G/L/1413  
 
28 October  2021 
(21-8161) Page: 1/4 
   
 
 
REPORT (20 21) ON THE ACTIVITIES OF THE COMMITTEE ON  
SANITARY AND PHYTOSANITARY MEASURES  
1.1.  The present report is being circulated by the Chairperson of the Committee on Sanitary and 
Phytosanitary Measures (SPS Committee) on his own responsibility. This report provides a summary 
of the activities of the SPS Committee during 2021.1 
1.2.  The SPS Committee held its regular meetings in 2021: on 25 -26 March, and on 14 -16 July. 
Due to COVID -19 sanitary conditions, the meetings were held either in hybrid format, i.e. in -person 
participation and via the virtual platform Interprefy, or virtually only, allowing for participation from 
Geneva -based and capital -based delegates.2 At these meetings , held to date in 2021, the 
SPS Committee made use of th e online tool eAgenda , which allowed Members to submit agenda 
items, raise and support specific trade concerns (STCs), and upload statements on the platform. 
The next regular meeting of the SPS Committee is scheduled to be held on 3 -5 November.  
1.3.  Mr Gregory MacDonald (Canada) had been elected in July 2020  as Chairperson for 2020 -2021. 
Mr Juteau Déadjufo Toussé (Cameroon) was elected as the new Chairperson for 2021 -2022.  
1.4.  In 2021, Members continued discussion on an SPS Declaration for the 12th WTO Ministerial 
Conference , initially submitted by Brazil, Canada and the United States, and now co -sponsored by 
29 Members .3 The Declaration refers to the evolving global agricultura l landscape which has led to 
new opportunities and pressures for international trade in food, animals and plants. It proposes a 
work programme to address issues that are currently impacting agricultural trade, including 
population growth, climate change an d technological innovation , the importance of sustainable 
agriculture, new pests and diseases, and continued application of SPS measures as disguised trade 
restrictions. While overall Members welcomed this SPS Declaration, providing comments and 
expressing  willingness to engage in further discussions on the text, several Members expressed 
concerns with the Declaration in its present form, but remained open to discuss the context, 
language, content and appropriateness of the work programme. In particular, th ey called for more 
robust references in the Declaration to biodiversity and ecosystems, global transformation towards 
sustainable food systems and animal welfare, among others. They suggested that the 
SPS Committee and other committees investigate how the WTO could contribute to these policy 
objectives with a view to reporting to MC13.  
1.5.  The Working Group on Approval Procedures4 pursued its work in 2021 and provided updates 
on its activities at the SPS Committee meetings. The co -stewards, Canada and Paraguay , submitted 
a proposed approach regarding a common understanding of approval procedures – for the purposes 
of the Working Group and to facilitate its work – that remains under discussion. The participants 
also submitted information on existing tools and be st practices to enhance implementation of the 
obligations of the SPS Agreement as they relate to approval procedures. This collection, intended to 
 
1 A revised version of this report will be prepared after the November 2021 SPS Committee meeting to 
reflect the additional discussions and activities that will take place.  
2 At the SPS Committee meeting of March 2021, the Chairperson and three staff members attended 
in-person, and delegates were invited to join the meeting virtually. The SPS Committee me etings of July and 
November 2021 were conducted in hybrid format with delegates joining the meeting in -person or virtually . 
3 G/SPS/GEN/1758/Rev.7 . 
4 G/SPS/W/328/Rev.1 . The Working Group on Approval Procedures was established in November 2020. 
Twenty -five Members are  participating in the Worki ng Group: Argentina, Belize, Brazil, Canada, Chile, 
Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, the European Union, Japan, Mexico, New Zealand, Norway, Paraguay, Peru, 
the Philippines, the Russian Federation, Singapore, South Africa, Switzerland, Chinese Taipei, Ukrain e, 
the United  Kingdom, the United States, and Uruguay. The OECD is also a participant.  G/L/1413  
 
- 2 - 
 
  facilitate the work of the Working Group, will continue to be discussed and updated as participants 
put forwa rd additional resources and best practices. Moreover, participants had initial discussions 
regarding key challenges of approval procedures that affect international trade, namely: (1) timing 
and undue delays; (2) transparency; (3) communication or informat ion exchange; (4) justification 
and discrimination of approval procedures; (5) harmonization with international standards; and 
(6) other challenges such as the COVID -19 pandemic.  
1.6.  The Secretariat presented a revised version of the Collection of Resources to  Facilitate 
Implementation of National SPS Coordination Mechanisms5, resulting from a recommendation of the 
Fifth Review. This revised version of the document incorporates additional resources , such as the 
annotated agenda for SPS  Committee meetings, as well as five new STDF resources. Members were 
invited to provide further comments and inputs.  
1.7.  Throughout the year, Members provided the SPS Committee with information regarding their 
status with respect to specific plant pests and animal diseases. This information that concerns the 
principle of regionalization is compiled in the Annual Report on the Implementation of Article 6, 
which the SPS Committee considered at its July meeting.6 At each meet ing, Members also provided 
information regarding changes in their SPS policies and situations.  
1.8.  The Committee also discussed SPS issues pertaining to the COVID -19 pandemic. 
The WTO Secretariat reported that there had been 109  SPS notifications and other com munications 
related to COVID -19 submitted by Members to date, and referred to its revised note entitled 
"Standards, regulations and COVID -19 — what actions taken by WTO m embers?" . Members and 
Observers also provided updates on COVID -19 and SPS issues in their respective areas. It was noted 
that there had been a positive uptake on the use of ePhyto and temporary acceptance of electronic 
copies. Concerns were expressed with regard to testing, inspection and other requirements for the 
importation of food products. Reference was also made to assessments of WHO, FAO and other 
bodies which did not find evidence that food could be a source of COVID -19. 
1.9.  The SPS Committee considered a wide range of STCs. Members raised 20 new STCs at the 
March and July SPS Committee meetings in 2021. These included, among others: regulation on 
plastic materials coming into contact with food; pesticide policies and maximum residue levels 
(MRLs); and import restrictions on meat, dairy and poultry products. Many previously raised STCs 
continued to be discussed during 2021. Members intervened on issues such as measures regarding 
pesticides (including legislation on endocrine disruptors); restric tions on animal products, many due 
to animal diseases including avian influenza and African swine fever  (ASF)  (several different STCs); 
phytosanitary restrictions on fresh fruits; and restrictions on bovine meat products and fish products.  
1.10.   The Secretariat also issued, prior to the SPS Committee's November meeting, the 
Annual  Report on the Use of the Procedure to Encourage and Facilitate the Resolution of Specific 
SPS Issues (to date, never used).7 
1.11.   The SPS Committee maintained its close working relationship  with Codex, the IPPC, and 
the OIE (often referred to as the "Three Sister" organizations) and received regular updates on their 
activities. Other observer organizations also provided information on their activities. There were no 
new requests for observer  status in the SPS Committee in 2021.  
1.12.   The SPS Committee also considered in its July 2021 meeting , the Annual Report on the 
Procedure to Monitor the Process of International Harmonization.8 To date, no new issues have been 
raised under this procedure in 20 21. Members continued to discuss two issues that had been raised 
in previous years related to Members' implementation of OIE standards on ASF and on highly 
pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI).  
1.13.   The SPS Committee considered the Annual Overview on Transparency9 and the Annual Report 
on Specific Trade Concerns10, issued together for the first time at the March 2021 SPS Committee 
 
5 G/SPS/GEN/1850/Rev.1 . 
6 G/SPS/GEN/1908 . 
7 G/SPS/GEN/1954 . 
8 G/SPS/GEN/1909 . 
9 G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.13  and G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.13/Corr.1 . 
10 G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.21  and G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.21/Corr.1 . G/L/1413  
 
- 3 - 
 
  meeting. Both reports covered the same reporting period, which facilitated analysis and 
comparisons.  
1.14.   The SPS Committee continued to org anize dedicated activities to exchange experiences and 
hear from experts. A virtual Thematic Session on African Swine Fever (ASF) was held on the margins 
of the Ma rch 2021 SPS Committee meeting, based on a proposal submitted by the European Union.11 
The event was comprised of four main sessions: (i) the main principles of the SPS Agreement 
relevant to the topic and the work of the SPS Committee; (ii) an overview of the international 
standards relevant to the disease and the epidemiological situation worldwide; (iii)  national 
experiences; and (iv) international and regional initiatives in the context of ASF.12 The thematic 
session provided information and helped to ra ise awareness on the disease . The role of 
regionalization, adapting to regional conditions, regional cooperation, and global research 
partnerships to ensure safe trade and prevent the spread of ASF were  also highlighted.  
1.15.   A two -day Workshop on Risk Assessment, Risk Management, and Risk Communication  was 
held on 12  and 13 July 202113, on the margins of the July 2021 SPS Committee meeting, based on 
a proposal submitted by Canada in the context of the Fifth Review.14 The workshop was held via 
Zoom and had close to 1,300 registered participants. There were speakers from the public sector 
(from  Africa, the Americas, Asia, Europe, and Oceania), private sector, acad emia, international 
standard -setting bodies (ISSBs), and other international organizations. The workshop highlighted 
the importance of a functional separation between risk assessment, based on science, and 
risk management decisions taken by regulators to m itigate the risks. Risk  communication 
throughout this process was also underscored as essential to ensure clear, efficient, and effective 
information flow among stakeholders, which include government agencies, private sector, and 
consumer groups. The impor tance of stakeholder engagement, forming trust, working transparently, 
and developing confidence in regulatory decisions were at the heart of many of the interventions.  
1.16.   At the informal meetings of March and July 2021, Members discussed and provided comment s 
on proposal s by New Zealand15 outlining specific initiatives to improve the monitoring process of 
international harmonization , including: (i) organizing a thematic session on international 
harmonization; (ii) reviewing the format and content of the notif ication template; (iii) Members' 
voluntary statements to the Committee on the use of ISSB standards; and (iv) statements 
from ISSBs on their initiatives related to monitoring the use of standards and related texts. Members 
indicated their willingness to co ntinue  discussions on the topic. The three ISSBs highlighted the 
timely and complementary nature of the proposal to work being undertaken in their respective 
bodies. Members decided to hold the Thematic Session on the Procedure to Monitor the Process of 
International Harmonization  during the week of the November 2021 SPS Committee meeting16 with 
a view to exchange views and review progress on international harmonization.  
1.17.   At each of i ts meetings, the SPS Committee was also kept informed of the work of the 
Standards and Trade Development Facility (STDF) by the STDF Secretariat17, and of SPS -related 
technical assistance activities, including the new SPS In -depth Virtual Course  which  was held from 
20 September to 8 October 2021.  
1.18.   Several virtual events were organized at the margin of the SPS Committee meetings in 2021. 
This included an information session on  the beta version of the WTO Trade Concerns Database ; 
a side event entitled "Promoting safe trade during the International Year of Plant Health" organized 
by the IPPC; a session entitled "Digital opportuniti es for sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) systems 
and the trade facilitation effects of SPS electronic certification" organized by the OECD; 
an  STDF Webinar, as part of WTO's Aid -for-Trade COVID -19 Stocktaking Event, entitled " Investing 
in safe trade systems to protect health and market access "; a side event organized by the 
United  States to present a new, onli ne SPS training resource18; and an STDF and World Bank 
Webinar titled " Systems approaches in food safety and plant health ". An upcomi ng STDF side event 
 
11 G/SPS/W /322. 
12 G/SPS/GE N/1874/Rev.2 . 
13 G/SPS/GEN/1911/Rev.2 . 
14 G/SPS/GEN/1769  and G/SPS/GEN/1769/Rev.1 . 
15 G/SPS /GEN/1851 , G/SPS/GEN/1877 , and G/SPS/GEN/1915 . 
16 G/SPS/GEN/1950/Rev.1 . 
17 G/SPS/GEN/1881  and G/SPS/GEN/1925 . 
18 G/SPS/GEN/1914 . G/L/1413  
 
- 4 - 
 
  to launch a new guide on good regulatory practices to improve SPS measures  is scheduled to be 
held on the margin of the November SPS Committee meeting.  
1.19.   The SPS Committee tentatively agreed to hold regular meetings on 2 3-25 March, 2 2-24 June, 
and 9-11 November 2022.19 In 2022, the SPS Committee may hold Thematic Sessions on 
Trade  Facilitative Approaches to Pesticide MRLs20; the Use o f Remote (Virtual) Audit and Verification 
in Regulatory Frameworks21; and International Standards and Best Practices in Pest Risk 
Identification, Assessment and Management.22 
__________  
 
19 G/SPS/GEN/1910 . 
20 G/SPS/GEN/1947 . 
21 G/SPS/GEN/ 1949/Rev.1 . 
22 G/SPS/GEN/1951 /Rev.1 .