WORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONG/SPS/GEN/214
8 November 2000
(00-4718)
Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures Original:  English/
Spanish
TECHNICAL COOPERATION:  AN OVERVIEW
Submission by the Inter-American Institute for Cooperation on Agriculture (IICA)
I. BACKGROUND
1. Most countries, lending institutions, and international cooperation agencies have traditionally
sought to strengthen sanitary and phytosanitary systems.  In addition, in order to foster comprehensive
development in the agri-food sector, food safety was recently included among their priorities.
2. Projects to modernize the Sanitary, Phytosanitary and Food Safety Systems (SPFSS),
however, have tended to be characterized by poor articulation among their elements, due to a lack of
assessments and to an imbalance in the atten tion given to the regulatory, technological and
institutional aspects. This has produced a fragmentation of the SPFSS and given rise to difficulties for
identifying and prioritizing their needs.
3. In a document describing its strategy for agri-food development in Latin America and the
Caribbean1, the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) acknowledges that during the past 15 years,
adjustments implemented in the different fields of development have produced uncertain results.  Itcan be deduced, then, that the results of investments made during this period to upgrade sanitary and
phytosanitary systems were also limited.
During the 1961-1998  period, the IDB disbursed a little more than US$16 billion  (constant) on
funding for agricultural projects.  Of this, only 3% was used for agricultural health projects,
revealing the little importance accorded by the countries to investment projects in this subject area.
4. Discussions on the subject of technical cooperation have taken place in the different forums
of the World Trade Organization (WTO) and other international organizations.  Representatives of
developed countries have expressed their concern over the low impact of the cooperation provided by
themselves and by cooperation agencies on the advancement of developing and less developed
countries.  In addition, and despite the large amount of funds and actions executed to date, developing
countries continue to call for more cooperation and for better implementation of the concept oftechnical cooperation.  This shows that cooperation actions have not fully adjusted to the new
functions of the SPFSS, nor have they always produced the expected impact or results.
                                                     
1 Echeverría, Rubén.  2000.  Estrategia para el desarrollo agroalimentario de América Latina y el
Caribe.  Policies and Strategies Series of the Department for Sustainable Development.  Inter-American
Development (IDB).G/SPS/GEN/214
Page 2
II. NEW STRATEGY NEEDED
5. To begin with, new strategies need to be implemented in order to maximize the use of
resources and change the traditional belief that isolated or relatively unplanned disease-control efforts,
investments in technology, or quarantine measures can modernize the SPFSS.
6. Efforts to strengthen the bases of the SPFSS will depend on the priorities of each country, but
public-private sector articulation  must be the first aspect addressed in any modernization process.
Such articulation can be understood as the existence of formal or informal mechanisms for inter-
sectoral communication that facilitate dialogue, analysis and the prioritization of needs among
different stakeholders.  This requires transparency, institutional commitment, organized structures
and/or permanent mechanisms for communication.
7. The first framework that should be strengthened is the institutional framework,  in order to
upgrade the country's official representation, the technical independence of its institutions, and the
processes that ensure the sustainability of sanitary and phytosanitary systems.
8. The second is the regulatory framework,  in order to harmonize national legislation with
international standards and to establish the rights and obligations of stakeholders.
9. Last, but not least, is the technological framework , which is the tool that will increase the
efficiency of the stakeholders and the processes identified earlier.
10. Table 1 lists the variables that make up the aforementioned frameworks and that must be
taken into account when establishing technical cooperation or investment programs to upgrade
SPFSS.  Many countries have made considerable progress in some of these areas; others have
significant gaps, indicating, in part, the need fo r more effective mechanisms for identifying and
prioritizing needs, and for conducting monitoring and evaluation.
Table 1:  Variables to be taken into account when implementing technical cooperation processes
Regulatory framework Institutional framework Technological framework
-  Laws
-  Standards
-  Regulations
relative to plant protection,
animal health, food safety and
the safety of agricultural inputs-  Responsiveness
-  Financial sustainability
-  Technical independence
-  Official representation
   (WTO, OIE, IPPC, CODEX)
-  Certification
-  Accreditation
-  Traceability
-  Technical sustainability
(education, training,   
compensation)
-  Research
-  Public communication-  Diagnostic capability
-  Surveillance
-  Quarantine
-  Risk analysis
-  Emerging issues
-  Regionalization
-  Information systems
-  Input records
-  Health campaigns
-  Risk factor campaigns
   (HACCP, GAP)
-  Emergency systems
Public-private sector articulation is necessary for achieving a balance and for fostering an
effective development of the different frameworks comprising the SPFSS.  It will determine the
degree of effectiveness and the speed at which necessary changes take place.G/SPS/GEN/214
Page 3
11. Like any other tool supporting SPFSS, technical cooperation must be an integral part of any
modernization model.  Once the stakeholders have defined the model, the technical cooperation they
request must take into account the stages of diagnosis, prioritization, implementation, monitoring and
evaluation.
III. CONCLUSIONS
12. Technical cooperation is a tool that can he lp countries modernize their SPFSS; it can also
upgrade the countries' capabilities to effectively implement the WTO Agreement on Sanitary and
Phytosanitary Measures. However, a change in methodology is necessary in this technical cooperation
to incorporate inter-sectoral articulation.
13. The private sector has probably been the stakeholder most overlooked in modernization
processes, despite the fact that most sanitary or phytosanitary rules are implemented in that sector.
Thus, mechanisms of articulation should ensure that the private sector participates actively in the
stages of diagnosis, identification, prioritiza tion and evaluation of technical cooperation.
14. Stakeholders in the SPFSS must become aware that the effectiveness of technical cooperation
does not lie in being granted longer periods for complying with sanitary or phytosanitary regulations,
and that financial resources are not a sufficient condition for effectively implementing said
cooperation.
15. As in the case of any other component of the agri-food system, sanitary systems respond more
efficiently to long-term planning policies.  Accordingly, a comprehensive modernization model must
be adopted, one that addresses animal health, plant protection and food safety, as well as the issues of
the institutional, regulatory and technological frameworks.
16. Actions to modernize SPFSS should be characterized by a balanced and gradual process of
implementation. In striving for balance, initial efforts should work to strengthen the frameworks
(regulatory, institutional or technological) that have the greatest need.  The process should be
implemented gradually so that efforts can adjust to the real availability of resources, both in
requesting countries and in countries offering the technical cooperation.
17. Human leadership and institutional strengthening are basic requirements for effectively
developing technical cooperation programs on agricu ltural health, plant protection and food safety.
They are, then, two fields that are opening up as new niches for cooperation in this area.
Inter-American Institute for Cooperation on Agriculture (IICA)
Agricultural Health and Food Safety
Headquarters
San Jose, Costa Rica
http://www.infoagro.net/salud
__________