WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  G/SPS/19/Rev.2 
23 July 2004 
 (04-3180) 
Committee on Sanitary a nd Phytosanitary Measures  
  
 
  
DECISION ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF ARTICLE 4  
OF THE AGREEMENT ON THE APPLICATION OF SANITARY  
AND PHYTOSANITARY MEASURES 
 
Revision
1 
 
 The Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures,  Having regard to paragraph 1 of Article 12 of the Agre ement on the Application of Sanitary and 
Phytosanitary Measures;   
In response to the request from the General Council that  the Committee examine the concerns of 
developing country Members regarding the equiva lence of sanitary or phytosanitary measures and 
develop concrete options as to  how to deal with them; 
Reaffirming  the right of Members to establish sanitary and phytosanitary measures necessary to 
ensure the protection of human, animal and plant lif e or health and the protection of their territory 
from other damage caused by the entry, establishmen t or spread of pests,  in accordance with the 
Agreement on the Application of San itary and Phytosanitary Measures; 
Desiring  to make operational the provisions of Artic le 4 of the Agreement on the Application of 
Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures; 
Noting  that equivalence of sanitary or phytosanitary measures does not require duplication or 
sameness of measures, but the acceptance of alte rnative measures that meet an importing Member's 
appropriate level of sanitary or phytosanitary protection; 
Recognizing  that equivalence can be applied between all Members, irrespective of their level of 
development; 
Noting  that Members have faced difficulties applyi ng the provisions of Article 4 recognizing the 
equivalence of sanitary and phytosanitary measures; 
Taking into account  the specific concerns raised by developing country Members, and particularly the 
least developed among them, regarding their difficulti es in having the equivalence of their sanitary or 
phytosanitary measures accepted by importing Members; 
                                                     
 
1 This revision provides updated information with respect to actions taken pursuant to the Decision as 
adopted on 26 October 2001.  This information is provided in footnotes to the relevant provisions in the 
Decision. G/SPS/19/Rev.2 
Page 2  
 
 Recognizing  the importance of minimizing possible negative effects of sanitary or phytosanitary 
measures on trade and of improving market access opportun ities, particularly for products of interest 
to developing country Members; 
Recognizing  that transparency, exchange of inform ation and confidence-building by both the 
importing and exporting Member are essential to achieving an agreement on equivalence;  
Recognizing  that there may be other less resource-intensive and time-consuming means for Members 
to enhance trade opportunities; 
Decides as follows: 
1. Equivalence can be accepted for a specific measure or measures related to a certain product or 
categories of products, or on a systems-wide basis.  Members shall, when so  requested, seek to accept 
the equivalence of a measure related to a certain product or category of produc ts. An evaluation of the 
product-related infrastructure and pr ogrammes within which the measure is being applied may also be 
necessary.
2  Members may further, where necessary and appropriate, seek more comprehensive and 
broad-ranging agreements on equivalence.  The accep tance of the equivalence of a measure related to 
a single product may not require the developmen t of a systems-wide equivalence agreement. 
2. In the context of facilitating the implementati on of Article 4, on request of the exporting 
Member, the importing Member should explain the objective and rationale of the sanitary or 
phytosanitary measure and identify clearly the risks th at the relevant measure is intended to address.  
The importing Member should indicate the appropriate  level of protection which its sanitary or 
phytosanitary measure is designed to achieve.3  The explanation should be accompanied by a copy of 
the risk assessment on which the sanitary or phytosanita ry measure is based or a technical justification 
based on a relevant international standard, guide line or recommendation.  The importing Member 
should also provide any additional information whic h may assist the exporting Member to provide an 
objective demonstration of the e quivalence of its own measure.  
3. An importing Member shall respond in a timely manner to any request from an exporting 
Member for consideration of the equivalence of it s measures, normally within a six-month period of 
time. 
4. The exporting Member shall provide appropriate  science-based and technical information to 
support its objective demonstration that its meas ure achieves the appropriate level of protection 
identified by the importing Member.  This information may include, inter alia , reference to relevant 
international standards, or to relevant risk asse ssments undertaken by the importing Member or by 
another Member.  In addition, the exporting Member  shall provide reasonable access, upon request, to 
the importing Member for inspection, testing and other relevant procedures for the recognition of 
equivalence. 
5. The importing Member should accelerate its proce dure for determining equivalence in respect 
of those products which it has historically imported from the exporting Member. 
The Committee agrees that historic trad e provides an opportunity for an importing 
Member to become familiar with the in frastructure and meas ures of an exporting 
                                                      
2 Product-related infrastructure and programmes is in reference to testing, inspection and other relevant 
requirements specific to product safety. 
3 In doing so, Members should take into account the Guidelines to Further the Practical 
Implementation of Article 5.5  adopted by the Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures at its meeting 
of 21-22 June 2000 (document G/SPS/15, dated 18 July 2000).  G/SPS/19/Rev.2 
 Page 3 
 
 
 Member, and to develop confidence in the re gulatory procedures of that Member.  
This information and experience, if directly relevant to the product and measure under consideration, should be taken into account in the recognition of equivalence 
of measures proposed by the exporting Memb er.  In particular, information already 
available to the importing Member should not be sought again with respect to 
procedures to determine the equivalen ce of measures proposed by the exporting 
Member. 
An importing Member should consider the rel evant information and experience that 
the sanitary and phytosanitary services ha ve on the measure(s) for which recognition 
of equivalence is requested as applied to the product for which that request relates. 
This information and experience refers to: 
 (i) The historic knowledge and confidence that the competent authority 
of the importing Member has of the competent authority of the exporting Member. 
 (ii) The existence of an evaluation and recognition of the products-
related system of inspection and certific ation of the exporting Member by the 
importing Member. 
 (iii) The available scientific inform ation supporting the request for the 
recognition of equivalence. 
The more such relevant information and exp erience is available to the importing 
Member, the more rapid should be the pro cedure for recognition of equivalence by 
that Member. 
A Member should consider the existence of information between competent 
authorities related to sanitary and phytos anitary measures of other products 
(different from the one for which equivalence is requested) when this information is 
useful. 
A Member should consider the risk of the product to which the sanitary and 
phytosanitary measures are applied, in or der to reduce requirements and accelerate 
the procedure in cases of low risk. 
The importing Member should not seek again information already available with 
respect to the determination of the equivalence of sanitary and phytosanitary measures proposed by the exporting Member,  unless this information needs to be 
updated. 
For accelerated procedures, the importing Me mber should estimate the steps that the 
demonstration of equivalence will require, and inform the exporting Member, when it 
is possible, of an estimated time schedule for the whole process.  These steps should 
be considered between the exporting and im porting Members, on an issue-by-issue 
basis, in order to give predictability to th e process of determination of equivalence. 
When more than one agency is involved, th e relevant requirements of all of these 
agencies must be taken into account and included in the steps and timetable identified 
above.  G/SPS/19/Rev.2 
Page 4  
 
 The Committee notes that the importance of this knowledge based on historic trade 
has been fully recognized in the dra ft FAO/WHO Joint Codex Alimentarius 
Commission Guidelines on the Judgement of  Equivalence of Sanitary Measures 
Associated with Food Inspec tion and Certification Systems.
4  The Committee further 
notes that the importance of such prior experience is also rec ognized in the draft 
paper of the World Organization for Animal Health (OIE) on the Judgement of 
Equivalence of Sanitary Measures relating to International Trade in Animals and 
Animal Products.5  The Committee encourages that further elaboration of specific 
guidance by these organizations should ensure that such recognition is maintained.   
The Committee draws the attention of the Interim Commission on Phytosanitary 
Measures (ICPM) to the Decision on E quivalence (G/SPS/19), and to the above 
clarification with respect to Paragraph 5 of the Decision.  The Committee requests that the ICPM take into consideration the D ecision and this clarification in its future 
work on judgement of equivalence with re gard to sanitary measures to address plant 
pests and diseases.
6 
6. The consideration by an importing Member of a request by an exporting Member for 
recognition of the equivalence of its measures with re gard to a specific product shall not be in itself a 
reason to disrupt or suspend on-going imports from that Member of the product in question. 
The Committee agrees that since a request for recognition of equivalence does not in 
itself alter the way in which trade is occu rring, there is no justification for disruption 
or suspension of trade.  If an importin g Member were to disrupt or suspend trade 
solely because it had received a request for an equivalence determination, it would be 
in apparent violation of its obligations under the SPS Agreement (e.g. under Article 2).  
At the same time, a request for recognition of equivalence does not impede the right 
of an importing Member to take any measure it may decide is necessary to achieve its 
appropriate level of protection, including in response to an emergency situation.  
However, if the decision to impose some add itional control measure were to coincide 
with consideration by the same Member of  a request for recognition of equivalence, 
this might lead an exporting Member whose trade  is affected to suspect that the two 
events were linked.  To avoid any misint erpretation of this kind, the Committee 
recommends that the importing Member should give an immediate and 
comprehensive explanation of the reasons for its action in restricting trade to any 
other Members affected, and that it shoul d also follow the normal or emergency 
notification procedures establis hed under the SPS Agreement.
 
The Committee notes that this issue has b een addressed also in the draft Codex 
Guidelines on the Judgement of Equivalen ce of Sanitary Measures Associated with 
Food Inspection and Certification Systems4, and should encourage the maintenance 
of such a provision in the further elaboration of specific guidance by the Codex.  The 
                                                      
4 The Codex Alimentarius Commission adopted the Guidelines for the Judgement of Equivalence of 
Sanitary Measures Associated with Food In spection and Certification Systems at its 26th Session held in Rome, 
Italy, from 30 June to 7 July 2003. 
5 The International Committee of the OIE adopted the Guidelines  for Reaching a Judgement on 
Equivalence of Sanitary Measures at its 71st General Session held in Paris, France, from 18 to 23 May 2003. 
6 The Interim Commission on Phytosanitary Measures (ICPM) noted the request of the SPS Committee 
at its 5th Session held in Rome, Italy, from 7 to 11 April 2003.  The ICPM agreed to include Equivalence and 
Efficacy of Measures, considered a pre-requisite to an  ISPM on Equivalence, as priorities in its work 
programme.  Work on these tw o issues is currently underway.    G/SPS/19/Rev.2 
 Page 5 
 
 
 Committee draws the attention of the Worl d Organization for Animal Health (OIE) 
and the Interim Commission on Phytos anitary Measures (ICPM) to the above 
clarification with respect to Paragraph 6 of the Decision on Equivalence, and 
requests that the OIE and the ICPM take this  clarification into consideration in their 
future work on equivalence with regard to  sanitary or phytosanitary measures. 5,6 
7. When considering a request for recognition of  equivalence, the importing Member should 
analyze the science-based and technical informati on provided by the exporting Member on its sanitary 
or phytosanitary measures with a view to determ ining whether these measures achieve the level of 
protection provided by its own relevant sanitary or phytosanitary measures. 
The Committee notes that conscientious impl ementation of the Guidelines to Further 
the Practical Implementation of Article 5.5 (G/SPS/15) will assist Members in 
determining equivalence.  
The Committee further notes that the relationship between the level of protection 
provided by the importing Member’s ow n measures and what it requires from 
imported products has been explicitly addressed  in the draft Codex Guidelines on the 
Judgement of Equivalence of Sanitary Meas ures Associated with Food Inspection and 
Certification Systems.4,7  The Committee notes that the OIE Guidelines for Reaching 
a Judgement of Equivalence of Sanitary Me asures also recognizes the importance of 
facilitating comparison of the exporting and  importing Members' measures.  The 
Committee agrees that Members should consid er the Codex approach of establishing 
an objective basis for comparison or the si milar OIE approach when determining the 
equivalence of sanitary measures.  
The Committee encourages the FAO/WHO C odex Alimentarius Commission and the 
World Organization for Animal Health to ensure that the recognition of the importance of facilitating comparison of the exporting and importing Members' 
measures is maintained in any elaboration of guidance by these organizations. 
The Committee requests that the Interi m Commission on Phytosanitary Measures 
(ICPM) take into consideration the Decision on Equivalence and this clarification in 
its future work on judgement of equivalen ce with regard to measures to address plant 
pests and diseases. 
The Committee agrees that where the objecti ve basis for comparison, or a similar 
approach established by a relevant internati onal organization, demonstrates that the 
level of protection achieved by the importing Member's sanitary or phytosanitary 
measure differs from its appropriate level  of protection, the importing Member 
should resolve this difference independently of the procedure for determination of 
equivalence.   
If the exporting Member demonstrates by wa y of an objective basis of comparison or 
similar approach established by a relevant  international organization that its 
measure has the same effect in achieving the objective as the importing Member's measure, the importing Member should recognize both measures as equivalent. 
                                                     
 
7 The Committee recognizes that the Codex Guidelines for the Development of Equivalence 
Agreements Regarding Food Import and Export Inspection and Certification Systems are also relevant in this 
regard. G/SPS/19/Rev.2 
Page 6  
 
 8. In accordance with Article 9 of the Agre ement on the Application of Sanitary and 
Phytosanitary Measures, a Member shall give full  consideration to requests by another Member, 
especially a developing country Member, for appr opriate technical assistance to facilitate the 
implementation of Article 4.  This assistance may, inter alia , be to help an exporting Member identify 
and implement measures which can be recognized as equivalent, or to otherwise enhance market 
access opportunities.  Such assistance ma y also be with regard to the development and provision of 
the appropriate science-based and technical info rmation referred to in paragraph 4, above.  
9. Members should actively participate in the ongoing work in the Codex Alimentarius 
Commission on the issue of equivalence, and in an y work related to equivalence undertaken by the 
World Organization for Animal Health and in the framework of the International Plant Protection 
Convention.  Bearing in mind the difficulties faced by developing country Members to participate in 
the work of these bodies, Members should consid er providing assistance to facilitate their 
participation. 
10. The Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures recognizes the urgency for the 
development of guidance on the judgement of equi valence and shall formally encourage the Codex 
Alimentarius Commission to complete its work with regard to equivalence as expeditiously as 
possible.
4  The Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures shall also formally encourage the 
World Organization for Animal Health and the Interim Commission on Phytosanitary Measures to 
elaborate guidelines, as appropriate, on equivale nce of sanitary and phytosanitary measures and 
equivalence agreements in the animal health and plant protection areas.5,6  The Codex Alimentarius 
Commission, the World Organization for Anim al Health and the Interim Commission on 
Phytosanitary Measures shall be invited to k eep the Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary 
Measures regularly informed regarding th eir activities relating to equivalence. 
11. The Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanita ry Measures shall revise its recommended 
notification procedures to provide for the notifi cation of the conclusion of agreements between 
Members which recognize the equivalence of sanitary and phytosanitary measures.8  Furthermore, the 
procedures shall reinforce the existing obligation in  paragraph 3(d) of Annex B of the Agreement on 
the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures for national Enquiry Points to provide 
information, upon request, on the participation in any bilateral or multilatera l equivalence agreements 
of the Member concerned. 
12. Members should regularly provide to the Co mmittee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures 
information on their experience regarding the impl ementation of Article 4 of the Agreement on the 
Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measur es.  In particular, Members are encouraged to 
inform the Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary  Measures of the successful conclusion of any 
bilateral equivalence agreement or arrangement.  The Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary 
Measures shall consider establishing a standing agenda item for its regular meetings for this purpose. 
13. The Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures shall develop a specific programme 
to further the implementation of Article 4, with pa rticular consideration of the problems encountered 
by developing country Members.9  In this respect, the Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary 
Measures shall review this decision in light of the relevant work undertaken by the Codex 
                                                      
8 G/SPS/7/Rev.2 and Rev.2/Add.1. 
9 In the light of this paragraph and the decision at the Fourth Ministerial Conference regarding 
implementation-related issues and concerns (WT/MIN(01)17, paragraph 3.3), the SPS Committee adopted a 
programme for further work on equivalence at its meeting of 19-21 March 2002 (G/SPS/20).  The Committee completed this work programme in March 2004 but agreed that equivalence would be a standing agenda item 
for its regular meetings.   G/SPS/19/Rev.2 
 Page 7 
 
 
 Alimentarius Commission, the World Organization fo r Animal Health and the Interim Commission on 
Phytosanitary Measures, as well as the experience of Members.  
14. The Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary M easures requests that the General Council  
take note of this decision. 
__________