G/TBT/GEN/338  
 
13 January  2023 
(23-0351) Page: 1/5 
Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade    
 
THEMATIC SESSION ON GOOD REGULATORY PRACTICES  
15 NOVEMBER 2022, 10:00 -13:00  
Moderator's Report1 
At the Ninth Triennial Review, Members agreed to continue to hold thematic sessions in conjunction 
with the TBT Committee's regular meetings from 2022 to 2024 to further deepen the exchange of 
experiences on specific topics. On this basis, the Committee agreed to hold a thematic session on 
good regulatory practices.2 The first part of the session focused on the domestic implementation  of 
GRP. The second part focused on GRP in trade agreements. Information about the speakers, 
presentations, and related materials is available on the WTO website.3 
 
1  DOMESTIC IMPLEMENTATION OF GRP  
1.1  Guiding questions  
• Considering the decisions and recommendat ions of the TBT Committee on GRP, what recent 
progress have Members made in their domestic regulatory frameworks on GRP? Are there 
any specific examples that have directly contributed to improved and effective 
implementation of the TBT Agreement?  
 
1.2  Interventions  
1.1.  Mr. Marcos Heleno Guerson  (Brazil)4, in keynote remarks, highlighted the special character 
of INMETRO as a body that works across the pillars of quality infrastructure, including metrology, 
conformity assessment and accreditation. In order t o face the challenges of Industry 4.0, INMETRO 
recently launched  an overhaul of its regulatory framework based on GRP. This enhances 
transparency on how INMETRO develops regulations, and established principles that must be 
followed in any regulatory proces s. INMETRO received more than 1,400 comments from stakeholders 
regarding this new regulatory framework, 500 of which INMETRO was able to address in the final 
framework. As part of enhancing competitiveness and reducing bureaucracy, regulations were 
consoli dated to deal with families of products and sectors. As a result, INMETRO went from having 
800 regulations mostly dealing with one single product, to 300 consolidated regulations. These 
300 regulations are being further assessed for fitness in a second pha se using Regulatory Impact 
Assessments (RIA). A priority for INMETRO is being fast and flexibility in making regulations, to step 
up to the challenges posed by Industry 4.0. He stressed that if processes are too slow and take 
many years, they risk leading to irrelevant regulations. He also highlighted the importance of using 
international standards as a basis for INMETRO's regulation, regulating based on essential 
requirements rather than all requirements, undertaking RIA, and using risk assessment and 
classification of three levels of risk as a basis for regulation.  
1.2.  Mr. Alex Hunt  (United States)5 first explained how the United States uses its Unified Agenda 
to provide a forward -looking overview of regulatory developments twice yearly (published in spring 
 
1 Mr. Don Spedding  (Australia) . This Report is provided on the Moderator's own responsibility.  
2 G/TBT/46 . 
3 WTO | Thematic Session on Good Regulatory Practice .  
4 President, INMETRO . 
5 Chief, Information Policy Branch, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, U.S. Office of 
Management and Budget . G/TBT/GEN/338  
 
- 2 - 
 
  and fall). The regulatory agenda covers approximately 60 ministries, departments, and agencies, 
describing the timetable for regulatory actions, their legal basis, and potential impacts including on 
international trade, amongst other information, to help t he public understand what is planned and 
how to engage in the regulatory process. Second, Mr. Hunt explained that under the Executive Order 
13609 on Promoting International Regulatory Cooperation6 agencies need to report on international 
regulatory cooper ation activity that is expected to lead to significant regulation. This reporting is 
done through the Unified Agenda and a dedicated website7, where proposed rules open for public 
comment are posted and comments are accepted from stakeholders worldwide. A gencies are 
required to take these comments into account under US law. Third, he highlighted the January 2021 
Presidential Memorandum on “Modernizing Regulatory Review,” which reaffirmed Executive Order 
12866 on Regulatory Review and directed OMB to produc e recommendations for modernizing 
regulatory review, including the need to assess the distributional consequences of regulations to 
avoid disadvantaging marginalized groups.  
1.3.  Ms Miriam Peña Niño  (Peru)8 presented Peru's progress in the implementation of th e RIA 
methodology, and the importance of related capacity building. On July 2022 the mandatory 
application of RIA began, and by April 2023, 55 Peruvian agencies would be using the RIA process. 
Since September  2021 different capacity building activities wer e provided. There  is a probability that 
in a later phase, the RIA process will be extended to also cover the development of technical 
regulations. She mentioned an early example from the Ministry of Foreign Trade and Tourism, which 
conducted an RIA of a pr oposed regulation, and looked at issues of productivity and competitiveness. 
She underscored the importance of capacity building for the regulatory quality officials and their 
teams, responsible for implementing RIA, so that they can rely on best practices . Peru had already 
trained 632 civil servants from the 55 agencies, including multi -day training with case studies. 
Ten pilot projects were underway with agencies that have proposed regulation in the pipeline. Peru 
has also developed guidelines for early n otice and regulatory agenda, as well as an Ex -Ante RIA 
evaluation  criteria handbook for those entities that are preparing RIAs.  
2  GRP IN TRADE AGREEMENTS  
2.1  Guiding questions  
• Which GRP provisions are being included in recent trade agreements negotiated by Membe rs 
and why?  
• How can these provisions support Members' compliance with WTO obligations? What benefits 
do they provide (generally and trade -related) and what are the challenges in their 
implementation?  
• Could you share concrete examples of GRP provisions from  trade agreements that have been 
implemented?  
• What can Members learn from the regulatory modernization efforts of other Members and 
available international resources to improve their regulatory practices?  
 
2.2  Interventions  
2.1.  Ms. Katja Modric Skrabal o (EU)9 discussed recent developments on incorporation of GRP 
principles in EU FTAs. She noted that older FTAs (such as agreements with Singapore and Korea) 
introduce GRP principles in specific TBT chapters or outside of the TBT chapters, covering a number 
of specifi c GRPs. For instance, a key GRP principle which the EU has strived to include in its FTAs is 
the introduction of impact assessments of planned technical regulations and conformity assessment 
procedures as well as the assessment of regulatory and non -regula tory alternatives to proposed 
measures. Other GRPs that have been part of EU FTAs include the use of relevant international 
standards as the basis for technical regulations and conformity assessment procedures, reviewing 
technical regulations at regular in tervals, and the participation of the public through consultations 
 
6 https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/information -regulatory -affairs/international -regulatory -cooperation/   
7 https://www.regulations.gov/   
8 Undersecretary of Regulatory Analysis and Simplification, Public Management Secretariat, Presidency 
of the Council of Ministers . 
9 Policy Officer, Regulatory Cooperation and Public Procurement unit , Directorate General for Tra de of 
the European Commission , European Union . G/TBT/GEN/338  
 
- 3 - 
 
  on planned regulatory measures. Finally, there are also general transparency provisions that have 
traditionally been included in EU TBT chapters.  
2.2.  More recently, in addition to these provisi ons, the EU has started to introduce specific chapters 
that more broadly tackle GRP in FTAs, for instance in the EU -Japan and EU -UK FTAs. These 
designated GRP chapters aim to promote an effective and transparent regulatory environment as 
well as building m ore compatible regulatory approaches between the EU and its trading partners and 
enhancing regulatory cooperation for discussions at the bilateral level. These provisions tend to 
enhance coherence of regulation but at the same time do not affect or define each parties' rights to 
regulate or choose the level of protection they deem necessary and appropriate to achieve their 
public policy goals. There are also a number of practices in these designated GRP chapters such as 
early information on planned regulato ry measures in the form of a yearly work plan, public 
consultations, impact assessments, publication of measures in publicly available registers which are 
easily searchable and finally, retrospective evaluations of measures in order to ensure they are up 
to date.  
2.3.  Ms. Kate Maxwell  (UK)10 discussed the experience of the UK around GRP provisions in FTAs. 
She emphasized the UK's focus on developing dedicated GRP chapters as they go forward with their 
FTA negotiations. The UK strongly believes in the value of st andalone GRP chapters and that these 
have been taken up in their ongoing negotiations. Ms. Maxwell also noted that while this is not an 
approach adopted by all countries and trading partners, the UK believes that these standalone 
chapters hold trading part ners to a high standard of GRP and increases business confidence, in 
particular for MSMEs. Similar to the approaches of the EU and US, the UK has incorporated GRPs 
such as public consultations, publici zed information, regulatory registers, retrospective re views 
conducted periodically at appropriate intervals, and dedicated contact points to facilitate cooperation 
and communication with parties. In addition to the completed UK FTAs with Australia; New Zealand; 
and the trilateral FTA with Norway, Iceland, and  Lichtenstein, all of which have standalone GRP 
chapters, there are ongoing negotiations with Canada, Mexico, and Switzerland. She concluded by 
reiterating that the UK firmly believes in the value of standalone GRP chapters in FTAs and their 
importance in giving certainty to businesses so that they need not worry about bureaucratic changes 
and unpredictability.  
2.4.  Ms Renee Hancher  (United  States)11 presented the United States' perspective on how GRP 
provisions in trade agreements support Members' compliance with WTO obligations. She noted that 
the TBT Agreement came first before Members started to negotiate GRP provisions in free trade 
agreements (F TAs). Thus, most of the GRP provisions in FTAs build on the TBT Agreement. In 
particular, the transparency obligations in the TBT Agreement ( especially  those related to the 
notification of draft measures, and the provision of adequate time for comments) fu lfil an important 
objective as they permit trading partners to understand the rationale behind other Members' 
proposed measures. For this reason, the United States attaches significance to transparency 
provisions in the GRP provisions included in their FTA s. Other important GRP provisions that are in 
line with the TBT Agreement relate to the importance of harmonizing regulations with international 
standards and having a retrospective review of regulations.  
2.5.  Ms Hancher noted that regulatory cooperation in FTA s can also help to build trust between 
trading partners, which can reduce differences in regulatory requirements and facilitate trade. One 
example is the agreement to recognize conformity assessment results in the context of the USMCA. 
Moreover, given that  regulatory requirements are the main trade irritants for US stakeholders, GRPs 
can help reduce trade concerns discussed in the TBT Committee. They also enhance predictability 
for traders both about existing regulations and proposed ones (especially when i nformation can be 
accessed online). GRP provisions, which started with the TBT Agreement, have contributed 
enormously to facilitating trade and may eventually reduce the workload of the TBT Committee.  
2.6.  Ms Juliana Ghizzi Pires  (Brazil)12 shared Brazil's perspective on how GRP provisions in trade 
agreements support Members' compliance with WTO obligations.  GRP provisions provide numerous 
benefits, such as enhancing predictability for traders and providing the opportunity to stakeholders 
to comment on proposed measures. The sharing of experiences is particularly important in Brazil as 
 
10 Assistant Director, Good Regulatory Practice and SME Trade Policy,  Department for International 
Trade , United Kingdom . 
11 Director, Regulatory Policies, USTR . 
12 Coordinator, General Regulatory Convergence and Export Barriers, Ministry of Economy . G/TBT/GEN/338  
 
- 4 - 
 
  it permits regulators to spread expertise among ministries and government agencies. Moreover, 
transparency tools can be used by regulators to choose the least  burdensome option when they 
regulate. For example, Brazil undertook a regulatory stocktaking exercise to determine which 
requirements should be kept. Regulatory Impact Assessments (RIAs) are also a helpful tool to 
establish internal processes that lead to  better regulations (e.g. assessing why there is a need to 
regulate). She concluded by noting that regulatory agencies in Brazil regularly share among each 
other their experience in adopting regulation with a view to improve the implementation of TBT and 
GRP tools.  
2.7.  Mr. Moses Ngosa (Zambia)13 presented on GRP and regulatory cooperation within the 
Southern African Development Community (SADC). He noted that the SADC Protocol on Trade 
contains a TBT Annex which aims at developing a common technical regulation framework and, to 
this end, establishes regional cooperation structures for addressing various TBT issues. The objective 
of this framework is to identify, prevent and eliminate unnecessary TBTs amongst SADC member 
states and other regional and internationa l trading blocs through harmonized regulatory measures. 
He noted that regulatory cooperation and harmonization plays an important role in addressing global 
challenges such as COVID -19 and the transition to a low -carbon economy and helps to avoid 
regulatory  fragmentation. To illustrate how GRP provisions under the SADC Protocol on Trade are 
being implemented in practice, Mr. Ngosa described how the SADC member states harmonized a 
technical regulation on road vehicles inspection and testing for used motor veh icles for road 
worthiness.  
2.8.  Ms. Carolina Ramirez Joignant  (Chile)14 described how Chile integrated GRP provisions in 
its FTAs. She noted that Chile has been incorporating GRP provisions as part of TBT sections in its 
FTAs for a long time, and in its most re cent FTAs, it included standalone GRP chapters. Currently 
Chile has GRP chapters in its FTAs with Pacific Alliance, Uruguay, Ecuador, and Brazil (in force) and 
with the European Union, the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans -Pacific 
Partnersh ip (CPTPP) and Paraguay (not yet in force). The objective of such chapters is to promote 
GRP and the adoption of a transparent regulatory environment with predictable procedures. These 
GRP chapters also envisage establishment of coordination mechanisms, pu blic consultations, 
reporting and transparency obligations. Such GRP chapters are not subject to dispute settlement 
mechanisms under Chile's FTAs.  
2.9.  She also noted that the OECD recently analysed the domestic regulatory environment in Chile 
and based on this  assessment, suggested that Chile (i) adopt criteria for systematic implementation 
of consultation practices in its rule -making process; and (ii) set out criteria for conducting RIA. Based 
on these recommendations, Chile took steps to embed stakeholder eng agement and RIA into its 
rule-making process.  
2.10.  Mr. Alberto Morales  (OECD)15 discussed trends relating to the implementation of GRP 
provisions in FTAs. First, he noted that economies increasingly incorporate standalone GRP chapters 
in their FTAs, as opposed  to the traditional approach of narrower GRP provisions embedded in TBT 
chapters. These standalone GRP chapters tend to be more ambitious in their scope and encompass 
additional tools such as regulatory oversight, ex post  evaluation of regulations and coop eration on 
regulatory enforcement. In addition, standalone GRP chapters tend to have more binding language 
and some of them are even subject to dispute settlement mechanism under FTAs. Second, he 
pointed out that FTA partners with a similar level of regula tory policy uptake tend to include concrete 
management tools for GRP cooperation in their FTAs, while partners with significant differences in 
their regulatory policy practices tend to agree on a minimum acceptable level of GRP.  
2.11.  Ms Anisyah  (Indonesia)16 described Indonesia's regulatory system reform in the food sector. 
The aim of this reform was to ensure consumer protection, encourage competitiveness of the food 
industry including MSMEs, and increase law enforcement and technology -based supervision. To thi s 
end, Indonesia implemented GRP in its regulatory development process. The first step of regulatory 
development process in Indonesia is planning prior to drafting regulations , which includes 
assessment of potential needs and policy objectives. In this pro cess, Indonesia engages various 
 
13 Trade and Investment Promotion Officer, Ministry for Commerce, Trade and Industry, Zambia.  
14 Adviser of Regulatory Affairs Division, Undersecretary of International Economic Affairs of Chile.  
15 Policy Analyst, Regulatory Policy Public Governance, OECD.  
16 Director, Processed Food Standardization at Indonesian Food and Drug Authority . G/TBT/GEN/338  
 
- 5 - 
 
  stakeholders, including private sector and academia. The second step is the development of draft 
regulations which consists of collecting data, consultations and discussions with stakeholders.  
2.12.  In addition, Ms Anisyah  noted that Indonesia relies on Codex standards when developing its 
domestic regulatory measures. The use of Codex standards helps to improve harmonization of 
national food safety regulations and reduce barriers to trade. In this context, she added that the 
Association of Southeast Asian Nations  (ASEAN) established the ASEAN consultative Committee on 
Standards and Quality to harmonize national regulations with international standards and implement 
mutual recognition arrangements on conformity assessment.  
3  COMMENT BY THE MODERATOR  
3.1.  I noted a number of key takeaways from the thematic session, in no particular order:  
• In terms of the domestic implementation of GRP , one clear message was the role of 
GRPs in creating a business -friendly, transparent, and stable regu latory environment. 
Transparency and predictability give businesses confidence and enhance their 
competitiveness. Implementation of GRPs is particularly beneficial for MSMEs as they have 
limited resources to overcome regulatory barriers. We heard an exampl e from one Member 
on how the implementation of GRP and regulatory reforms helped it move up 75 places in 
the global "ease of doing business" ranking.  
• Strong partnerships among governments, businesses and civil society are critical to fostering 
GRPs. Workin g together in relevant forums can build confidence between trading partners 
as well as improve information and experience sharing. Regulatory cooperation can also help 
unlock opportunities with new trading partners and address global challenges such as 
COVID-19 and the transition to a low -carbon economy. In this context, it was also mentioned 
that it is important to engage stakeholders at an early stage in regulatory discussions.  
• We heard about how Members use regulatory impact assessments (RIAs) as a GRP. It was 
noted that RIAs help to develop better, high -quality regulations and modernize existing ones. 
However, it was important to provide adequate capacity building, training and guidance 
materials for regulatory agencies that carry out RIAs. The use of fo rward -looking regulatory 
agendas was also discussed as a GRP which can help businesses, civil society, and the public 
to better engage in the regulatory process.  
• With respect to GRP provisions in trade agreements , many speakers highlighted that 
these are f ounded on the disciplines of the TBT Agreement. These include GRP provisions in 
FTAs such as transparency and notification of draft regulations, clearly providing the 
rationale for measures, use of relevant international standards, and retrospective review  of 
technical regulations, which are all rooted in the TBT Agreement. In this respect, speakers 
noted that GRP provisions in FTAs can build mutual confidence and improve Members' 
compliance with WTO TBT obligations. They can also help to facilitate trade a t regional level 
by overcoming unnecessary regulatory divergences. At the same time, it was stressed such 
provisions do not limit the right of Members to regulate or determine levels of protection 
they deem to be appropriate.  
• We also discussed incorporatin g GRP provisions on retrospective periodic review of 
regulations in FTAs. We also heard some useful examples of domestic procedures for ex post  
evaluation of regulations.  
• We saw that the role of GRP in FTAs is evolving, and Members increasingly incorporate  
standalone GRP chapters in their FTAs, as opposed to the traditional approach of narrower 
GRP provisions embedded in TBT chapters . These standalone chapters tend to be more 
ambitious in their scope and encompass additional tools such as regulatory oversig ht, 
regulatory cooperation, and cooperation on enforcement. Standalone GRP chapters help 
create more predictable and stable trade and investment environments for FTA partners and 
businesses, including MSMEs.  
3.2.  I found the discussions to be very rich, and I w ould like to express my appreciation for the 
insightful contributions from our speakers. They left us with a lot to reflect on for further work in the 
Committee on the topic of GRP.  
__________