WORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONG/TBT/W/176
18 June 2002
(02-3394)
Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade Original:  English
LABELLING
Submission from Japan
I. BACKGROUND
1. During the Second Triennial Review of the Operation and the Implementation of the
TBT Agreement in 2000, some Members raised concerns that the provisions on labelling of the
TBT Agreement were not clear enough while the importance of labelling in international trade was
increasing.  In response to such concerns, in the follow-up discussions on the Triennial Review in the
TBT Committee meetings, some Members argued that  as the labelling requirements are included in
the definitions of technical regulation, standard, and conformity assessment procedures under the
TBT Agreement, they are already effectively ruled by the existing provisions in the Agreement, and
therefore there was no need for clarification, which could lead to the allowance of a disguised
restriction on international trade.
2. In the last TBT Committee meeting in March 2002, Members, taking into account of a
Canadian paper on labelling (G/TBT/W/174), shared a view that it is worthwhile to deepen the
discussion on the issues of labelling in relation to international trade by utilizing  occasions such as
informal meetings of the TBT Committee, while pu tting aside the issue whether it is necessary to
clarify the provisions or not.
3. Japan has pointed out on several opportunities that it is important to deepen the discussion on
the issues of labelling in relation to international trade, based on facts, and welcomes the approach
shared by Members in the last meeting.
4. With a view to contributing to the deepening of the discussion on labelling in the
TBT Committee, Japan would like to express its current ideas on labelling, which was developed
through such means as surveys to industries in Japan.
II. LABELLING –CHARACTERISTICS AND ISSUES–
5. Labelling requirements are included in the definitions of technical regulation, standard, and
conformity assessment procedures under the TBT Agreement;  therefore they are covered by the
relevant provisions of the Agreement.
6. As a result of surveys to domestic industries, Japan has recognized some characteristics of
labelling.  This could be partially attributed to the fact that the bodies developing labelling
requirements are not the same with those developing usual standards/technical regulations.  In otherwords, there would be considerable number of cases in which the bodies developing labelling
requirements are not the standardizing bodies usually developing standards nor are governmental
bodies developing technical regulations, and they develop only labelling requirements.  As a result,
the following cases that are characteristic to labelling have been recognized:G/TBT/W/176
Page 2
B. LACK OF TRANSPARENCY
7. Japan notes that the lack of transparency in the developing process of labelling requirements
creates unnecessary obstacles to trade in some cases.  When the bodies developing labelling
requirements are not the standardizing bodies that have already accepted the Code of Good Practice(CGP) for the preparation, adoption and applicati on of standards contained in Annex 3 to the
TBT Agreement, nor are governmental bodies, there arise some cases in which labelling requirements
are not prepared based on the provisions on transparency of the Agreement.  It means that their
procedures do not conform to the provisions of th e Article 2 of the Agreement, which are applied in
developing technical regulations, nor have they accepted the CGP as standardizing bodies that
prepare, adopt and apply standards.  In order to im prove the transparency in the developing process of
labelling requirements, Japan would like to encourage that those bodies developing labellingrequirements accept the CGP.
C. L
ACK OF INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS AND DUPLICATION OF LABELLING REQUIREMENTS
8. Japan notes that the lack of relevant international standards leads to the existence of several
labelling requirements among Member countries/regions in the same fields, and it creates unnecessary
obstacles to trade in some cases.  This could also be attributed to the fact that the bodies developinglabelling requirements are not always the standardizing bodies that have accepted the CGP, as well as
to the lack of international standardizing process and international standards in this field.  As a mean
to solve this, Japan would like to encourage international standardization on labelling, in cooperation
with the existing international standardizing process.
D. L
ABELING REQUIREMENTS BASED ON DESCRIPTIVE CHARACTERISTICS (LACK OF
PERFORMANCE -BASED LABELLING REQUIREMENTS )
9. Article 2.8 of and Paragraph I of Annex 3 to  the TBT Agreement provide provisions for
performance-based standards, where appropriate, and each Member promotes to adopt performance-
based regulations and standards based on these provisions.  As for labelling, on the other hand, Japan
notes that labelling requirements are sometimes not based on performance as recommended by theAgreement but on descriptive characteristics, when the bodies developing labelling requirements are
not governmental bodies or standardizing bodies that are familiar with the area of standards and
conformance as well as the TBT Agreement.  As a mean to solve this, Japan would like to point out
the need for promoting the implementation of perf ormance-based labelling requirements, as in the
Agreement.
10. Furthermore, Japan recognizes that there are some other major issues concerning labelling,
such as the issue of the relationship between non-product related process and production methodlabelling and the TBT Agreement.
III. CONCLUSIONS
11. As for labelling, the issues related to international trade would be basically the same with
those for usual technical regulation, standard, and conformity assessment procedures.  Japan,
however, has noted some cases in which the provisions of the TBT Agreement are not fullyimplemented, since labelling requirements are not prepared by standardizing bodies or governmental
bodies that are familiar with the area of standards and conformance as well as the TBT Agreement.
More specifically, we would like to give cases such as: (a) lack of transparency in the developing
process of labelling requirements, (b) lack of international standards as well as duplication of labelling
requirements, and (c) lack of performance-based labelling requirements.  In order to cope with theseissues, Japan would like to encourage the implementation of the provisions of the TBT Agreement,G/TBT/W/176
Page 3
such as acceptance of the CGP by the bodies developing labelling requirements, promotion of
international standardization on labelling, and adoption of performance-based labelling requirements.
Furthermore, with a view to solving these issues es pecially those raised from a lack of international
standards and a lack of transparency, an effective cooperation between the bodies developing
labelling requirements and the existing international standardizing process as well as domesticstandardization bodies that have accepted the CGP would be expected.
12. Japan would like to deepen discussion on labelling including the issues mentioned in the
Section II above in the TBT Committee from a viewpoint that labelling does not create unnecessary
obstacles to international trade.
__________