, and
supported the setting up of a task forces to focus on the following areas:  (i) the access to information
(e.g. on the availability and provision of technical assistance) by means of a database.  However, theduplication of work of the existing databases should be avoided;  (ii) to identify the specific needs and
priorities (e.g. in two or three strategic areas) of developing countries, the possible donors, and, when
applicable, the financial means;  and (iii) the creation of a mechanism which would evaluate the
results and the effectiveness of the assistance provided.
91. The representative of Argentina found the Workshop informative.  He noted the suggestions
made, and believed that the report of the Chairperson contained good guidelines for the Committee to
further its work.  The most important issue was the coordination among national authorities, theCommittee and donors on the way technical assistance could be provided.  He agreed with Mexico on
the need to evaluate the effectiveness of technical assistance programmes.  He believed that the
proposals of setting up a database and a task force needed to be further studied.  These mechanisms
could be used as tools to ensure the effectiveness and continuation of technical assistance.  He
thanked the Secretariat for a successful national TBT Seminar held in October 2002 in Buenos Aires,where 50 representatives from different central and local government agencies participated.
92. The representative of Peru noted that there was a consensus on the need to share updated
information on technical assistance as well as to set up a database.  However, developing countries
often experienced problems to access information due to the lack of infrastructure and, therefore, it
was important to provide technical assistance in this area.
93. The representative of Venezuela welcomed the results of the Workshop, and believed that the
questionnaire had contributed to the identification of needs and priorities of developing country
Members.  She highlighted the importance of raising awareness of and benefiting from the
Agreement.  She suggested that the report of the Workshop should be circulated at a TBT seminar to
be held in Peru.
94. The Chairperson concluded that there was support to further elaborate the proposals which
had arisen from the Workshop, which could contribute to the development of the TBT-relate technical
assistance programme in the context of the Third Triennial Review.  Members should keep the
momentum, and should consider working methods to facilitate discussions.  She noted the idea to
have a focused group of delegations to take the work forward.  However, it was necessary to avoid the
risk of creating additional bureaucratic and nego tiating structures, which could slow down the
process.  This required flexibility and the ability to explore practical options to further elaborate theproposals.  She noted the importance to avoid the duplication of work, especially concerning the
database of which a large number of Members supported.  She requested the Secretariat to prepare a
paper outlining the existing databases on TBT-related technical assistance, with an aim to assist
Members to identify where the Committee could add further value.  She invited Members to bring to
the Secretariat's attention of any database that they were aware of, in addition to those in the ISO,OECD and the WTO.  She encouraged interested Members to contribute to this process in the
capacity of friends of the Chair and the Secretariat.  They could be called upon in an informal capacity
to identify practical issues associated with the proposals.
95. The representative of Brazil thanked the Ch airperson for highlighting the issues, and
expressed Brazil's willingness to assist in the process.
96. The representative of the European Commun ities considered the Chairperson's suggestion
was a sound way to move forward.  He believed that much of the information was already available,G/TBT/M/29
Page 16
and supported the idea of putting it together.  He sought further clarification how the friends of the
Chair and the Secretariat would work.
97. The Chairperson responded that it could be a combination of approaches to consolidate inputs
from Members.  Input could be provided by e-mail and, if needed, from time to time, Members could
meet informally in Geneva.
98. The Chairperson, in relation to  the issue of workshops, recalled that the Committee had been
considering another workshop which was a learning event on labelling.  Discussions had been held
based on a Secretariat note containing a number of draft elements.  She believed that further reflection
on the format of the event was required.  She observed that there was a general agreement on holding
this event based on real-life case studies, with no formal conclusion, but with a particular focus on
developing countries' concerns.  However, the following issues required further consultations:  (i) the
participation of the event (e.g. whether to invite the private sector);  (ii) the timing of the event(e.g. whether it should take place before or after the Cancun Ministerial Conference);  (iii) the cases to
be included (e.g. whether these should relate only to the TBT Agreement or to all types of labelling);
(iv) the elements to be studied under each cases;  and (v) the speakers and their selection (e.g. if they
should be experts who had direct involvement in a particular labelling case or they could be other
stakeholders).  She took note of the view that  the discussion should not pass judgement on the
compliance of particular cases with the disciplines of the Agreement.  Certain Members had the desire
to focus on the implementation of the Agreement and to include the elements of good practices as
well as least trade restrictive alternatives.  There was a suggestion to divide the event into two parts
(i.e. a section on trade concerns and another on trade benefits).  She encouraged delegations to consult
among themselves to seek common ground on how the event should be structured.  She proposed tohold informal consultations on this before the next Committee meeting.
99. The representative of the European Communitie s thanked the Chairperson for her summary of
the discussions on the labelling workshop.  He was of the opinion that the discussions had been
fruitful and significant progress had been made, although a number of outstanding issues still
remained.  He was concerned about the timing of the event, and welcomed informal consultations onthe issues before the next meeting.
100. The representative of Malaysia thanked the Chairperson for her summary (i.e. the workshop
should be a learning event for educational purposes, and that it should be based on case studies and
should not result in formal conclusions or recommendations).  She believed that a number of issues
needed further reflection.  There should be practical considerations on the timing of the event.  She
supported the idea of holding informal discussions on the outstanding issues.  However, she requested
for more time to reflect on them before the consultations.
101. The representative of Egypt agreed that progress had been made in aspects of the workshop.
However, certain points needed further reflection.  His delegation was willing to cooperate with the
others to reach an agreement on the structure and components of the event.  He raised concerns on the
timing, and believed that, from a practical point of view, it was not appropriate, in particular for
developing countries to be well prepared, to hold it too soon.  He supported the idea of informalconsultations, and agreed with Malaysia that more time would be needed to consult with capitals.
102. The representative of India thanked the Chairperson for her summary.  India believed that the
workshop should be a learning event focused on the implementation of the Agreement.  He supported
the proposal to have informal consultations before th e next meeting, and shared the view of Egypt and
Malaysia that more time was needed to prepare these consultations with capitals.
103. The representative of Canada supported the idea of holding informal consultations on the
workshop, when delegates felt ready to resolve the outstanding issues, including the one on timing.G/TBT/M/29
Page 17
104. The representative of Switzerland reiterated her delegation's view on the importance of
pursuing discussions on labelling, and supported the idea to conduct informal consultations as soon as
possible.
105. The representative of Brazil believed that the workshop should be a learning event for the
sharing of information to better understand the existing labelling schemes.  Case studies should focus
on the experience in the implementation and compliance with the schemes, as well as their trade
impact.  It would not be appropriate to have any formal conclusion, nor to have discussions on good
practices.  Regarding the timing of the event, she shared the view that more time was needed to
consult with capitals, in particular, in order for developing countries to participate properly.
106. The representative of Mexico supported a workshop on labelling, provided that it would be of
an educational purpose, with a view to assist Members to exchange experiences on how to implement
the Agreement regarding labelling (e.g. the legitimate objectives and alternatives, such as voluntarylabelling schemes).  It should be a dialogue without any conclusion.  He noted the different types of
labelling (e.g. relating to sanitary, quality or energy efficiency), and believed that it could be useful to
discuss the issue of the usefulness of labelling w ith respect to the fulfilment of objectives.  The
adverse trade effect of labelling was another issue that the Committee could address.  The Agreement
allowed Members to adopt labelling requirements.  However, labelling schemes might not always bethe most appropriate approach, as they could imply costs for consumers.  He supported the proposal
on informal consultations.
107. The representative of Japan echoed the others on holding informal consultations.  He believed
that the workshop should address trade concerns rather than trade benefits so as to ensure that
labelling requirements did not create unnecessary obstacles to trade, although he did not excludefurther discussions on trade benefits.  The event should be opened to various stakeholders, including
other WTO Committees.  It was useful to have a broad based information exchange, with the
participation of international standardization bodies, such as the ISO, given that it had developed a
number of guides and recommendations on labelling.  Japan was flexible on the timing of the event,
and noted the importance to maintain the momentum and to allow time to develop the discussionunder the Third Triennial Review.
108. The representative of Argentina shared the views that the discussions had been productive and
allowed Members to identify a number of elements that deserved further reflection.  He echoed that
the event should be educational without recomme ndations or conclusions.  This would allow a
productive and frank discussion on the various implications and aspects of labelling.  The issue of
whether the event should include only labelling under TBT disciplines or other types was one that
needed special consideration.  Regarding the timing  of the event, he believed that more informal
consultations would be required to discuss the various elements, and that more time was needed in
order to be well prepared and to obtain feedback from capitals.
109. The representative of Australia agreed that there were a number of issues where further
informal consultations would be needed.  Regarding the timing, given the pre-Cancun workload, she
shared the views that a date after the summer would be appropriate.  She sought information from theSecretariat on the work which would be involved in organizing such an event.
110. The representative from the Secretariat informed the Committee that there was no official
time-limit for organizing such events, but it would require at least three months.  If it involved
financing participants, the workload of the WTO logi stics unit to make the necessary arrangements for
the nominees should also be taken into consideration.
111. The representative of Panama shared the view that future discussions would be necessary.
The Workshop should be a learning event, and should take into account the fact that the Agreement
had already provided disciplines on labelling requ irements.  She suggested to take into account theG/TBT/M/29
Page 18
knowledge and experiences of the various stakeholders regarding labelling (e.g. standardizing bodies,
consumers, governments and producers), as well as its trade impact on domestic markets and market
access at the international level.
112. The representative of Kenya welcomed the Chairperson's summary and further informal
consultations.  He recalled that at the Doha Ministerial Conference, the issue of labelling had been
discussed and a recommendation had been made on labelling for environmental purposes.  He
believed that the educational event would allow the Committee to address an issue that was also being
addressed by the Special Session of the Committee on Trade and Environment.
113. The Chairperson informed the Committee that the date of the informal consultations would be
communicated to Members in due course, and invited Members for any advanced input concerning
the organization and structure of the labelling workshop.
114. The Committee took note of the statements made.
VII. PREPARATION FOR THE THIRD TRIENNIAL REVIEW OF THE OPERATION
AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TBT AGREEMENT UNDER ARTICLE 15.4
115. The Chairperson recalled that on 10 February 2003, the Committee had held an informal
meeting to evaluate the progress of its work since the Second Triennial Review, including the
proposals and papers which had been submitted by delegations.  Members had shared views on the
conduct of the Third Triennial Review to be carried out before the end of year 2003.  A number of
Members had indicated their interests to include certa in elements in the Review and their intention to
submit additional papers to facilitate discussions.  She encouraged them to make their submissions assoon as possible to ensure sufficient time for discussions.  She drew attention to documents
G/TBT/W/194-197 and 199, submitted respectively by Japan on "A Policy Framework for the
Acceptance of Results of Conformity Assessment Procedures";  by the Separate Customs Territory of
Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu on the "Imp lementation of Supplier's Declaration of
Conformity";  by Canada on the "Main Objectives for the Third Triennial Review of the Agreement";by the EC on the "Third Triennial Review of the Agreement";  and by Korea on "Korea's Experience
with the Implementation of the WTO/TBT Agreement".  She also drew Members' attention to a paper
submitted by the People's Republic of China on "The Third Triennial Review of the TBT Agreement".
116. The representative of Japan highlighted the following elements which could be included in
the Third Triennial Review:  technical assistance, labelling and the acceptance of conformity
assessment results.  His delegation was willing to participate in discussions of other issues proposed
by Members (e.g. good regulatory practice, supplier's declaration and the enhancement of
transparency).  He introduced document G/TBT/W/194 which encouraged the acceptance of
conformity assessment results conducted outside the importing country.  The paper provided the
approaches to realize the acceptance of results (e.g. mutual recognition agreements (MRAs) to
specific regulations, arrangements amongst certification bodies, utilization of arrangements between
accreditation bodies and the designation by the importing regulatory authority).  It described thecharacteristics and benefits of the approaches as well as the conditions to conclude MRAs.  It
proposed a step-by-step approach when technical co mpetence equivalency did not exist, in order to
conclude a government-based MRA.  He believed the paper could contribute to future discussions.
117. The representative of the Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu
drew attention to document G/TBT/W/195 which outlined Chinese Taipei's experiences in the
implementation of supplier's declaration of conformity (SDoC).  This approach was introduced to the
regulatory process for certain electronic products in January 2002.  She explained that it involved
mainly small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs).  A review had been conducted in August 2002,
where a number of problems in the implementation process had been identified.  Solutions had been
suggested.  She believed further discussions and information exchange on this would be needed.  SheG/TBT/M/29
Page 19
welcomed the Canadian submission which contained cas e-studies of SDoC as well as identified issues
involved in the application which could affect the success of the programmes. She believed that
technical assistance was required in order to introdu ce SDoC to the regulatory sector (e.g. to establish
an effective market surveillance mechanism, to trai n the personnel in regulatory agencies and to put in
place procedures to review SDoC 's implementation).  She proposed to hold an informal workshop on
SDoC which could improve the understanding of  the implementation and techniques of SDoC.
118. The representative of Canada introduced the Canadian paper (G/TBT/W/196) which proposed
the following issues to be examined in the Thir d Triennial Review:  good regulatory practice (GRP),
conformity assessment procedures, labelling and trade-related technical assistance (TRTA).  He
believed that GRP could be regarded as the approach to other subjects to be dealt with under the
Review (i.e. regulatory systems and measures to be taken in order to meet legitimate policy
objectives, while respecting WTO obligations, in particular, those concerning TBT).  GRP could beapplied also to the issue of transparency, including the concerns raised by Mexico on notifications,
and should be further addressed.  He noted that the discussions on conformity assessment in the
Committee, and suggested to focus discussions on elements such as:  the encouragement of the
adoption of international standards and guides by conformity assessment users as well as the
strengthening of the global conformity assessment system.  Canada intended to submit a paper on itsexperience on conformity assessment.  He recalled that labelling had been briefly discussed in the
Second Triennial Review, and believed that it should be further discussed in the Third Review.  He
echoed Kenya's concern that the CTE had been called upon to examine labelling requirements for
environmental purposes, and that the TBT Committee had the role to address the issue of labelling.
He expected both committees to support mutually in the work on labelling for environmentalpurposes.  Canada intended to submit a non-paper on this.  On TRTA, he was of the view that the
workshop and the discussions that followed it, had underscored its importance.  He welcomed
information from Members on the existing technical assistance to allow a fruitful discussion.
119. The representative of the European Communities considered the Third Triennial Review as an
opportunity to improve the implementation and interpre tation of the Agreement.  He drew attention to
document G/TBT/W/197 which contained the EC's priorities for the Review:  (i) assisting developing
countries to benefit from the Agreement;  (ii) promoting appropriate conformity assessment
procedures;  (iii) enhancing transparency in the preparation of technical regulations, standards and
conformity assessment procedures, including the handling of comments on notifications by other
Members;  (iv) taking forward TBT Committee discussions on labelling; and (v) assisting Members to
identify and use an appropriate mix of measures to facilitate trade in the TBT field.
120.  On the development dimension, the EC proposed the Committee to further its work on the
development of the technical cooperation programme launched in the Second Triennial Review.
Elements for further studies should include the following:  existing technical assistance activities;
enhancement of cooperation between donors;  reassessment of needs in the light of priorities;  and the
identification of appropriate partners.  Particular attention should be given to the monitoring and
evaluation of the technical assistance programme.  On the issue of enhancing the participation ofdeveloping country Members in the international standardization process, he welcomed the work
undertaken by the Secretariat and the Director General, and invited the Committee to consider ideas to
continue and build on this work.  He recalled that his delegation had submitted information on the
EC's technical assistance programmes in 2002, and welcomed similar information provided by other
Members.  He encouraged the Committee to contin ue its work on the transparency of technical
assistance programmes.
121. On conformity assessment, the Third Triennial Review should build on the work undertaken
in the Second Review, where an indicative list of approaches to facilitate the acceptance of
conformity assessment results had been provided.  He believed that SDoC could assist market access
without prejudice to the fulfilment of legitimate public policy objectives, when it was combined witheffective market surveillance and product liability la ws.  The EC's experience on the use of SDoC hadG/TBT/M/29
Page 20
been positive.  He encouraged other Members to exchange experiences in this area, and welcomed the
papers submitted by Canada and Chinese Taipei.  The EC believed that accreditation, a possible tool
to verify the competence of conformity assessment bodies, when operated to recognized international
standards, provided a mechanism to assist the acc eptance of conformity assessment activities.  He
invited the Committee to examine this issue of accreditation, with particular attention to its potentialto help developing country exporters.
122. He found it important to further enhance the implementation of TBT transparency provisions,
and to assist Members, in particular, developing country Members, to make effective use of the
notification procedures.  He invited the Committee to seek ways to facilitate the distribution of
comments made on draft technical regulations and conformity assessment procedures.  Possible
mechanisms to achieve this were to place the comments on web-sites of relevant bodies of Members
or on the WTO web-site.  The latter would imply additional work for the Secretariat.  He also invitedthe Committee to explore the following matters:  ways to facilitate access to final texts of notified
proposals as well as notifications by local government bodies.  He believed the Committee should
continue its discussions on labelling, and that the Chairperson's summary would contribute to it.  The
workshop would improve Members' understanding on the issue.
123. Regarding the measures to facilitate trade (e.g. technical assistance, special and differential
treatment; harmonization of technical regulations, equivalency and mutual recognition agreements),
he invited an exchange of experience on this with a view to assist Members achieving an appropriate
mix among the measures.  He supported further discussions on GRP, and an exchange of information
on approaches to technical regulations and regula tory practices.  The Committee should also hold
discussions on the linkage between technical regulations and measurement requirements.  He notedthat in some cases, legislations stipulated measurements which were not clear, conflicting or
unrealistic (e.g. when the measurements indicated were impossible to measure with existing
technologies, or when different measurement methods could arrive at different results).  Under such
circumstances, trade barriers could be created.  Another area where the EC considered important in
the Review was the terms and definitions under the Agreement.  Members should be informed ofrecent developments in the ISO/IEC on the elaboration of standards related to terms and definitions in
the Agreement.  He noted that Annex 1 of the Agreement, in its present state, referred to
ISO/IEC Guide 2/1991 which had been superseded by ISO/OIEC Guide 2:1996.  The ISO had been
working on a new international standard on terms and definitions for conformity assessment (future
ISO 17000).  He proposed to hold discussions on this, and to invite ISO/IEC for an update.
124. The status of the Committee's recommendations and decisions (as contained in
document G/TBT/1) was another issue that the EC wi shed to discuss.  His delegation considered them
a useful guidance on rules of procedure, the interpretation, implementation and administration of the
Agreement, and the settlement of disputes.  However, he was concerned that in a recent dispute
settlement case, these recommendations and decisions had been largely ignored by the panel, and
believed that they did not carry much weight.  The Committee should examine the value of its
recommendations and decisions.  He noted that Article 15.4 provided the Committee with thepossibility to submit proposals for amendments to the text of the Agreement, and that Article IX of
the Marrakech Agreement allowed the General Council to seek an authoritative interpretation of its
provisions.  He recognized that it would take time to thoroughly discuss the above issues, and invited
the Committee to develop a road map on how to address them.
125. The representative of Korea drew attentio n to document G/TBT/W/199, which contained
information on Korea's experience with the implementation of the Agreement.  His delegation was
committed to further contributions in the Third Trie nnial Review process.  On conformity assessment
procedures, Korea's priority was to promote bilateral mutual recognition agreements (as identified by
his delegation in its response to the survey questionnaire).  He noted that Article 6.3 of the Agreement
encouraged Members to negotiate, at the reques t of other Members, agreement for the mutual
recognition of results of each other's conformity assessment procedures.  He believed that this couldG/TBT/M/29
Page 21
be an area to move forward in terms of technical co operation to obtain mutual benefits.  He invited the
Committee to develop ideas and to explore projects amongst developed and developing country
Members.  In this regard, he believed the Japanese paper (G/TBT/W/194) had provided insight for
further discussions on MRAs.
126. The representative of the People's Republic of China drew attention to a non-paper on
transparency prepared by her authorities as a contribution to the Third Triennial Review, which
contained an analysis of the TBT notifications made during the year 2002.  She outlined the following
statistics for that year:  (i) 50 Members (34 per cent of the WTO membership) submitted notifications
on drafted technical regulations or conformity assessment procedures.  Two-thirds of the membership
(mostly developing country Members) did not notify;  (ii) a total of 577 notifications were made, of
which 288 had indicated less than 60 days for comments (49.9 per cent of the total made by both
developed and developing country Members), thus, she found this a common problem;  (iii) 15 urgent
notifications were made by 8 Members (2.6 per cent of the total);  and (iv) according to the
Doha Ministerial Declaration, there should be no less than six months between the publication of
technical regulations and their entry into force.  However, in 2002, only 35 notifications had fulfilled
this requirement (6.1 per cent of the total), while 298 notifications (51.6 per cent) had not provided
the six month period, and 242 had no indication or stated "non-applicable".  She considered this acommon problem for both developed and developing country Members.  She believed that technical
regulations, conformity assessment procedures as well as other technical requirements were
generating an important impact on trade, and that the issue of notifications should be further discussed
by the Committee.  Good practices with regard to the transparency provisions (e.g. publications,
notifications, commenting, enquiring and replying) could assist Members to effectively carry outtechnical coordination and to improve trade facilitation.  China intended to further contribute on this.
127. The Chairperson noted that the above submissions had provided information on national
experiences as well as put forward proposals which could contribute to the further work of the
Committee in the context of the Third Triennial Review.
128. The representative of Mexico welcomed the submissions, and believed that they contained
certain elements which his delegation wished to address.  He believed the proposals were of a
different degree of importance and could have different possibilities of achieving results.  He invited
the Committee to continue its discussions on the Mexican proposal on technical assistance as well as
to find mechanisms to assess the results of technical assistance (e.g. in terms of guidelines or good
practices).  He appreciated the contribution from Chinese Taipei, which provided information on
SDoC, and believed that the experience shared could assist the Committee to better understand the
conditions of using this approach.  He supported the idea of holding a workshop on SDoC, andbelieved that it was a mechanism which could speed up trade transactions.  However, the constraints
of developing countries in using SDoC should be taken into account (e.g. regarding the kind of
products and conditions needed).  The Committee could reflect on how to strengthen the relevant
institutions in developing country Members so that this approach could be appropriately adopted.
129. He found the Japanese paper contained important elements on MRAs.  He was of the view
that not all MRAs were effective, and that cert ain MRAs between governments had not achieved the
expected results.  Ways should be sought to contribute to the conclusion of appropriate MRAs.  He
shared other Members' concerns on the implementation of the transparency provisions of the
Agreement and favoured discussions on this in the Triennial Review.  He highlighted two elements:
(i) the notifications on laws and parliamentary decisions which came under the Agreement.  However,notification procedures were not often followed through.  He believed that Members should consider
mechanisms to fulfill their transparency obligations ;  and (ii) the transparency obligations by local
government authorities.  He echoed with the EC that further discussions on this were required.  He
also supported the discussion on terms and definitions under the Agreement as well as the status of the
decisions and recommendations of the Committee.  He suggested to deal with the issue of labellingG/TBT/M/29
Page 22
from the perspective of regulatory practices, since labelling requirements were technical regulations in
the context of the Agreement.
130. The representative of Switzerland welcomed the contributions from other Members and found
that they contained important ideas for the Review.  She shared the views of the EC, in particular on
technical assistance, conformity assessment, transparency and labelling.  She proposed to establish awork programme to deal with these issues in the next three years.  She recalled that the issue of
labelling had been briefly addressed in the Second Triennial Review, and believed that, for this
coming Review, a more focused discussion should be held.  Labelling requirements should be in
conformity with the rules of the Agreement and should not be disguised restrictions to trade.
131. The representative of Brazil thanked the delegations which had made contributions to the
Third Triennial Review, and informed the Committee that his delegation would present comments on
them.  He noted a number of converging issues under discussions which were related to theimplementation of the Agreement (e.g. conformity assessment procedures, technical cooperation,
transparency and notification procedures).  Brazil was consulting relevant national authorities and the
private sector with a view to submit a paper for the Review in due course.
132. The representative of Malaysia thanked the Members who had submitted papers, and believed
that the Third Triennial Review would provide an opportunity for the Committee to examine the
implementation and operation of the Agreement, as well as to building upon the work which had been
accomplished in the Second Review.  She found that the compilation of responses on technical
assistance had provided a wealth of information which could serve as a useful basis for the
Third Triennial Review.  The responses had pointed out a number of difficulties experienced by
developing country Members in the implementation and administration of the Agreement (e.g. thelack of resources or institutional capacity).  The Committee would need to consider solutions, so that
Members could fulfil their obligations under Article 15.2.  She supported to consider the issue of
conformity assessment in the Review, and recalled the difficulties expressed by developing countries
in this area (e.g. the cost involved and the lack of infrastructure).  The Committee should explore the
practical issues (e.g. on supplier's declaration, MRAs, equivalence and accreditation) in addition to, assuggested by the EC, updating the indicative list of approaches.  She noted the interest of Japan,
Chinese Taipei and Canada on these issues, and hoped to see progress in some of them at a later stage.
133. On transparency, she welcomed the proposals of the EC, the People's Republic of China and
Mexico.  She believed there were ways to promote the distribution of comments and replies, as well
as greater transparency on draft technical regulations and conformity assessment procedures.  The
concerns which had been raised on replies to comments on draft regulations should be discussed,
including the point on the follow-up of cases presented at Committee meetings.  Explanations shouldbe shared in the Committee rather than just bilate rally.  On labelling, she echoed the view expressed
by Mexico that provisions of the Agreement were adequate to address issues related to technical
regulations, including labelling.  Therefore, discussions on labelling should be done in the context of
technical regulations and good regulatory practices.
134. The representative of Egypt thanked Members for their submissions, and recalled that
Article 15.4 provided the opportunity to review th e operation and implementation of the Agreement,
including the provisions on transparency, with a view to adjust, where necessary, the rights and
obligations of the Agreement, as well as to ensure mutual economic advantage and balance of rights
and obligations.  The Committee could, where appropriate, and without prejudice to the provisions of
Article 12, submit proposals to the Council for Trad e in Goods for amendments to the text of the
Agreement.  He agreed that the Third Triennial Review should build on the work undertaken during
the Second Review, and should aim at examining the implementation of the Agreement with a view to
reducing administrative burden, especially for developing country Members.  He believed that the
provisions related to the rights and obligations of developing country Members needed to be reviewed
to ensure that they were effective, responsive and operational.  On GRP, he agreed with Canada that itG/TBT/M/29
Page 23
was a means to reduce or eliminate trade barriers.  He looked forward to the Canadian paper and the
discussions on GRP.  However, he believed special attention should be given to the difficulties faced
by developing countries in adopting GRP.  These could be noted in the responses to the questionnaire
on technical assistance.  He invited Members to take into account in their contributions, the
difficulties of and the special treatment for developing country Members, and believed that couldcontribute to enhancing the operation and implementation of Articles 11 and 12.  The discussions on
technical assistance should go further with a view to finding appropriate mechanisms to enhance the
provision of technical assistance to developing countries.
135. He agreed to hold an in-depth discussion on SD oC, and believed that it should be concluded
before Cancun, as it was one of the TBT outstanding implementation issues.  He welcomed the
submission from Chinese Taipei, and encouraged Members to exchange views on the various
elements of this approach.  On labelling, he raised concerns and sought clarification on the linkage, assuggested in the Canadian paper, between the work  undertaken within the Committee and that of the
Committee on Trade and Environment (CTE).  He emphasized that labelling should be approached as
a technical regulation that should facilitate trade, and not as an obstacle to it.  He noted that the
Canadian submission contained a reference to labelling and social issues.  He recalled that at Doha,
Ministers had reaffirmed that social issues, child labour and core labour standards were within themandate of the International Labour Organization, and, therefore, expressed that the WTO should not
deal with such issues.  The Committee should also consider ways and means to enhance transparency,
in particular, on the implementation of the provisions related to developing countries' rights.  He
echoed the views of the People's Republic of China, Mexico, Brazil and Malaysia on transparency and
notification procedures.
136. The representative of the United States thanked the delegations that had made contributions to
the Third Triennial Review.  She informed the Co mmittee that her authorities, in addition to the
normal inter-agency coordinating mechanism with the private sector advisory group, had solicited a
consultation through the official Gazette (the Federal Registrar), and were in the process of analysing
the input received.  This process would be enriched with the papers which had been submitted.  Shehoped that a substantive contribution would be put forw ard at the next meeting.  She noted that there
were a number of priorities among Members for the Review.  On technical assistance, she believed
that a way could be found to better coordinate the Secretariat's work with the needs identified in the
Committee.  She supported the discussion on GRP which would include the elements of labelling and
transparency.  She believed that the Agreement, as it stood, compassed a good balance of rights and
obligations, and, in light of the current experience , did not require any amendment.  However, there
was a need to promote the awareness and emphasize the compliance with the existing obligations.
137. The representative of Chile thanked delegations for their submissions.  She highlighted a
number of issues that could be included in the Triennial Review (e.g. conformity assessment
procedures, GRP and technical assistance).  She welcomed the papers submitted by Chinese Taipei
and Japan on SDoC and on MRAs respectively, and invited Members to share experiences in the
various approaches for the acceptance of conformity assessment results in order to facilitatediscussions.  She believed GRP was the key element to eliminate unnecessary trade barriers, and
should be included in the Review.  This could be achieved when technical regulations and conformity
assessment procedures were prepared and applied according to principles of the Agreement
(e.g. transparency, the use of international standards and the adoption of the least trade restrictive
measures).  She shared the view of Mexico and Malaysia that labelling requirements were technicalregulations, and GRP should be applied.  She noted that the EC paper had identified a number of
elements on labelling to be taken into account (e.g. transparency and consumer's interests).  However,
she believed the most important element to be considered was to ensure that labelling schemes did not
constitute unnecessary barriers to trade.  On the status of the decisions and recommendations of the
Committee (as proposed by the EC), she believed that this was a cross-cutting issue that affected notonly the TBT Committee, but also decisions taken in other Committees.  Therefore, the
TBT Committee was not the proper place to deal with it.G/TBT/M/29
Page 24
138. The representative of Australia thanked Members for their papers.  She noted that there was a
considerable convergence around the need to explore the issues of transparency, technical assistance
and conformity assessment.  On transparency, she shared the EC's view on a wider distribution of
comments and replies on draft technical regulations, and intended to introduce observations on this.
Australia was interested in further exploring the issues of equivalence and supplier's declarations.  Shefound the Chinese Taipei submission on SDoC helpful.  It complemented the Canadian contribution
on that issue.  She supported the view not to amend the Agreement, but to encourage its compliance.
139. The representative of India welcomed the submissions.  He believed that the mandate of
Article 15.4 was to examine the implementation of the existing Agreement as well as the relevant
problems faced by Members.  The responses to the questionnaire on technical assistance and the
Workshop had provided a good panorama on the problems faced by Members during the course of
implementation.  He encouraged further discussions and experience sharing on these.  He did not findthe need to clarify the scope or the interpretation of  the Agreement.  He echoed the view that labelling
was already included in the Agreement.  The Trienn ial Review should allow Members to share their
experience on labelling, and there was no need to link the Committee's work to that of the CTE.
140. The representative of Canada found the EC pape r constructive.  It contained issues which his
delegation considered important.  He noted that suggestions to improve the notification procedures
had arisen from the discussion on transparency.  He believed that the papers from the EC, Japan and
Korea on MRAs contained elements that should be considered during the Review (e.g. the problems
faced in the implementation of government-to-government MRAs and the complexity of the different
approaches on the acceptance of conformity assessment results).  He agreed that the implementation
of MRAs was complex, and that it was important to consider whether such a mechanism wasappropriate or whether there existed other mechanisms to accomplish the same goals.  He welcomed
the Chinese Taipei's paper on SDoC which reflected  Canada's view that SDoC could be a useful
instrument.  However, its effectiveness and appropriateness depended on the specific circumstances
(i.e. the sector and the regulatory/technical enviro nment involved).  He suggested to have further
discussions on this issue.  He echoed the concerns expressed by other Members on the decisions andrecommendations of the Committee as raised in the EC paper, and believed that the Committee should
focus on the compliance of the Agreement rather than the expansion of its scope.
141. The representative of the ISO in response to the questions raised by the EC on the ongoing
work of the ISO and IEC on terminology and on conf ormity assessment, drew attention to documents
G/TBT/W/72/Rev.4 and G/TBT/W/ 73/Add.1 which provided an update on a list of relevant
international standards and guides related to conformity assessment procedures as well as on the work
of the ISO/CASCO.  He informed the Committee that ISO 17000 was expected to be issued as a draftinternational standard in the near future.  Once it was adopted, a revision of Guide 2 would take place.
142. The Chairperson noted the convergence of views on certain issues.  She realized that there
would be opportunities for further discussions on these and on other issues.  It was too early to
summarize the elements to be included in the Third Triennial Review.  She identified a number of
issues which had been frequently raised by Members (e.g. conformity assessment procedures, MRAs,accreditation, SDoC, GRP, transparency and notification procedures, technical assistance and special
and differential treatment, developing countries' concerns, labelling, participation in the process of
international standardization, measurement as well as terms and definitions under the Agreement).
She invited further input from Members.
143. The Committee took note of the statements made.
VIII.  UPDATING BY OBSERVERS
144. The representative of ALADI recalled that under the 1980 Montevideo Treaty, the
ALADI member States had signed a Framework Ag reement (FA) for trade promotion through theG/TBT/M/29
Page 25
elimination of technical barriers to trade.  This FA became a regional agreement in August 2001.  Its
purpose was to avoid unnecessary barriers in inter-regional trade when preparing, adopting and
applying technical regulations, standards and conformity assessment procedures.  Accordingly, the
FA signatories in their regulatory activities should  consider not only the work that had been done in
the region, but also the existing international standards.  As a means to contributing to increase traderelations in the region, particular attention should also be given to the avoidance of unnecessary
obstacles to trade.  With regard to conformity assessment procedures, the FA signatories should
promote and strengthen such systems through mutual recognition and should use the relevant
international standards, guides and recommendations .  Chapter 6 of the FA referred to technical
assistance(TA), and was intended to ensure that its signatories could reach the conditions in order to
comply with and benefit from its provisions.  TA was provided among signatories according to agreed
modalities and conditions, in certain cases, in cooperation with international and regional bodies.Special consideration was given to the least developed countries in the region to assist the expansion
and diversification of their exports.  With a view to enhance transparency and harmonization, an
integrate information system on proposed technical regulations, standards and conformity assessment
procedures was developed (with the contributions from FA signatories, the ALADI Secretariat, the
Pan American Commission for Technical Standards (COPAN) and other regional entitities).  Thesystem could be used to exchange comments on drafts and to respond to requests.
145. The ALADI Secretariat, as part of its programme, had undertaken actions to assist
FA signatories to implement their commitments.  A document on the structure of conformity
assessment systems in the region had been prepared, which called for the horizontal cooperation
among ALADI member States.  Another current activity was to identify the technical regulations,standards and conformity assessment procedures applied by its member States with the objectives to
provide information to stakeholders on possible technical trade barriers and to facilitate market access
in the region. This initiative would require the input from the respective bodies in member States.
The Administrative Commission of the FA was in charge of the programming of regional actions,
coordinating technical assistance, disseminating information, promoting joint positions ininternational fora.  The Secretariat of ALADI (also acted as Secretariat of the Commission) had
submitted a proposal to improve the functioning of the organization (e.g. on participation, observers
and coordination with other relevant bodies to avoid duplication of work).
146. The Committee took note of the statement.
IX. ELECTION OF OFFICER
147. Pursuant to Article 13.1 of the TBT Agreement, the Committee elected Mr. Juan Antonio
Dorantes Sánchez as the Chairperson of the Committee for the year 2003-2004.
148. The Chairperson thanked Members for his election, and referred to the Third Triennial
Review as an important task in front of the Committee.  He informed delegations that the next
Committee meeting would be held on 1-2 July 2003.G/TBT/M/29
Page 26
ANNEX A
SPECIAL WORKSHOP ON TBT-RELATED TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
SUMMARY REPORT OF THE CHAIRPERSON
Emily Earl (New Zealand)
1. Following the Special Workshop, the moderators, under their own responsibilities, have
summed up the presentations and discussions of the five sessions (see Annexes).  I would briefly
summarize my view on some of the main points emerging from the discussion at the Workshop based
on the moderators' reports.
2. The first three sessions of the Workshop provided a valuable opportunity for exchange of
information and ideas on the specific technical assistance needs identified and prioritized by
developing countries, as well as the existing technical assistance activities, and the types and roles of
technical assistance stakeholders.  This provided a valuable background for the participants to move
forward to the discussions under sessions four and five to focus on seeking solutions.  Suggestions
were made on future strategies to improve the delivery of TBT technical assistance, and participantswere invited to reflect on the appropriate role of  the Committee with respect to the issues raised, in
light of its mandate from the Second Triennial Review as well as in the context of the Third Triennial
Review.
3. The responses from developing country Members to the questionnaire on needs identification
and prioritization provided a good base for the discussions of the Workshop.  The discussions helped
to further identify the trends and commonalties in  needs identified by Members, while recognizing
that particular solutions would be very much country-specific, as there were large differences among
developing country Members in their respective capacities and circumstances.  The exchange of
national experiences was identified as a useful way of acquiring knowledge from more experiencedMembers.
4. During the Workshop, a strong emphasis was placed on the importance of raising the
awareness and the political profile of TBT issues for the implementation of the Agreement and the
resulting-benefits, as well as for the request and provision of TBT-related technical assistance.
5. The need for co-ordination at the national, regional and multilateral levels, as well as among
different donors and between donors and recipients was also highlighted.  This need arose in part due
to the complexity of the Agreement itself, but also  to the large number of players involved in the
implementation of the Agreement and its related technical assistance.  For the effective coordination
between donors and recipients as well as among donors, the importance of transparency  in technical
assistance delivery and demand was underlined.  A number of suggestions in this regard were made,although difficulties in desegregating donor data to an appropriate level in some instances were noted.
6. The designing of technical assistance programmes could benefit from the proper identification
of needs undertaken in consultation, preferably with all relevant stakeholders.  A structured/sequenced
approach to implementing them could also inco rporate elements of raising awareness, improved
coordination, better transparency and flow of information, as well as consideration of differing
priorities among developing countries.  In this context, it was noted that a one-size-fits-all approach
might not necessarily work, although certain common elements of effective assistance could be
identified.
7. It was noted that ensuring the sustainability of technical assistance and its results was a key
element in technical assistance activities.  It was recognized that further reflections on this would be
useful.  Obtaining feedback on, and assessment of, technical assistance so as to allow continual
improvement and adjustments to meet the outstanding needs and priorities could be one important
element in this regard.G/TBT/M/29
Page 27
Annex 1
SESSION ONE
RESPONSES TO THE "SURVEY TO ASSIST DEVELOPING COUNTRY MEMBERS TO
IDENTIFY AND PRIORITIZE THEIR NEEDS IN THE TBT FIELD"
Moderator:  Tobias Nussbaum (Canada)
1. This Session dealt with the specific problems id entified and prioritized in the responses to the
survey by developing countries (JOB(02)/99 and A dd.1-52) concerning the implementation of and the
benefiting from the TBT Agreement.  It consisted of four presentations describing nationalexperiences with challenges in implementing the TB T Agreement, a summary by the Secretariat of its
analysis of the survey results, and discussion among participants.  Although the presentations were
only an indication of the larger sample received through the survey results, many of the same issues
were raised, and there was considerable breadth in the types of problems identified.  It was noted that
despite the fact that many of the needs identified we re similar, their particular solutions would be very
much country-specific, as there were large differences among developing countries in their respective
capacities and circumstances.
2. In identifying needs and priorities, there was a strong emphasis placed during the session on
the importance of awareness raising, both with rega rd to the obligations in the TBT Agreement, and
more broadly, the use and benefit of the Agreement, with domestic interests.  It was noted that effortsto increase awareness for the TBT agreement could usefully be focussed on all parts of government as
well as industry, decision-makers with responsibility for national budgets, and the public at large.
Some participants emphasized that in some cases pr iority was not given to TBT issues at government
level.  It was highlighted that top policy makers should be made convinced of the role and importance
of the TBT Agreement, so that resources could be better allocated.  The lack of awareness among thedifferent stakeholders hindered the capacity to provide meaningful comments to technical regulations,
standards and conformity assessment of other countrie s, due to little feedback coming from the local
industry.  The lack of awareness of the importance in participating in standards-setting activities was
also an element of concern to some participants.
3. It was recognized that the implementation of the TBT Agreement involved many different
institutions and competencies, both at public and private level
.  The need for better coherence within
the domestic context was also stressed by a number of participants. In particular, ensuring better
coordination and communication among all relevant go vernmental ministries and agencies with a role
to play in implementation of the TBT Agreement wa s seen as critical.  Developed countries, too,
acknowledged that coherence within government was a major challenge of implementation.
4. It was noted that in some cases there was a need to adopt or enforce legal infrastructure to
ensure the implementation of the Agreement, as well as the need to create a mechanism for the
preparation of technical regulations and standards.  The implementation of the transparency
provisions of the TBT Agreement (to fulfil notification obligations, disseminate information) was also
seen as one of the key needs by a number of participants.
5. Capacity building and better infrastructure was another theme frequently raised in the session.
Points mentioned were the need for assistance in the establishment/upgrading of national enquiry
points, of national standards bodies, as well as in the setting up or upgrading of facilities for
conformity assessment (laboratories, testing facilities, trained auditors, metrology services).  The need
to assist in identifying the basic infrastructure ne eded by developing countries, in particular small
economies, was also highlighted.  It was noted that the needs are often significant and reflect the
complex reach of the TBT agreement into a wide range of government activity.G/TBT/M/29
Page 28
6. Due to different situations and interests in countries within the same region, regional
coordination was identified as difficult. The lack of both financial and human resources to participate
in TBT Committee sessions, and other meetings of other relevant international organizations was seen
as a critical problem for developing countries.
7. The difficulty in complying with other Members' technical regulations or conformity
assessment procedures, due to their complexity and sometimes to language problems, was also seen as
an area of concern to developing countries, as well as the difficulty in establishing a national quality
strategy.
8. Some contributions from the floor proposed ideas for addressing problems identified, such as
the creation of an expert group to bring the responses to the questionnaire under one "roof" to enable aproper understanding and to facilitate the implementation of the Agreement, as well as structures to
increase coherence among donors.  These proposals were taken up in the fourth session on future
strategies.  It was considered that technical assistance was as a "win-win" activity, beneficial to both
recipient countries and donors.
9. Participants welcomed the Secretariat's analysis of the survey results, which was seen as a
most useful document to carry forward the discussion of TBT-related technical assistance.  The
seven areas of needs identified in the Secretariat's background paper (to improve knowledge of the
TBT Agreement, to disseminate and raise awareness;  for the effective implementation of the
Agreement;  exchange of experiences among Members as well as bilateral contact and cooperation;national and regional co-ordination strategy;  infrastr ucture and capacity building;  participation in the
work of the TBT Committee and of other organizations;  market access and others) reflected the
interests and priorities identified during the session.G/TBT/M/29
Page 29
Annex 2
SESSION TWO
EXISTING TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE ACTIVITIES
Moderator:  Juan Antonio Dorantes (Mexico)
1. This session dealt with the lessons learned by developing country Members from existing
technical assistance activities.  The goal of this session was to identify areas where there was room for
improvement.  Four presentations were delivered describing national experiences of technicalassistance activities received.  Two principal areas of concern were identified, relating to
(i) transparency of technical assistance activities, and (ii) technical assistance follow-up.
2. On the first issue, participants highlighted th e need for increased transparency both in the
supply and in the operation of technical assistance activities.  It was stressed that the different levels at
which TBT-related technical assistance was provided - bilateral, regional, and multilateral - led toconsiderable coordination problems among donors.  Nevertheless, donors were encouraged to increase
their cooperation efforts in order to avoid duplication and make the most efficient use of technical
assistance resources.  In order to identify relevant providers of technical assistance and to enhance
coordination, it was suggested to improve the exchange of information on national experiences among
Members and to find additional ways of bringing together suppliers and seekers of technicalassistance.  In this context, the particularly valuable experience of donors that had previously been
recipients of technical assistance was emphasized.
3. As to the operation of technical assistance activities, increased transparency was deemed
particularly important in the process of determining needs and priorities of developing country
Members. It was stressed that technical assistance did not always address key areas of interest todeveloping countries.  Moreover, needs identification for technical assistance was seen as an evolving
process that required regular updating.  As a general guideline, it was indicated that technical
assistance activities should follow a step-by-step approach, focusing first on the provision of
knowledge and skills, and, in a second step, on the development of TBT-related infrastructure.  Often,
despite progress in the first area, technical assistance was not forthcoming for the second step and
generally remained insufficient.  In each technical assistance activity, the selection and preparation of
participants were considered critical to ensure proper application and dissemination of the knowledgegained.  Furthermore, it was pointed out that regulators and the private sector should be direct
recipients of training activities.
4. Finally, it was emphasized that follow-up was essential to evaluate the overall performance of
technical assistance activities.  Three main points were raised.  First, technical assistance activities
had to be organized so as to allow for increased permeability and a wider spread of the acquiredknowledge, including through the use of modern  information technologies.  Second, continuity and
sustainability should be the leitmotiv of all technica l assistance activities.  It was stressed that longer
technical assistance programmes were more beneficial to developing countries and created longer
term effects.  Finally, participants noted the lack of monitoring of technical assistance activities and
the need to establish a set of criteria against which to measure the effectiveness of the technicalassistance provided.
5. In conclusion, it was recalled that the objectives of TBT-related technical assistance were
both to enable developing country Members to participate more effectively in, and benefit from, the
multilateral trading system and to allow Members to fully implement their obligations and use their
rights under the TBT Agreement.G/TBT/M/29
Page 30
Annex 3
SESSION THREE
PROVISION OF TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND CAPACITY BUILDING
Moderator:  Mr. Joshua Phoho Setipa (Lesotho)
1. This Session dealt with the provision of technical assistance and capacity building focusing in
particular on the following elements: (i) types and roles of technical assistance providers; (ii) types of
technical assistance recipients (iii) roles of government and the private sector; and (iv) providers' andrecipients' coordination and cooperation in the provision and utilization of technical assistance.
2. As regards the types and roles of technical assistance providers, reference was made to
ongoing programmes and the need to streamline these to reflect the needs identified by recipients in
order to make technical assistance efficient and effective.  Observer organizations also highlightedtheir programmes related to technical assistance.  Attention was also drawn to the issue of
transparency and enhanced awareness in the work of these organizations.
3. Attention was also drawn to the fact that TB T matters are often included in other programmes
that deal with trade-related issues in general.  In this regard, the importance of raising awareness andcoordinating these activities among donors was emphasized for the coherence and effectiveness of
their technical assistance programmes.  The importance of having an integrated approach was also
mentioned as a key element.
4. Recipients, for their part, recalled the various types of assistance received under bilateral,
regional and multilateral initiatives. The need to enhance information regarding all the possible areas
of assistance was mentioned, i.e. to create a data-base on the ongoing technical assistance.  A cross-
cutting issue that was highlighted as of critical  importance to the effectiveness of the technical
assistance programmes offered by providers was the need to ensure that it reflects the trade policy
priorities of the recipients, i.e. market access issues.
5. It was pointed out that it was important to ensure that technical assistance targets the right
stakeholders including SMEs and civil society.
6. In order to obtain providers' and recipients' coordination and cooperation, the TBT Committee
was mentioned as a forum that could provide an opportunity to coordinate and articulate technical
assistance.  The current technical assistance programme in the TBT Committee was also considered ashaving the potential to enhance transparency in the various activities currently undertaken by
providers and also in the technical assistance needs of developing country Members.
7. The main elements that were highlighted by the majority of participants included the need to
ensure transparency, awareness, consistency with national requirements and needs, and the overalllink between work being undertaken in the TBT field and current trade policy priorities.G/TBT/M/29
Page 31
Annex 4
SESSION FOUR
FUTURE STRATEGIES
Moderator: Ms. Yap Lai Peng (Malaysia)
1. The Fourth Session of the workshop focused on “Future Strategies” for technical assistance.
Issues raised in the first three sessions with re gard to the responses to the questionnaire survey on
technical assistance needs, the problems faced in implementing the TBT Agreement and the lessons
learned from existing technical assistance activities, provided the backdrop for participants to provide
suggestions and ideas to improve the delivery of TBT technical assistance.
2. First and foremost, the need for a structured approach  to the implementation of technical
assistance was underlined.  Technical assistance could benefit from proper identification of needs
undertaken in consultation, preferably with all relevant stakeholders.  A structured approach wouldalso incorporate elements of raising awareness, improved coordination, better transparency and flow
of information, as well as consideration of differing priorities among developing countries.  In this
context, it was noted that a one-size-fits-all approach might not necessarily work.
3. Awareness  of the importance of technical barriers to trade and of the TBT Agreement should
be promoted at both national and international levels.  Involvement of higher level policy-makers wasdeemed important for a proper formulation of effective technical assistance plans.  Providers would be
able to respond better if a country had a properly formulated plan with identifiable needs and
priorities.  At the international level, an increased awareness of donor governments and organizations
could lead to enhanced funding for TBT-related technical assistance activities.
4. Implementation  of the TBT Agreement was seen as an essential goal of technical assistance.
Exchange of experiences between Members was encouraged, through a new form of training, which
would allow Members to learn from the more experienced ones.
5. To improve transparency  and ensure targeted technical assistance delivery, a database
containing technical assistance needs, availability as well as funding information could be set up to
better match technical assistance demand and supply.  Other proposals for enhanced transparency
included a system of notifications by both the provider and the recipient.  Further, it was recognized
that coordination at the national, regional and multilateral levels was necessary to avoid duplicationand delivery gaps and to ensure that technical assistance was delivered effectively.
6. It was finally noted that sustainability  of technical assistance was key.  However, while
technical assistance programmes should not be one-off events, they should neither extend in
perpetuity.  To ensure sustainability, the govern ment’s responsibility to provide continuity and
maintain adequate human resources and effective institutions was highlighted.  In addition, it wasfound that the monitoring of technical assistance pr ogrammes would prove beneficial to ensure long-
lasting effects.G/TBT/M/29
Page 32
Annex 5
SESSION FIVE
CONCLUSION AND NEXT STEPS
Moderator:  Emily Earl (Chairperson)
1. This session attempted to draw together some of the issues expressed during the course of the
day and to consider some questions relating to the appropriate role of the Committee on technical
assistance in light of its mandate from the Second Triennial Review to develop a demand-driventechnical assistance programme.
2. A number of common themes from the discussions throughout the day were identified as
important in considering how the Committee could assist developing country Members to implement
the provisions of the TBT Agreement as well as as sist Members to implement the provisions relating
to technical assistance (e.g. Article 11).  The non-exhaustive list which did not intend to capture the
full range of the discussion, highlighted the importance of the following:
• raising the awareness and the political profile of the Agreement;
• specificity in needs identification and prioritisation, e.g. through the use of strategic planning or
structured and sequenced approaches;
• ensuring the mutual benefits of both recipients and donors in technical assistance activities;
• improving co-ordination at the national, regional and multilateral levels, as well as among
different donors and between donors and recipients etc.  This need arose in part due to the
complexity of the Agreement itself, but also to  the large number of players involved in the
implementation of the Agreement and its related technical assistance;
• ensuring the sustainability of technical assistance, both with respect to ongoing activities and their
results;
• obtaining feedback on, and assessment of, technical assistance so as to allow continual
improvement and adjustments to meet the outstanding needs and priorities.
3. A number of questions could be posed in front of the TBT Committee to facilitate its
consideration of its appropriate role in technical assistance, particularly, in the context of the Third
Triennial Review, given that the Committee could not be a technical assistance provider directly.
These questions could also assist it to consider some of the proposals made under Session Four of the
Workshop.  The non-exhaustive list of questions concerning the role of the Committee, if any,included:
• the role of the Committee with respect to the ongoing identification by developing countries of
their TBT-related needs and priorities;
• the role of the Committee to facilitate the exchange of national experiences;
• the role of the Committee to assist donors and recipients in developing effective, efficient and
sustainable technical assistance programmes;
• the role of the Committee to raise the profile of TBT issues in the WTO and at the national level;
• the role of the Committee to contribute to enha nced cooperation and co-ordination between those
involved in technical assistance;
• the role of the Committee in assisting recipients and donors in identifying each other as
prospective partners;
• the role of the Committee with respect to coordination with other organisations;  and
• the role of the Committee in providing a foru m for feedback and assessment of technical
assistance so as to contribute to improvements in this field.G/TBT/M/29
Page 33
4. It was noted, with respect to considering the role of the TBT Committee, that it was important
to keep in mind the on-going work of other organisations, so as to avoid duplication and to improve
co-ordination.  Caution was also expressed about the limited resources of the Committee when
considering its role in co-ordination, and a pragmatic approach should be followed.
__________