G/SPS/GEN/1880  
 
2 March 2021 
(21-1789) Page: 1/2 
Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures  Original: English  
 
 
UPDATE ON OECD ACTIVITIES OF INTEREST TO THE SPS COMMITTEE  
COMMUNICATION FROM THE OECD  
The followi ng communication, received on 2 March 2021, is being circulated at the request of the 
OECD . 
_______________  
 
 
1  DIGITAL OPPORTUNITIES FOR SANITARY AND PHYTOSANITARY (SPS) SYSTEMS AND 
THE TRADE FACILITATION EFFECTS OF SPS ELECTRONIC CERTIFICATION  
1.1.  A recent OECD report describes current trends in the use of digital tools and examines the 
potential for digital technologies to c reate efficiencies in SPS systems and enhance agro -food trade. 
Structural gravity model estimates indicate positive effects on trade volumes from digital 
technologies such as SPS electronic certificates, notably for plant -based, vegetables and processed 
food products. The report also identifies the main challenges associated with expanding the use of 
digital technologies in agro -food trade, as well as the conditions required to address these 
challenges. In this sense, successfully expanding the use of digit al technologies requires careful 
planning and long -term investments. Targeted financial assistance and capacity building can provide 
support to countries currently lacking the capabilities to adopt these tools.  
− This report will be published as an OECD Food , Agriculture and Fisheries Paper in March -
April 2021.  
− This report will be presented during a Side Event to the SPS Committee Meeting on 26 March 
2021, from 14:00 -15:00.  
2  NON-TARIFF MEASURES IN AGRICULTURE  
2.1.  Sanitary and Phytosanitary (SPS) provisions and Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) generally 
raise trade costs, but by providing a positive signal to consumers that enhances confidence in 
imported products they can also expand trade. This paper seeks to identify which specific elements 
of SPS and TBT measures are particularly trade enhancing. It investigates the trade cost and trade 
enhancing effects of SPS and TBT measures along with other types of NTMs in agricultural trade. 
It provides estimations on the quantity and price effects on 34 SPS and 24 TBT measures.  
2.2.  The econometric results show that technical measures can increase import prices of agricultural 
products by nearly 15%, most of which comes from restriction or special authorisation for TBT or 
SPS reasons, such as registration requ irements. Conformity assessment also tends to significantly 
increase the cost of trade. Trade enhancing effects are identified for labelling and packaging 
requirements, which are also the measures with relatively low associated trade costs . 
− Gourdon, J., S.  Stone and F. van Tongeren (November 2020), "Non-tariff measures in 
agriculture ", OECD Food, Agriculture and Fisheries Papers, No. 147, OECD Publishing, Paris. 
http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/81933f03 -en. G/SPS/GEN/1880  
 
- 2 - 
 
  3  GETTING GOODS ACROSS BORDERS IN TIMES OF COVID -19 
3.1.  This note updates "Trade facilitation and the COVID -19 pandemic " from April 2020 with insights 
into the evolution of new border protocols and trade facilitation measures impacting traders since 
COVID -19 and ex ploring what more can be done to prepare for the next stages of the pandemic as 
uncertainty persists. It highlights the importance of transparency and availability of timely 
trade -related information in mapping bottlenecks and risks, as well as the importa nce of trade 
facilitation measures in supporting business recovery and resilience across different goods sectors. 
Finally, it provides some preliminary insights for trade facilitation with respect to the distribution 
of vaccines.  
− This policy brief was publ ished on 18 November 2020 and can be accessed here: 
http://www.oecd.org/coronavirus/policy -responses/getting -goods -across -borders -in-times -
of-covid-19-972ada7a/ . 
4  RECENT WORK ON TRADE -RELATED INTERNATIONAL REGULATORY CO -OPERATION  
4.1  Good regulatory practices and co -operation in trade agreements: A historical 
perspective and stocktaking  
4.1.  This paper presents a stocktaking of standalone chapt ers in trade agreements dedicated to 
good regulatory practices and international regulatory co -operation. While standalone regulatory 
policy chapters in trade agreements remain a new development, they signal countries ' increasing 
interest in elevating the visibility and ambition of regulatory policy, in line with their commitments 
in the 2012 OECD Recommendation of the Council on Regulatory Policy and Governance and the 
2005 APEC -OECD Integrated Checklist on Regulatory Reform. Still, the level of ambition o f these 
chapters varies widely depending on the state of play of regulatory policy in trading partners. By 
comparing the main substantive and structural features of these chapters, this stocktaking aims to 
inform the development of similar chapters in futu re trade agreements.  
− Kauffmann, C. and C. Saffirio (2021), "Good regulatory practices and co -operation in trade 
agreements: A historical perspective and stocktaking", OECD Regulatory Policy Working 
Papers, No. 14, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/cf520646 -en. 
4.2  Best Practice Principles on International Regulatory Co -operation (the Principles)  
4.2.  The aim of the Principles is to provide policy makers and civil servants in both OECD member 
and partner countries with practical guidance on international regulatory co -operation (IRC). Such 
undertaking would help them identify and make use of the relevant forms of IRC in support of 
economic prosperity, welfare and the public interest. The objective is to complement Principle 12 of 
the 2012 OECD Recommendation of the Council on Regulatory and Policy Governance which calls on 
regulators and policy makers to give consideration to all relevant international standards and 
frameworks for co -operation in th e same field and, where appropriate, their likely effects on parties 
outside the jurisdiction, when developing regulatory measures.  
− The draft Principles are currently open for public consultation (until 3 March 2021). The draft 
can be accessed here : http://www.oecd.org/gov/regulatory -policy/public -consultation -best-
practice -principles -on-international -regulatory -cooperation.pdf . 
− Previous publications of the series of OECD Best Practice Principles for regulatory policy are 
available  here: http://www.oecd.org/gov/regulatory -policy/recommendations -
guidelines.htm . 
4.3  No policy maker is an island: The international regulatory co -operation response to 
the COVID -19 crisis  
4.3.  This brief discusses how countries can together manage more effective and consistent 
responses to the COVID -19 crisis  and its vast consequences by learning from each other, ensuring 
the resilience of supply chains and maintaining the interoperability of essential services through 
international regulatory co -operation (IRC).  G/SPS/GEN/1880  
 
- 3 - 
 
  − This policy brief was published on 8 June 2020 and can be accessed here: 
http://www.oecd.org/coronavirus/policy -responses/no -policy -maker -is-an-island -the-
international -regulatory -co-operation -response -to-the-covid-19-crisis-3011ccd0/ . 
Contacts:  
Annelies Deuss (E -mail: annelies.deuss@oecd.org ) 
Marianna Karttunen (E -mail: marianna.karttunen@oecd.org ) 
Camila Saffirio (E -mail: camila.saffirio@oecd.org ) 
 
__________