G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 6 
G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 4 
 
1 February  2024 
(24-0826) Page: 1/44 
Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures    
 
ANNUAL OVERVIEW – IMPLEMENTATION OF SPS TRANSPARENCY PROVISIONS AND 
SPECIFIC TRADE CONCERNS  
NOTE BY THE SECRETARIAT1 
Revision  
1  INTRODUCTION  
1.1.  At its meeting on 15 -16 March 2000, the Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures 
(the SPS Committee) requested the Secretariat to prepare a paper summarizing the specific trade 
concerns (STCs) that had been brought to the Committee's attention since 1995.2 Since then, 
the Secretariat has revised document G/SPS/GEN/204  annually to includ e new information provided 
by Members.  
1.2.  Similarly, at  the October 2007 Workshop on Transparency , the Committee requ ested 
the Secretariat to prepar e an annual overview of the implementation of the transparency provisions 
of the SPS  Agreement.3 Since then, the Secretariat has revised document G/SPS/GEN/804  annually 
to provide an overview of the level of implementation of the transparency obligations contained in 
the SPS Agreement (Article 7 and Annex B) and of the Committee's Recommended Procedures for 
Implementing the Transparency Obligation s of the SPS Agreement.4 
1.3.  The latest revision of the Recommended Procedures for Implementing the Transparency 
Obligations of the SPS Agreement ( G/SPS/7/Rev.5 , hereafter the "Recommended Transparency 
Procedures") was circulated on 16 January 2023. This "technical" revision does not include any 
substantive changes to the text. It incorporates updates based on changes in the online tools  
(namely  the new ePing  SPS&TBT Platform ). 
1.4.  Part A  of the present  document provides an overview of the level of implementation of the 
transparency obligations found in the SPS Agreement  and Part B  contains information on STCs . 
Additionally, Part C  of the document covers  other transparency -related aspects, including the 
proposals made in the context of the Sixth Review  of the Operation and Implementation of the SPS 
Agreement , the transparency recommendations of the Fifth Review  adopted in 20205, detailed 
information on improved SPS IT tools  and the transparency -related work  of the Standards and Trade 
Development Facility (STDF).  
1.5.  In preparing this document, the Secretariat has largely relied on the ePing SPS&TBT Platform . 
Among other functions, the  ePing SPS&TBT Platform  is the single entry poin t to search  specialized 
and detailed information on SPS (and TBT) notifications, STCs, national notification authorities 
(NNAs) and national enquiry points (NEPs) contact information, as well as  other documents. It allows 
 
1 This document has been prepared under the Secretariat's own responsibility and is without prejudice to 
the positions of Members or to their rights and obligations under the WTO.  
2 G/SPS/R/18 , para. 20.  
3 See G/SPS/R/47 , para. 44, for the recommendations arising from the 2007 Workshop on 
Transparency . See also footnote 6 of G/SPS/7/Rev.5  requesting the Secretariat to provide an annual report on 
the level of  implementation of the transparency provisions of the SPS Agreement and of the recommended 
transparency procedures.  
4 Since 2021, the information previously contained in G/SPS/GEN/804  and G/SPS/GEN/204  and 
revisions has been merged into a single do cument.  
5 See G/SPS/64  and G/SPS/64/A dd.1. G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 6 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 4 
 
- 2 - 
 
  for advanced searches according to specific criteria and facilitates the creation of custom reports 
and graphs, which can be shared with interested stakeholders. Most of the underlying data for the 
analysis contained in this document is publicly available and searchable through the Platform . 
Detailed information is available in Part C  of the present document . 
1.6.  The Members' transparency toolkit  webpage is regularly  updated to streamline the information 
available. Among other features, it  includes a quiz for users to self-assess  their knowledge on 
SPS transparency -related matters.  
1.7.  One key conclusion that can be extracted from this document is that, overall, there is a 
high level of implementation of the SPS transparency obligations  by WTO Members. 
Since  1995: 13 5 Members (8 2% of me mbership) have submitted at least one notification; 
160 (98%) and 16 2 Members (99%) have provided contact information for their SPS NNAs and 
NEPs, respectively.  
1.8.  In addition, for 202 3, the following 5 key points  can be highlighted:  
a) A total of  65 Members submitted a  total 1,994 notifications  of new or modified 
SPS measures  (compared to a record high of 2,172 in 2022) , including addenda and 
corrigenda to both regular and emergency notifications.  
b) Two least developed country (LDC) Members, Tanzania  and Uganda , are among the top 10  
notifiers of regular notifications  in 2023 . 
c) The highest share (7 3%) of regular notifications submitted refer to food safety ; 89% of the 
emergency notifications submitted refer to animal health . 
d) Members discussed 67 STCs , including 17 new concerns ; 20 Members (12%)  raised at 
least one STC.  
e) Two STCs  were reported as resolved  in 2023 . A total of  311 (54%) STCs have been reported 
as resolved or partially resolved  since 1995 . 
 G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 6 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 4 
 
- 3 - 
 
  Contents  
 
1   INTRODUCTION  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..........  1 
2   PART A - IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TRANSPARENCY PROVISIONS  ............................  4 
2.1   Designation of national notification authorities and enquiry points  ................................ .... 4 
2.2   Submission of notifications  ................................ ................................ ..........................  4 
2.2.1   Types of notifications  ................................ ................................ ..............................  4 
2.2.2   Notifying Members  ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 6 
2.2.3   Products covered  ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 11 
2.2.4   Regions/countries affected  ................................ ................................ ......................  12 
2.2.5   Objective and rationale  ................................ ................................ ...........................  13 
2.2.6   International standards, guidelines or recommendations  ................................ ..............  15 
2.2.7   Proposed date of adoption/publication/entry into force  ................................ ................  16 
2.2.8   Final date for comments  ................................ ................................ .........................  17 
2.2.9   Addenda to regular and emergency notifications  ................................ .........................  18 
2.3   Notification keywords  ................................ ................................ ................................  19 
2.4   COVID -19 related notifications and documents  ................................ .............................  20 
3   PART B - SPECIFIC TRADE CONCERNS  ................................ ................................ ....... 21 
3.1   General overview of specific trade concerns (1995 -2023)  ................................ ...............  21 
3.2   Specific trade concerns considered in 2023  ................................ ................................ ... 27 
3.2.1   Resolution of STCs in 2023  ................................ ................................ ......................  29 
3.2.2   Good offices of the Chair  ................................ ................................ .........................  29 
4   PART C – OTHER TRANSPARENCY -RELATED ASPECTS  ................................ ...............  30 
4.1   Review of the Operation and Implementation of the SPS Agreement  ................................  30 
4.1.1   Transparency recommendations in the Fifth Review  ................................ ....................  30 
4.2   Technical assistance and workshops  ................................ ................................ ............  30 
4.3   SPS IT tools  ................................ ................................ ................................ .............  31 
4.3.1   The ePing SPS&TBT Platform  ................................ ................................ ...................  31 
4.3.2   eAgenda  ................................ ................................ ................................ ...............  34 
4.4   Standards and Trade Development Facility (STDF)  ................................ ........................  34 
 
 G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 6 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 4 
 
- 4 - 
 
  2  PART A - IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TRANSPARENCY PROVISIONS  
2.1.  Part A of the present document provides an overview of the level of implementation of the 
transparency provisions contained in the SPS Agreement  and the Recommended Transpare ncy 
Procedures in document G/SPS/7/Rev.5 , with a focus on 202 3. It does not include information on 
areas where the Secretariat is not directly involved (such as publication of a notice of a regulation 
at an early stage, Members'  response to requests for documents or other information , provision of 
comments to notifications, and of the response to  these comments by the notifying Member, among 
others).  
2.1  Designation of national notification authorities and enquiry points  
2.2.  Paragraph 10 of Annex B  to the SPS Agreement requires Members to desi gnate a single central 
government authority as responsible for the implementation of notification procedures. This agency 
is referred to as the SPS national notification authority  (NNA). As of 31 December 202 3, 160 (98%) 
Members out of 164 had designated s uch an agency.  The Members that have not designated NNAs 
are all  LDCs.6 In addition, one observer government has  designated an NNA.  
2.3.  Paragraph 3 of Annex B  to the SPS Agreement requires that each Member establish a  national  
enquiry point (NEP) responsible for the provision of answers to all reasonable questions and of 
relevant documents. As of 31 Decembe r 2023, 162 Members (99%) had provided the  contact 
informa tion of their NEP. One developing country and one LDC ha ve not yet established an NEP. 
Thirty -four Members have identified more than one SPS  NEP. A total of  31 Members have indicated 
that their NNA and NEP a re the same institution.  In addition, four observer governments have 
provided the WTO with the contact information of their NE P. 
2.4.  In 202 3, 30 Members updated their NNA and/or NEP contact details , available  through 
the ePing SPS&TBT Platform . Through this Platform, users with notification admin rights are 
responsible for ensuring that the contact details of domestic NNAs and NEPs are up to date 
(see Section 4.3.1.1.2 ).7 It can be useful to have at least two staff members trained in NNA/NEP 
operations since this allows for absences and commitments of staff to other duties, as recommended 
in the Practical Manual for SPS National Notification Authorities and National Enquiry Points . 
Whenever possible, Members are encouraged to use an institutional email address rather than a 
personal one.8 
2.2  Submission of notifications  
2.5.  Under the SPS Agreement, notifications are used to inform other Members about new or 
modified  regulations that may significantly affect trade. Paragraphs 5 to 8 of Annex B, as well as the 
Recommended Transparency Procedures, elaborate on the notification procedures Members are to 
follow. For ease of reference, the specific sub -topics highlighted below follow the order of items that 
are contained in the regular and emergency notification formats.  The online submission of 
notifications further improves the q uality of the information provided, increasing efficiency and 
allowing for more thorough  searches.  As indicated above, this functionality is currently accessible 
for users with relevant rights through the ePing SPS&TBT Platform  (see Section  4.3.1.1.4 ). 
2.2.1   Types of notifications  
2.6.  The two main types of notifications are  regular notifications (of new or modified draft 
SPS regulations) and emergency notifications  (of regulations adopted when urgent problems of 
health protection arise or threaten to arise for a Member ). In addition, addenda, corrigenda, 
revisions or supplem ents can be issued subsequent to an original regular or emergency notification.9 
An addendum is used to provide additional information or changes to an original notification, for 
example if the products covered by the proposed regulation have been modifie d, if the comment 
 
6 The categories of level of development rely on WTO working definitions as identified in the 
WTO Reference Database  for analytical purposes ( idb@wto.org ). They can be consulted through the ePing 
SPS&TBT Platform  by clicking on  "Facts & figures ", "Definitions of groups" in the top menu bar.  
7 See doc ument G/SPS/GEN/2163 -G/TBT/GEN/ 363 for more information on the different levels of access 
for ePing users.  
8 Further recommendations can be found in the Practical Manual for SPS NNAs  and NEPs. 
9 See the Members' transparency toolkit  and the Recommended Transparency Procedures 
(G/SPS/7/Rev.5 ) for further elaboration on the different types of notifications.  G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 6 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 4 
 
- 5 - 
 
  period has been extended, or if a notified measure has entered into force. A corrigendum is used to 
correct an error in an original notification such as incorrect address detail s. A revision is used to 
replace an existing notification, fo r example if a notified draft regulation was substantially redrafted 
or if a notification contained a large number of errors.  All types of notifications  can be directly filled 
in and submitted through the ePing SPS&TBT Platform  (see Section 4.3.1.1.4 ). 
2.7.  Chart  A.1 shows the number of regular and emergency notifications (including addenda and 
corrigenda) submitted per year since 1995. As of 31 December  2023, Members had submitted10 
21,899 regular notifications  (including 2 09 revisions) , 3,414 emergency notifications  (including 
15 revisions) , 7,886 addenda  and 626 corrigenda , reaching a grand total of 33,855 notifications. 
Despite punctual decreases  in some years, the global tendency  shows an upward trend in  the total 
number of notifications su bmitted per year , reaching in 2022  a historical record number of 
2,172 notifications . In 2023 , Members submitted  1,231 regular notifications  (including  9 revisions) , 
220 emergency notifications, 510 addenda and 32 corrigenda , adding up  to a total of 
1,994  notifications . Compared to the previous year, there  was a n increase  in the number of  regular 
notifications submitted, from  1,147 in 2022 to 1,231 in 202 3 (7% increase ), and a decrease in the 
number of emergency notifications, from 396 in 202 2 to 220 in 202 3 (44% decrease) . The overall 
number of addenda submitted decreased  from 621 in 202 2 to 510 in 202 3 (18% decrease ) 
(see Section 2.2.10 ). The monthly average of notifications decreased from 181 in 202 2 to 
166 in 2023. 
Chart A.1 – Number of r egular and emergency notifications  (including  revisions) , addenda 
and corrigenda for both types , and number of Members who have submitted at least one 
notification, per year  
 
2.8.  In June 2002, the SPS Committee adopted a special format and recommended procedures for 
the notification of determination of the recognition of equivalence of sanitary or phytosanitary 
measures. As of 31 December  2023, there have been 11 equivalence notifications  circulated by 
Panama ( one, in 2007), the Dominican Republic ( one, in 2008), the United States ( five in 2019 and 
three in 2022 ) and New Zealand (one, in 2023) . A two-part Thematic Session on Equivalence was 
held in Octobe r 2018 and March 2019 within the framework of the Fifth Review .11 
2.9.  In April 2004, the Secretariat established a mechanism for Members to inform each other of 
the availability of unofficial translations of notified SPS measures into one of the working langua ges 
 
10 For this Note, submission refers to the date of distribution of the notification by the Secretariat.  
11 The programmes of parts 1 and  2 of the Thematic Session are contained in G/SPS/GEN/1640/Rev.1  
and G/SPS/GEN/1675/Rev.1 , respectively, and the reports in G/SPS/R/93  and G/SPS/R/94 . Presentations of 
both sessions are available at: https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/sps_e/events_e.htm . 
G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 6 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 4 
 
- 6 - 
 
  of the WTO. These are submitted in the form of supplements to the original notification. As of 
31 December 202 3, 19 supplement notifications  had been circulated. None have been submitted 
since 2015. The availability of translations has periodically  been discussed in the SPS Committee 
under transparency -related matters.12 Interestingly,  the same  mechanism for sharing translations 
of notified TBT  regulations, launched in January 2008, has resulted in 251 supplement not ifications , 
although , similarly to SPS, it has not been used since  2016.  In this context , it is worth  highlight ing 
that Members can also  share  unofficial translations through the ePing SPS&TBT Platform , although 
it has not been used for that purpose yet  (see Section 4.3.1 ). 
2.10.  In October 2004, the SPS Committee adopted a procedure to enhance transparency of special 
and differential treatment (S&D) in favour of developing Member s, which included an addendum 
notification format to inform the C ommittee o f a Member's decision on whether and how S&D may 
be provided in reference to a specific request. The procedure and addendum notification format were 
subsequently revised in December 2009  (G/SPS/33/Rev.1 ), and the notification format was 
incorporated in  the Recommended Transparency Procedures  for ease of reference. 
No S&D notifications have ever been circulated by WTO  Members under this procedure . 
All notification types are summarized in Table A.1 . 
Table A.1 – SPS notifications submitted by WTO Members  (including equivalence and 
supplement notifications)  
Type of notification  Since 1995  In 202 3 Variation since 
2022 
Regular  (incl. revisions)  21,899 1,231 +7% 
Emergency  (incl. revisions)  3,414 220 -44% 
Addenda to regular  7,127 466 -16% 
Addenda to emergency  759 44 -25% 
Corrigenda to regular  550 26 +86% 
Corrigenda to emergency  76 6 +100 % 
Equivalence notifications  11 1 +1 
Supplement notifications  19 0 - 
Total 33,855 1,994  
2.2.2   Notifying Members  
2.11.  As of 31 December 202 3, 135 Members (82%  of the membership ) had submitted at least 
one notification to the WTO.  In 2023, Bangladesh and Vanuatu submitted their  first SPS notifications. 
Several  EU member States have not submitted notifications; however, most SPS measures are 
notified by the European Union on behalf of its member States.13,14 In addition, 1 2 developing 
Members  and 1 0 LDCs have not yet submitted any notification. In 202 3, 65 Membe rs submitted at 
least one notification.  The number of Members submitting notifications each year has considerably 
increased since 1995 and has remained relatively stable over the last few years ( Chart  A.1). 
2.12.  Since 2001, the GCC Standardization Organization (GSO) has been submitting joint 
notifications , and in 2022 the East African Community (EAC) started submitting joint SPS (and TBT) 
notifications through the ePing SPS&TBT Platform . Joint submission of notifications further improves 
regional coordination and streamlines work for both Members and the Secretariat. In 2023 other 
Members have explored thi s option to streamline their work.  
2.13.  Charts A.2 and A.3 show the number of regular and emergency notifications  (including  
addenda and corrigenda) , respectively, and the percentage of notifications by Members' 
development status. Chart A.2  shows that the share of regular notifications submitted by developing  
Memb ers has been rising since 2000 and, since 2008, is higher than that of regular notifications 
submitted by developed Members . The share of notifications from LDCs is overall low, but has been 
increasing over the last few years, reaching a historical maximum  of 19% in 202 3, mainly due to 
 
12 See for example the reports of the Fourth Review and the 2017 Workshop on Transparency  in 
G/SPS/62  and G/SPS/R/89 , respectively.  
13 See G/SPS/GEN/456  for notification procedures for the European Uni on and its member States.  
14 The information provided by the European Union covers its 28 member States from 1  July 2013 until 
31 January  2020. The United Kingdom withdrew from the European Union as of 1  February  2020.  
The European Union and the United King dom communicated that during the transition period, which ended on 
31 December  2020, the European Union SPS regime continued to apply in the United Kingdom.  See documents 
WT/GC/206  and G/SPS/GEN/1767 . G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 6 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 4 
 
- 7 - 
 
  the high number of notifications submitted by Tanzania (98) and Uganda  (96) (see Chart A.8 ), 
as well as the joint notifications submitted by the EAC . Chart A.3  shows that the percentage of 
emergency notifications submitted by developing Members has been greater than 50% since 2002. 
Overall , the difference in percentage  of emergency notificati ons between developed and developing 
Members is much larger than in the case of regular notifications . While in 2022 this difference was 
considerably reduced, mainly due to the high number of emergency notifications submitted by very 
few developed Members in relation to avian influenza, in 2023 we again see the general pattern due 
to an increased share of notifications on animal diseases submitted by developing countries , mostly 
related to animal diseases including avian influenza . 
Chart  A.2 – Number of regular notifications and percentage by development status  
 
Chart A.3 – Number of emergency notifications and percentage by development status  
 
2.14.  Looking at the geographic regions from which the notifications submitted since the year 1995 
originate, Chart A.4  shows that the largest share  of notifications come from Asia (29%), followed by  
the North America region (2 5%) and then by South and Central America and the Caribbean (2 4%).15 
 
15 The geographical groupings used rely on WTO working definitions as identified in the WTO Reference 
Database  for analytical purposes ( idb@wto.org ). The same groupings are used in the WTO Annua l Reports. 
They can be consulted through the ePing SPS&TBT Platform  by clicking on  "Facts & figures",  "Definitions of 
groups" in the top menu bar.  
G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 6 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 4 
 
- 8 - 
 
  Chart A.4 – Notifications by geographical region since  1995  
 
2.15.  When comparing the percentage of notifications submitted in 202 3 to the average submitted 
by the different regions between 1995 and 202 2 (Chart A.5 ), we can observe a striking increase in 
the case of Africa. Since 2020, several African Members feature among the top 10 notifiers each 
year and this trend continues in 2023. While notifications submitted by African countries until 20 22 
represent about 5% of the total, in 2023 this figure rose to 2 0%, mainly due to notifications 
submitted by Tanzania and Uganda, as well as the joint notifications by the EAC (see Section 2.2.2  
and Chart A.8 ). Overall, we can observe a slight increase in the percentage of notifications submitted 
by Europe (from 10% until the end of 2022 to 12% in  2023) and CIS States (from 2% to 4%) . 
In contrast, a reduction can be observed in the case of North America (from 2 5% to 13% until the 
end of 2022), South  America, Central America and the Caribbean (from 2 4% to 20%) and the 
Middle  East region (from 6% to 3%). 
Chart A. 5 – Comparison between notifications submitted by geographical region in the 
period 1995 -2022 and in 202 3 
 
2.16.  The Members wh o have submitted the greatest number of notifications (regular and 
emergency) since 1995  are listed in Charts A.6 and A.7, while the Members that have submitted the 
greatest number of notifications in 2023 are listed in Charts A.8 and A.9. In all four charts, bars 
show the number of notifications by type and values above the bars represent the corresponding 
percentage with respect to the total number of notifications submitted . 
G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 6 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 4 
 
- 9 - 
 
  2.17.  It is interesting to note t hat, while the top 10 notifying Members have mostly been stable 
since 1995 , in the last few years, two African LDCs have been  submitting high number s of 
notifications and are now among the top 20 Members notifying regular notifications (Uganda, 15º, 
and Ta nzania, 18º). This could suggest that these Members may have successfully put in place an 
internal coordination system that ensures the sustained fulfilment of the SPS transparency 
obligations.  
Chart A.6 - Ten Members who have submitted the most regular no tifications since 1995  
(percentage with respect to total of regular notifications)  
 
Chart A.7 - Ten Members who have submitted the most emergency notifications since  
1995  (percentage with respect to total of emergency  notifications)  
 
G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 6 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 4 
 
- 10 - 
 
  Chart A.8 - Members which have submitted the most regular notifications in 2023 
(percentage with respect to total of regular notifications)  
 
Chart A.9 - Members which have submitted the most emergency notifications in 2023 
(percentage with respect to total of emergency notifications)  
 
2.18.  In 2023, Brazil submitted 1 1% of all regular notifications circulated  (Chart A.8 ). 
Tanzania , Uganda and Kenya are among the t op 10 notifying Members , some of them for several 
consecutive years . It is also important to note that Burundi and Rwanda have each submitted 3% 
of the regular notifications circulated in 2023. This is mostly due to the joint submission of 
notifications by  the EAC, suggesting that joint notifications by regional groupings can further increase 
transparency and improve the fulfilment of the obligations established in the Agreement. 
For emergency notifications (Chart  A.9), three developed Members and seven developing Members 
feature among the top 10 notifiers. Thailand submitted more than  two thirds of all emergency 
notifications circulated  in 2023, of which more than half related to avian influenza  (see Box 1 ). 
This disease was also the subject of half of the emergency notifications submitted by Kazakhstan 
and Saudi Arabia in 2023.  No emergency notification was submitted by an LDC in 2023.  
G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 6 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 4 
 
- 11 - 
 
  2.19.  When looking at the break -down  according to the type of notification, both since 1995 and 
for 2023, it seems that Members more consistently submit addenda to regular notifications than to 
emergency notifications , e.g. to provide information on the modification of the content of a 
previously notified regulation . The overall data on the use of addenda are shown in Section 2.2.10 . 
 
2.2.3   Products covered  
2.20.  In accordance with paragraphs 5 and 6 of Annex B to the SPS Agreement and the 
Recommended Transparency Procedures, Members are required to identify the products to be 
covered by a new or changed SPS measure and should provide the relevant HS codes.  
2.21.  Since 1995, the WTO's Central Registry of Notifications (CRN) has been assigning, to the 
extent possible, the relevant HS codes for all notifications where these are not provided by 
Members.16 The online submission of notifications through the ePing SPS&TBT Platform  facilitates 
the inclusion of HS (and ICS ) codes by submitting Members through a built -in search function, 
providing more accurate information. Since September 2020, Members can specify the relevant 
codes from all HS versions, which are available from a drop -down list when submitting notification s 
online (see  Section  4.3.1.1.4 ). This update was aimed at increasing accuracy in the products covered 
and facilitating the retrieval of the relevant HS codes, further improving the quality of notifications.  
2.22.  While only indicative, Charts A.10  and A.11 show the products at the two -digit HS codes level 
that are most often covered by regular and emergency notifications since 1995. Note that only 
 
16 This information is available in th e ePing SPS&TBT Platform  for tracking purposes only.  Box 1. Avian influenza  
The keyword "avian influenza" was assigned to 116* (53%) of the 220 emergency notifications submitted 
in 2023. When comparing the number of outbreaks of highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI)* notified per 
year through the OIE-WAHIS system  with the SPS notifications submitted to the WTO, we observe that since 
2019 an increase in the number of  outbreaks notified to the WOAH coincides with an increase in the number 
of measures notified to the WTO in relation to avian influenza.  In 2023, there was a strik ing decrease in both 
the number of outbreaks notified to WOAH (1516) as well as the number of notifications submitted to WTO. 
Interestingly, while 47  Members (including several EU countries) informed WOAH of outbreaks of HPAI, only 
11 Members have notified related trade m easures in 2023.  
Despite the high number of outbreaks of HPAI notified to the WOAH and the measures notified by 
WTO Members in relation to this disease, since 1995 only 24 of the 575 (4.2%) STCs raised in the Committee 
were assigned the keyword "avian infl uenza", corresponding to 13% of "animal health/animal diseases" 
related STCs. Members have also raised issues on the use of the WOAH standard for HPAI under the agenda 
item "Monitoring of  the use of international standards " in the SPS Committee meetings . 
Number of regular and emergency notifcations related to avian influenza and number of new 
HPAI outbreaks notified to the WOAH  
 
*85 (73%) out of 116 were submitted by three Members.  
**Please note that data in the OIE -WAHIS refer to HPAI while the keyword av ian influenza assigned to WTO 
SPS notifications refers to both HPAI and low pathogenic avian influenza (LPAI).  
0500100015002000250030003500400045005000
050100150200250300
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
Regular notifications Emergency notifications New HPAI outbreaks (WOAH)G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 6 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 4 
 
- 12 - 
 
  HS codes referred to in more than 3% of notifications are represented and that some code 
descriptions have been shortened for presentation purposes.  
Chart A.10 - HS codes most frequently assigned to regular notifications since 1995  
 
Chart A.11 - HS codes most frequently assigned to emergency notifications since 1995  
 
2.23.  It is interesting to note that regular notifications ( Chart A.10 ) refer to a larger variety of 
HS codes in similarly high percentages (12 different codes are referred to in more than 3% of 
notifications, the  highest percentage of 9% correspondin g to HS  code 08 - Edible fruit and nuts; 
peel of citrus fruit or melons and HS code  02 - Meat and edible meat offal). While the list of HS codes 
most frequently referred to seems stable over time, it is interesting to note that, in 2023, 
an unusually high number of regular notifications referred to HS 31 – Fertilisers. 
Emergency  notifications mainly refer to animal -related HS codes ( Chart A.11 ), and these are 
assigned to higher percentages o f emergency notifications (seven different codes are referred to in 
more than 3% of notifications and four of these are above 30%; the highest percentages 
corresponding to HS code  02 - Meat and edible meat offal, referred to in 62%  of notifications, and 
to HS code 01 - Live animals, referred to in 61% of notifications). These data are consistent with 
results shown in Chart A.13  related to the objective of notifications.  
2.2.4   Regions/countries aff ected  
2.24.  The Recommended Transparency Procedures call on Members to identify the regions or 
countries which are most likely to be affected by the measure being notified. Since December 2008, 
the notification templates include a data entry option for this item  whereby Members are invited to 
either select the checkbox for "all trading partners" or provide information on specific regions or 
countries likely to be affected.  
2.25.  Since 2008, the vast majority of notifications affecting all trading partners are regular 
notifications and only a small percentage are emergency notifications. Likewise, notifications 
affecting specific regions or countries are mostly emergency notifications, compared to a smaller 
percentage of regular notifications. Chart A.12  shows that 86% of regular notifications submitted in 
2023 are likely to affect all trading partners and 96% of emergency notifications submitted that year 
are likely to affect specific regions or countries.  This pattern has been stable over the last few years, 
and seems to be consistent with the idea that emergency notifications are submitted where urgent 
problems of health protection arise or threaten to arise for a Member. The results shown in 
G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 6 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 4 
 
- 13 - 
 
  Chart  A.13, indicating that emergency notifications mostly pursue animal health animal health, and 
the fact that all the emergency notifications to which the keyword regionalization has been assigned 
(86) are likely to affect specific regions of countries further reinforces the idea most of the emergency 
notifications submitted in 2023 were related to an animal health issue in a specific region or country. 
More detailed information on the objective of mea sures in relation to the affected partners is 
available in Chart A.14 . 
Chart A.12 - Percentage of regular and emergency notifications (excluding addenda and  
corrigenda) affecting all trading partners or specific regions or countries  
 
2.2.5   Objective and rationale  
2.26.  In accordance with paragraphs 5 and 6 of Annex B to the SPS Agreement and 
the Recommended Transparency Procedures, Members are also required to state the  objective and 
rationale of proposed regulations by selecting one of the following five options: food safety, animal 
health, plant protection, protect humans from animal/plant pest or disease, and protect territory 
from other damage from pests. These objec tives correspond to the definition of an SPS measure in 
paragraph 1 of Annex A to the SPS Agreement.  
2.27.  Chart A.13  indicates the share of each objective as cited in regular and emergency 
notifica tions. It must be noted, however, that many notifications identify more than one objective. 
For regular notifications, the most frequently cited objective is food safety (73%), followed by plant 
protection (29%) and animal health (20%), while for emergency  notifications it is animal health 
(89%), followed by food safety (31%) and protection of humans from animal/plant pest or disease 
(20%). While some small variations are observed over time, the overall patterns have not fluctuated 
much since 1995, and food  safety and animal health are consistently the most frequent objective 
mentioned in regular and emergency notifications, respectively.  
Chart A.13 - Objectives of notified SPS measures (excluding addenda and corrigenda)  
in 2023  
 
G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 6 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 4 
 
- 14 - 
 
  2.2.5.1   Relationship between the ob jective of the measure and the regions  or countries 
affected  
2.28.  Chart A.14  represents the objectives of regular and emergency notifications in relation to  
trading partners likely to be affected  (i.e., all trading partners vs specific regions  or countries), 
since 2008, when revised notification formats were adopted, making these data available.  In the 
case of notifications affecting all trading partners submitted since 2008, food safety is the objective 
most frequently identified in regular notifications (84%), while plant protection is the most frequent 
objective in emergency notifications (51%). In the case of notifications likely to affect specific regions  
or countries submitted since 2008, p lant protection is the objective most frequently identified in 
regular notifications (69%), while animal health is the most frequent objective in emergency 
notifications (84%).  
Chart A.14 - Objectives of regular and emergency notifications (excluding adden da and  
corrigenda) by affected Members since 2008  
 
2.2.5.2   Relationship between  the objective of the measure and the development status 
of the notifying Member  
2.29.  Chart A.15  shows a detailed analysi s of the objective of the measures and the development 
status of the notifying Members since 2008. Overall, developed Members have notified about 33%  of 
all regular measures and 24% of all emergency measures submitted since 2008. In the case of 
developed M embers, the most striking result refers to plant protection measures, representing 
61% of all emergency measures related to plant protection. The share of notifications submitted by 
developing Members is higher for all other objectives, both for regular an d emergency notifications, 
reaching more than 80% of the regular notifications aimed at the protection of the territory from 
other damage from pests, and of the emergency notifications aimed at the protection of food safety, 
animal health and humans from a nimal/plant pests or diseases.  
G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 6 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 4 
 
- 15 - 
 
  Chart A.15 - Objectives of regular and emergency notifications (excluding addenda and 
corrigenda) by development status since 2008  
 
2.2.6   International standards, guidelines or recommendations  
2.30.  The SPS Agreement does not require Members to notify a measure if its content is 
substantially the same as that of an international standard adopted by Codex, WOAH (founded as 
OIE) or IPPC. Nonetheless, the Recommended Transparency Procedures encourage Mem bers to 
notify all regulations that are based on, conform to, or are substantially the same as an international 
standard, guideline or recommendation, if they are expected to have a significant impact on trade 
of other Members. The notification formats als o seek more precision from Members regarding 
relevant standards and the conformity of the notified measure with these.  
2.31.  With respect to regular notifications circulated in 2023, Chart A.16  shows that in 55% of the 
cases, Members have not identified an international standard as being relevant to the notified 
measure. This represents a 2% increase compared to the previous year (53% in 2022). In 2023, 
22% (28% in 2022) have referred to Codex, 17%  (12% in 2022) to IPPC and 6%  (7% in 2022) to 
WOAH.  When it comes to emergency notifications, Chart A.16  shows that in only 1% of the cases, 
no relevant international standard had been identified, whereas 93%, 5% and 1%  referred to WOAH, 
IPPC and Codex standards, respectively. These results are identical to those observed in 2022.  
Chart A.16 – Regular and em ergency notifications referring to a relevant international 
standard in 2023  
 
2.32.  It is important to keep in mind that, even if a notification refers to an international standard, 
the notified measure might not conform to it, i.e. its content might not be sub stantially the same as 
the content of the international standard. Therefore, in the notification formats Members are required 
to identify whether the proposed regulation conforms to the relevant international standard. In 2023, 
of the 548 (45%) regular not ifications identifying a relevant international standard for the measure, 
G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 6 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 4 
 
- 16 - 
 
  416 (76%) indicated that the proposed regulation conformed to that relevant international standard. 
Out of the regular notifications that indicated that the notified regulation did n ot conform to a 
relevant international standard, all but three referred to Codex standards. For the same period, 
nearly all (98%) emergency notifications identifying a relevant international standard indicated that 
the proposed regulation conformed to the relevant international standard. This further confirms 
the relevance of the standards set by the three international standard -setting bodies recognized by 
the SPS Agreement when addressing emergency situations.  
2.33.  Chart A.17  shows conformity with international standards of measures notified by  
development status. Overall, since 2008 the majority of measures conforming to international 
standards are submitted by developing Members. In the case of  regular notifications, developing 
Members have submitted 60%, 71% and 78% of measures notified which conform to Codex, WOAH 
and IPPC standards, respectively. Concerning emergency notifications, developed Members have 
submitted 61% of notifications conform ing to IPPC standards. Developing Members have notified 
56% and 81% of the emergency notifications confirming to Codex and WOAH standards, 
respectively.  
Chart A.17 – Conformity with international standards of measures (excluding addenda  
and corrigenda) not ified by development status since 2008  
 
2.2.7   Proposed date of adoption/publication/entry into force  
2.34.  In accordance with paragraphs 1 and 2 of Annex B to the SPS Agreement, Members must 
ensure that all SPS regulations which have been adopted are published prompt ly. Except in urgent 
circumstances, Members are also obliged to allow a reasonable interval between the publication of 
a measure and its entry into force. Paragraph 3.2 of the Doha Decision on Implementation -Related 
Issues and Concerns states that this int erval "shall be understood to mean normally a period of not 
less than 6 months".17 
2.35.  The regular notification format contained in the Recommended Transparency Procedures 
includes separate fields for entering the "proposed date of publication", the "proposed date of 
adoption" and the "proposed date of entry into force". In addition, it includes a default checkbox for 
a six-month interval between the publication and entry into force of a new measure. For each of 
these items, Members submitting notifications onl ine through the ePing SPS&TBT Platform  can easily 
enter dates from a calendar, allowing for a more accurate analysis.  
2.36.  For 2023, about 28% (34% in 2022) of the regular notifications identified either a specific 
date or a wider period (months or quarters, mainly ) for adoption, while in the remaining 72%, 
the date of adoption was still to be determined. This illustrates that, at the time of notification, 
Members are not al ways able to foresee the exact date of adoption of a regulation.  
2.37.  During the reporting period, 340 (28%) regular notifications (25% in 2022) indicated a 
specific date of publication. Of these, 127 (37%, compared to 76% in 2022) had been published on 
the da y, or prior to the date of distribution of the notification, and 57  of these concerned measures 
identified as trade facilitating. Regarding the interval between publication of the measure and its 
 
17 WT/MIN(01)/17 ; see also para. 4.3 of G/SPS/7/Rev.5 . 
G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 6 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 4 
 
- 17 - 
 
  entry into force, 190 regular notifications (16%, compared t o 22% in 2022) had selected the 
checkbox for a six -month interval provided in the notification format. A total of 272 notifications 
provided a specific date of entry into force. Of these, only 15 provided a period of six months or 
more and, of the remainin g, 27 provided one day or more. A total of 950 notifications did not provide 
a specific date of entry into force. It  should be noted that, in some cases, such dates are not yet 
determined at the time of the notification, as the nature and extent of comment s received on the 
proposed measure may affect the dates of adoption, publication and entry into force.  
2.38.  As provided for in the Recommended Transparency Procedures, notifying Members sometimes 
follow up on their original notification with an addendum to aler t Members to the adoption, 
publication, or entry into force of a previously notified proposed measure. About 83% of the addenda 
submitted in 2023 (77% in 2022) indicated the  adoption, publication or entry into force of 
regulations as shown in Chart A.19  (see Section 2.2.9 ). 
2.2.8   Final date for comments  
2.39.  Paragraph 5 of Annex B to the SPS Agreement provides that notifications sh ould take place 
at an early stage, when amendments can still be introduced and comments taken into account. 
The Recommended Transparency Procedures state that the comment period provided for regular 
notifications should last at least 60 days. Where domesti c regulatory mechanisms allow, the 60 -day 
comment period should normally begin with the circulation of the notification by the 
WTO Secretariat. The notification formats also offer a checkbox option for such a 60 -day comment 
period to encourage Members to f ollow this recommendation.18 Members submitting notifications 
online can easily enter the final date for comments from a calendar, allowing for a more accurate 
analysis. A total of 726 (59%, same share as in 2021 and in 2022) regular notifications submitte d 
in 2023 used the checkbox to provide a 60 -day comment period.  
2.40.  An analysis of the total notifications issued during 2023 shows that 1095 (55%) provided a 
comment period, of which 981 are regular notifications. The duration of the comment period ranged 
from a minimum of 1 day to a maximum of 95 days19, with an average of 57 days (calculated as the 
difference between the date of circulation of the notification and the final date for comments; 
see Table A.2 ). More specifically, 813  (83%) regular notifications provided a comment period of 
60 or more days. On average, both developed Members and developing (including LDCs) provided 
57 days for comments. The ePing SPS&TBT Platform  allows to search for notifications for which the 
comment period is open.  
Table A.2 - Comment period provided in regular notifications (2023)  
All Members  
  No. Share  
No. of regular notifications  1,222  - 
Comment period available  981 80% 
Comment period not indicated/not available  241 20% 
Comment period ends before or equal to distribution date  2 <1% 
Average length (in days)  57 
Developed Members  
  No. Share  
No. of regular notifications  441 - 
Comment period available  292 66% 
Comment period not indicated/not available  149 34% 
Comment period ends before or equal to distribution date  1 <1% 
Average length (in days)  57 
 
18 See G/SPS/7/Rev.5 , para. 2.8.  
19 One notifica tion provided 186 days and another, 426 days: these outliers were excluded from the 
subsequent calculations.  G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 6 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 4 
 
- 18 - 
 
  Developing Members  
  No. Share  
No. of regular notifications  781 - 
Comment period available  689 88% 
Comment period not indicated/not available  92 12% 
Comment period ends before or equal to distribution date  1 <1% 
Average length (in days)  57 
 
2.41.  While Members must notify other WTO Members of draft, new or changed measures, they are 
not required to submit the text of the relevant regulations along with their notifications. However, 
Members have raised concerns in the SPS Committee regarding difficu lties to access the full text of 
the regulations, only summarized in the notifications. Members  have also pointed out that the 
process of obtaining the texts of regulations reduces the period actually available for providing 
comments.  
2.42.  Since February 2008, to address these concerns and facilitate access to notified draft 
regulations, Members may, on a voluntary basis, provide the Secretariat with an electronic version 
of the text of the notified draft regulation as an attachment to the notification. The  subm itted text 
is then made electronically accessible to other Members through a hyperlink in  the notification 
format.20 Many Members include a hyperlink to their own electronic version of the notified regulation 
as part of the text of the notification, in add ition to or instead of the above option. Through the 
submission of notifications functionality of the ePing SPS&TBT Platform , Members can upload 
documents that become automatically av ailable for all Members through the Platform. In 2023, 
around 1,142 (94%) regular and 165 (75%) emergency notifications , submitted by 61  Members, 
included a link to the full text or a summary of the notified draft regulations using this facility. 
Members m ay wish to remind their notification authorities of the availability of this facility.  
2.2.9   Addenda to regular and emergency notifications  
2.43.  Overall, Members have been submitting increasing numbers of addenda to regular and 
emergency notifications since 1995, as shown in Chart A.18 . This increase led to an historical 
maximum in 2022, reaching a total of 612 (553 regular and 59 emergency) addenda (see Chart  A.1). 
A slightly lower number of addenda was submitted in 2023, with a total of 510 (466 emergency and 
44 emergency). It is also interesting to note that an increasing number of Members are following 
the good practice of submitting ad denda to regular and emergency notifications. In  total, 74 and 
50 Members have submitted at least one addendum to regular or emergency notifications, 
respectively. In 2023, 35 and 15 Members have submitted addenda to regular and emergency 
notifications, re spectively, representing a slight increase compared to 2022 (34 and 13, 
respectively).  
Chart A.1 8 - Evolution of the number of addenda and number of Members submitting  
addenda to regular and emergency notifications  
 
 
20 See G/SPS/7/Rev.5 , para. 2.17 and Annex C.  
G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 6 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 4 
 
- 19 - 
 
  2.44.  According to the Recommended Transparency Procedures, Members are asked to select 
the reason for an addendum from a list of options. Chart A.19  shows the share of each option for 
2023. Note that the "Notification of adoption, publication, or entry into force of regulation" is an 
option available for addenda to regular notifications only. Also, the format for addenda to regular 
notifications includes the option "Withdrawal of proposed regulati ons", while emergency notifications 
refer to "Withdrawal of regulations". Other reasons mentioned in the formats include, for instance, 
lifting an import ban or the inclusion of a new country in the list of affected regions. It  is interesting 
to note that the large majority (83%) of addenda to regular notifications inform of the adoption, 
publication, or entry into force of regulation while, for emergency notifications, 14% inform of the 
modification of content and/or scope of previously notified draft regu lation and another 14% inform 
of the withdrawal of a proposed regulation. The large majority (77%) refer to "Other" reasons, of 
which a large majority referred to the lifting of a temporary ban, including a ban imposed during 
the COVID -19 pandemic (see Section 2.4 ). 
Chart A. 19 - Reasons for addenda (percentage) in 202321 
 
2.45.  In addition, Members can notify their decision on special and differential treatment provided 
in reference to a specific request, through another addendum notification format. As previously 
mentioned, no Member has ever notified such a decision to the Committee.  
2.3  Notification keywords  
2.46.  In the ePing SPS&TBT Platform , notifications can also be categorized according to a list of 
about 90  predefined keywords, which describe issues appearing frequently in notifications. The CRN 
has assigned these keywords since 2003, and they assist searc hing for notifications in certain areas. 
While the keywords include the objectives of the notification (e.g. food safety, animal health, plant 
protection), they also include other notification subjects, specific animal and plant diseases, etc.  
2.47.  As shown in Chart A.20 , the keywords which have been most frequently assigned to regular 
notifications, in descending order for the current reporting period, are human health, food safety, 
plant health , pesticides and maximum residue limits (MRLs). For emergency notifications, the most 
frequent keywords in descending order are animal health/animal diseases22, avian  influenza, 
zoonoses and pest - or disease - free regions/regionalization. It must be noted that most of 
the notifications are assigned more than one keyword. The COVID -19 SPS keyword created in 2020 
was assigned to two addenda to emergency notificati ons only (see Section 2.4 ). 
 
21 Each notification can have multiple entries for the reasons for addenda.  
22 "Animal health" and "Animal diseases" keywords have been merged into "Animal health/animal 
diseases".  
G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 6 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 4 
 
- 20 - 
 
  Chart A.2 0 - Keywords of notified regular and emergency SPS measures in 2023 (number)  
 
2.4  COVID -19 related notifications and documents  
2.48.  During the COVID -19 pandemic, Members have continued to fulfil their transparency 
obligations, including the notification of specific COVID -19 related SPS measures. The WTO created 
the dedicated website COVID -19 and world trade  to inform of trade -related developments in light of 
the pandemic. In 2020, the Secretariat created a COVID -19 SPS keyword that was assigned to 
notifications and other documents based o n the presence of the words COVID -19, nCOV or 
coronavirus in the text of the notification. This keyword can be searched for in the ePing SPS&TBT 
Platform  and in DocsOnLine .  
2.49.  Between February 2020 and December 2023, Members submitted a total of 133 documents 
informing of measures adopted in relation to the COVID -19 pandemic. In 202 3, only two documents 
were submitted, both lifting temporary restrictions previously notified as emergency notifications. 
Likewise, most of the restrictions on the importation, and sometimes transit, of live animals and 
animal products, or on certain speci es imposed in 2020 have already been lifted. Almost  two-thirds 
of the measures adopted facilitated trade, mainly through the acceptance of electronic copies or 
scanned certificates. While several of these measures were extended through addenda to the origi nal 
notifications, Members have not recently informed of further extensions of their trade facilitating 
measures. As of 31 December 2023, SPS COVID -19 related documents represented 25% of all 
COVID -19 related documents submitted by Members to the WTO. The last SPS COVID -19 document 
was submitted on 16 January 2023.   
2.50.  In May 2020, the Secretariat published a technical note on " Standards, regulations and 
COVID -19 - What actions taken by WTO members? " (SPS and TBT) that was updated in December 
2020. In June 2020, th e SPS Committee organized an information -sharing session on COVID -19 on 
the margins of the Committee meeting23 and included a dedicat ed item in all informal meetings prior 
to the regular Committee meetings until June 2022.24 Additionally, a Thematic Session on the Use 
of Remote (Virtual) Audit and Verification in Regulatory Frameworks was held on the margins of the 
2022 June Committee m eeting.25 A report to the Council for Trade in Goods circulated in December 
2022 summarizes the SPS  COVID -19 related actions undertaken by the SPS Committee.26 
 
23 The report of the information -sharing session is contained in G/SPS/R/98 . 
24 The reports on the SPS Committee informal meetings held in March and June 2022 are contained in 
Annex A of document G/SPS/R/105  and Annex C of d ocument G/SPS/R/107 , respectively. In the June 2022 
meeting, the Committee agreed to delete this agenda item for the following SPS Committee meeting (see 
section 6.3 in document G/SPS/R/107 ). 
25 The dedicated page and the recordings of the sessions are avai lable here: 
https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/sps_e/thematic_session_21jun22_e.htm . 
26 The report is contained in document G/L/1477 -G/SPS/66 . 
G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 6 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 4 
 
- 21 - 
 
  3  PART B - SPECIFIC TRADE CONCERNS  
3.1.  Part B of the present document contains information on STCs, ma intaining the previously 
assigned numbers according to the chronological order of the Committee meetings in which they 
were first raised, although titles may be updated to reflect the latest state of the concern. 
These  numbers serve as unique identifiers a nd are intended to facilitate the tracking of issues raised 
over time. The Secretariat has revised this report annually to include new information provided by 
Members ( G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.1  to G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev .23). As mentioned above, i n preparing 
this report , the Secretariat has largely relied on the ePing SPS&TBT Platform . More detailed searches 
have b een undertaken in the Trade Concerns Database (TCD) . 
3.2.  Part B  is divided into two sections:  
• General overview of specific trade concerns (1995 -2023); and 
• Specific trade concerns considered in 202 3. 
3.3.  The first section of Part B presents a general overview of STCs , including  summary statistics 
and graphs for all the STCs raised in the SPS  Committee between the first regular meeting of 1995 
and the last regular meeting of 20 23. It provides detailed informati on on the concerns raised per 
meeting, as well as the relation between the number of notifications and the number of concerns. 
In addition , the STCs are categorized by their primary subject keyword ( food safety, animal or plant 
health, or other concerns ). Information is also provided on the participation of Members in STCs, 
by development status, on the average number of times that STCs are raised, as well as  on reported 
status of resolution . 
3.4.  The second section of Part B contains information regarding all S TCs which were raised in the 
SPS Committee in 20 23 (Section 3.2 ). This includes STCs raised for the first time in 20 23, 
STCs which were previously raised and discussed again in 2023 and STCs resolved in 2023. 
Information is also provided on the first request for the use of the Good Offices of the Chair under 
Article 12.2 of the SPS Agreement and the ad hoc  consultations procedure, as well as on  STCs for 
which substantive action o ccurred under the  Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU) . All STCs 
discussed in 202 3 are presented by responding Member  (Table B.2 ). 
3.1  General overview of specific trade concerns  (1995 -2023) 
3.5.  Altogether, 575 STCs have been raised between 1995 and the end of 20 23. The full list of STCs 
raised since 1995 can be found in the  TCD. Chart B.1  shows the number of new STCs raised each 
year, per Committee meeting, and Chart B.2  shows the number of new and previously raised STCs 
per year.  A total of 17 new STCs were raised in the three SPS Committee meetings held in 202 3. 
This number is slightly lower than the average since 1995, and also lower than the number of new 
STCs raised in the last three years . 
3.6.  In 202 3, 57 previously raised STCs were discussed again  (including 10 new STCs raised again 
in the same year) , the highest number since 1995 . Over the last four years there seems to be a 
downward trend in the number of new STCs raised and an upward trend in the number of previously 
raised STCs. The withdr awal of several new STCs from the agenda prior to its adoption at the 
beginning of the meeting may suggest that bilateral negotiations prior to SPS Committee meetings 
contribute to easing trade frictions and reduce the number of new STCs raised in the Comm ittee. 
Specific information on STCs discussed in 202 3 is available in Section 3.2 . G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 6 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 4 
 
- 22 - 
 
  Chart B.1 – Number of new STCs raised  since 1995, per Committee meeting  
 
Chart B.2 – Number of new and previously raised STCs discussed per year since 199527 
 
3.7.  It is interesting to note that , despite the increasing number of notifications submitted by 
Members  (see Chart A.1 ), there does not seem to be a clear correlation between the number of 
notifications and the number of new STCs raised. Only 2 25 (39%) STCs referred to a notified 
measure; specifically, 1 97 STCs referred to a regular notification (including addenda) while 3 5 STCs 
referred to an emergency notification  (including addenda) . Additionally, 18 STCs referred to a 
TBT notification and ten STCs raised in the TBT  Committee refer red to a notification s ubmitted to 
the SPS Committee.  
3.8.  Chart B.3  categorizes the 575 STCs raised since 1995 into food safety, animal or plant health, 
or other concerns. Overall, 191 (33%) of STCs raised relate primarily to food safety , 188 (33%) to 
animal health /animal diseases (animal health) , 126 (22%) to plant health, and 70 (12%) to other 
issues such as certification requirements, or control , inspection or approval procedures.28 A closer 
look at the primary objectives of STCs raised in 202 3 compared to previous years  shows an increased 
number of STCs which are not clearly related to food safety, animal or plant health , both in the new 
and the previously raised STCs discussed in 2023  (Chart  B.11). On average, it seems that STCs 
 
27 Please note that the number of times an STC is raised during the year is not taken into account.  
New STCs raised again in the same year are also included in the total of previously raised STCs.  
28 Many STCs co ncern both food safety, animal or plant health and control, inspection or approval 
procedures. Where this is the case, the primary subject keywor d "food safety ", "animal  health/animal diseases"  
or "plant health " has been assigned. In addition, the keyword "control, inspection and approval procedures"  
has also been assigned to such STCs.  
G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 6 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 4 
 
- 23 - 
 
  related to other concerns  (including control, inspection and approval procedures)  are raised more 
frequently than STCs with other objectives (3.5 times compared to the average of 3.1 for all STCs). 
Similarly, fewer  STCs with other objectives have been reported as resolved or partially resolved. 
These statistics are summarized in Table  B.1. 
Chart B.3 – STCs by subject (1995 -2023) 
 
3.9.  There does not seem to be a clear pattern in the primary subject keywords (food safety, animal 
health, plant health or other concerns) of new STCs submitted  since 199 5 (Chart B.4 ). Overall, f ood 
safety has been  the most frequent primary keyword of new STCs raised in recent  years , alternating 
with animal health. Compared to 2022, there was a decrease in the number of STC s relate d to food 
safety an d other concerns, while the number of STCs related to animal and plant health  remains 
overall  unchanged . 
Chart B.4 - Primary subject keywords of new STCs per year  
 
3.10.  Chart  B.5 reflects the participation of Members in the 575 STCs29 raised since 1995, according 
to their development status, regardless of how often the same STC was discussed in the Committee. 
Developing Members actively participa te as Members raising (390 times) and supporting (515 times) 
STCs, compared to developed Members (326 and 280 times, respectively). These figures are 
 
29 STCs can be raised, supported or responded to by more than one Member, which explains the 
apparent double -counting shown in Chart B.5 compared with the overall count of the 575 STCs raised since 
1995.  
G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 6 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 4 
 
- 24 - 
 
  considerably lower in the case of LDCs (10 and 26 times, respectively).  When it comes to Members 
maintaini ng the measures,  in 336 cases  a developing Member responded to a concern, compared to 
310 and two for a developed Member and an LDC, respectively.  
Chart B.5 – Participation of Members in STCs  according to the ir development status , since  
1995  
 
 
3.11.  A total of 6 6 Members (4 0% of the membership) have raised at least one STC since 1995. 
This includes  19 developed Members , 43 developing Members and four LDCs. A total of 7 9 Members 
have supported at least one STC since 1995 (1 4 developed  Members , 50 develop ing Members and 
15 LDCs) . A total of 69 Members' measures have been subject to an STC at least once ( 16 developed  
Members , 51 developing Members and two LDCs).  Overall, t hese numbers confirm that developing 
Members and LDCs are very active and make use of  the SPS  Committee  as a forum to discuss trade 
concerns . 
3.12.  Charts  B.6 and B.7 show the  10 Members that have raised the highest number of  new 
concerns and the 10 Members that have responded  to the highest number of STCs, respectively, 
since 1995 up to the last Committee meeting in November 20 23. Out of the 10  Members that have 
raised the highest number of STCs since 1995, three are developed Members and the remaining 
seven are developing Members , and the list of most active Members has not changed from last year . 
Two Members have raised almost 40% of the STCs d iscussed in the SPS Committee. When it comes 
to Members responding to STCs, five are developed and five are developing  Members . 
Chart  B.6 shows that, for some Members , more  than 75% of the STCs raised have been resolved or 
partially resolved.30 
 
30 Members can report on the resolution of STCs under t he corresponding agenda item in the 
SPS Committee. Where an STC has been raised by more than one Member but not all those who raised the 
STC have reported it to be resolved, the STC is considered to be partially resolved. Also, for partially resolved 
STCs,  for the concern may have been resolved for selected products or by some of the importing Members 
maintaining the measure in question.   
G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 6 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 4 
 
- 25 - 
 
  Chart B.6 - Members wh o have raised the most STCs since 1995  
 
 
Chart B.7 - Members responding to the most STC s since 1995  
 
 
3.13.  South America, Central America and the Caribbean is the region that ha s raised the most 
STCs since 1995  (30%) , followed by North America  and Asia (both 26%) . Asia is the region 
responding to the highest  number of STCs  (36%), followed by Europe  (27%). Finally, South America, 
Central America and the Caribbean is also the region that most frequently support s STCs (23%) 
(Chart B.8 ). It is interesting to note that food safety  is the primary objective of the majority of 
concerns raised by Asian Members  (48%), while the majority of concerns (4 6%) raised by Europe an 
Members  relate to animal health . It is also w orth noting that the European Union is responding to 
STCs that refer mainly to food safety (53%) while Members from South America, Central America 
and the Car ibbean mainly respond to STCs related to animal health (49%).  
Chart B. 8 – Number of STCs by geographical region since 1995  
 
G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 6 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 4 
 
- 26 - 
 
  3.14.  Chart B.9  refers to  the average number of times STCs have been raised since 199531, coupled  
with information on the resolution status of the concerns. Out of the 575 STCs raised since 1995, 
230 (40%) have been reported to be resol ved and 8 1 (14%) have been reported to be partially 
resolved. It is interesting to note that 163 (71%) of the 230 STCs reported as resolved were only 
raised once or twice  prior to their resolution . In the case of the 8 1 STCs for which a partial solution 
has been reported, 47 (5 8%) have only been raised once or twice. This could suggest that raising 
STCs in the Committee triggers discussions that could contribute to the resolution of the concerns. 
When it comes to 264 STCs that have not been reported as resolved, 143 (54%) have only been 
raised once or twice, although this result includes STCs that have been raised in recent Committee  
meeting s, and more time would be needed before further conclusions can be drawn. It is al so worth 
noting that 133 (50%) of the concerns that have not been reported as resolved have not been raised  
in the last five years ; some of those were only raised once or twice and never discussed again in the 
Committee, suggesting that some of these STCs may have resolved without the Committee  being 
informed.  In total, about  54% of the STCs raised have been resolved or partially resolved. More than 
half of these were raised, alone or with other Members, by developing countries and LDCs . 
These  data confirm the importance of the Committee for the resolution of trade concerns.  
Chart B. 9 – Resolution status and number of times STCs have been raised since 1995  
 
3.15.  Of the 230 STCs for which a solution has been reported, 90 (39%) relate to animal health, 
65 (29%) to plant health, 58 (25%) to food safety, and 17 (7%) to other concerns. It is interesting 
to note that STCs relating to food safety and animal health issues  each represent 33%  of the total 
number of STCs raised since 1 995 (Chart B.3 ), while  they correspond to 25% and 39%, respectively,  
of the total STCs reported as resolved. STCs related to plant health and other concerns represent 
22% and 12% of the total , and constitute 29% and 7% of the resolved STCs, respectively. 
These  statistics are summarized in Table  B.1. 
Table B.1 - Summary of statistics on resolution of STCs , by primary subject keyword  
Primary keyword 
subject  Food safety  Animal health  Plant health  Other concerns  All STCs  
All STCs  191 (33%) 188 (33%) 126 (22%) 70 (12%) 575 
Number of times 
raised (average)  3.3 3.1 2.7 3.5 3.1 
STCs reported as 
resolved (R)  58 (25%) 90 (39%) 65 (29%) 17 (7%) 230 (40%) 
Partially resolved 
(PR) STCs  26 (33%) 34 (41%) 14 (18%) 7 (8%) 81 (14%) 
STCs for which no 
solution has been 
reported (NR)  107 (40%) 64 (25%) 47 (18%) 46 (17%) 264 (46%) 
 
31 These figures do not include the time the STC was raised in the Committee to report on its resolution.  
G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 6 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 4 
 
- 27 - 
 
  3.16.  In 2022, the list of keywords assigned to STCs was reduced to streamline searches.  
Chart  B.10 shows that a large number of STCs discussed since 1995 are related to human health 
and food safe ty. Other keywords frequently assigned are animal health and international 
standards/harmonization  and risk assessment . 
Chart B.1 0 – Keywords assigned to STCs  
 
 
3.2  Specific trade concerns considered in 2023 
3.17.  While in 2023 Committee meetings were still held in hybrid mode, a higher number of 
delegates were present in the Geneva compared to the previous years, allowing for more 
opportunities for in person bilateral interactions. In 2023, several new and previously raised STCs 
were removed before the adopt ion of the agenda due to progress in bilateral consultations. 
In particular, in March  2023 India withdrew four new STCs: Brazil's MRLs for prothioconazole 
(G/SPS/N/BRA/2054 ); Brazil's MRLs for fluxapyroxad in bananas, pumpkins 
(G/SPS/N/BRA/2079/Add.1 ); Brazil's  modifications of MRLs and pre -harvest intervals (PHI) 
inconsistent with established risk assessment guidelines by FAO ( G/SPS/N/BRA/2029/Add.2 ); and 
South Africa's MRLs for abamectin, pyraclostrobin and chlorpyrifos ( G/SPS/N/ZAF/ 78). In the same 
meeting, Chinese Taipei did not raise the STC "China's actions related to COVID -19 that affect trade 
in food and agricultural products ( ID 487 )", which was only raised by Australia, Japan, and the 
European Union.32 In July 2023, three  previously raised STCs were removed from the agenda: Brazil 
withdrew STC ID 521 , Chinese  Taipei's import restriction s on poultry and beef; India removed STC 
ID 525 , The  Russian  Federation's classification of tea as "fruits and vegetables"; and the Russia n 
Federation withdrew STC ID 527 , Delays in Thailand's approval procedures for animal products.33 
In November 2023, before the  adoption o f the agenda, the United  States withdrew the support it  had 
initially indicated in eAgenda for STC ID 431 , South  Africa's import restricti ons on poultry due to 
highly pathogenic avian influenza.34 
 
32 See paragraph  3.1 of the summary report of the March 2023 SPS Committee meeting 
(G/SPS/R/109/Corr.1 ). These STCs had been included in the annotated draft agenda circulated as JOB/SPS/26 . 
33 See paragraph 4.1 of the summary report of the July 2023 SPS Committe e meeting ( G/SPS/R/110 ). 
These STCs had been included in the annotated draft agenda circulated as JOB/SPS/29 . 
34 See paragraph 3.1 of the summary report of the November 2023 SPS Committee meeting 
(G/SPS/R/111 ). This STC had been included in the annotated draft agenda circulated as JOB/SPS/32 . 
G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 6 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 4 
 
- 28 - 
 
  3.18.  A total of 67 STCs  were brought to the attention of the Committee during 20 23, of which 
17 were new STCs and 50 had been raised previously (Table B.2  provides further information on 
these STCs, including Members' participation, objective, number of times raised and resolution 
status ). In addition, seven STCs raised for the first time in 2023 were again discussed in subsequent 
meetings during the same year , bringing the number of previously raised STCs considered in this 
document to 5 7, a historical maximum  in the SPS Committee  (Chart B.2 ). In 2023, two STCs were 
reported as resolved (see Section 3.2.1 ). In 202 3, substantive action occurred under the DSU in the 
case of three STCs ( IDs 185, 356 and 495) (Table B. 3). 
3.19.  The number of new STCs raised in the Committee has been decreasing since  a high in  2020, 
and only 17 new concerns were discussed in 2023  (Chart B.1 ). Of the 57 previously raised STCs 
discussed in 2023, 43 (75%) were raised for the first time in 2020 or later, and only 14 (25%) were 
raised before 2020 . Thirty -three (58%)  of these 5 7 STCs have been discussed five times or more 
since they were first raised. One of these STCs  has been raised 4 9 times.  
3.20.  Despite the high number of notifications circulated every year (Chart A.1 ), only seven35 of the 
17 new STCs raised in 202 3 referred  specifically  to SPS notifications. For instance , while 
133 COVID -19 related SPS notifications  and documents had been submitted since the beginning of 
the pandemic  until December 202 3, only two new COVID -19 related STCs have been raised in the 
Committee since the beginning of the pandemic, and only one of these has been raised  again  in 
2023.36 
3.21.  As mentioned earlier, a total of 6 7 (new and previously raised)  STCs were discussed in 202 3. 
In 202 3, 20 Members (1 2% of the membership ) raised at least one STC , compared to eight Members 
in 2022. These  includ e 12 (four developed and eight developing)  Members who raised  at least one 
new STC and 18 (six developed and 12 developing) Members who raised  at least one of the 
57 previously raised STC s. Seven  previously raised STCs, discussed  three times or more , 
have gathered the support of 10 Members or more.37 Concerning Members responding, the 17 new 
STCs were raised against measures maintained by 1 5 (seven  developed and eight developing ) 
Members . The 5 7 previously discussed STCs were raised against measures maintained by 23 
(five developed and 17 developing)  Members. Additionally, one STC was raised again against 
measures maintained by  at least 15  Members.  
3.22.  Out of the 17 new STCs raised in 20 23, six (35%) refer to animal health and zoonoses38, 
noting that this category includes issues that are also relevant from a food safety perspective; three  
(18%) relate primarily to food safety ; five (29%) refer to other concerns; and three (18%) refer to 
plant health . Chart  B.11 shows all new and previous STCs  raised in the Committee in 20 23 compared 
to all STCs discussed between 1995 and 20 22, by primary subject keywords assigned.  In 202 3, 
we can see a sharp  increase in the STCs relate d to other concerns, which mainly refer to issues 
related to control, inspection and approval procedures , and a slight increase in the new STC s related 
to animal health. Similarly, we can see a sharp  decrease in the percentage of new STCs relating  to 
food safety and a milder decrease in STCs related to plant health , compared with the period 1995 -
2022. 
 
35 These STCs were 559, 560, 566, 567,  571, 573 and 574. 
36 These STCs were 487 (raised ten times since 2020)  and 488 (raised once in 2020 ). 
37 STCs 382, 446, 448, 485, 487, 501 and 534. 
38 Among the new STCs raised in 2023 with animal health as a primary keyword, ASF ( 563), avian 
influenza ( 562 and 573), BSE ( 561 and 564), and foot  and mouth disease ( 564 and 568) are the major 
diseases of concern.  G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 6 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 4 
 
- 29 - 
 
  Chart B.11 – New and previous STCs raised in 2023, by primary subject keywords,  
compared to all STCs raised between 1995 and 20 22 (percentage)  
 
3.2.1   Resolution of STCs in 202 3 
3.23.  In July 2023, Brazil reported on the resolution of two STCs: STC ID 482  (Peru's import 
restrictions on pork) and ID 489  (Mexico's import restrictions on pork). Prior to the resolution of STC 
ID 489, in 2022 Brazil had requested the Good Offices of the Chair under Article 12.2 of the SPS 
Agreement and the ad hoc  consultations procedure ( G/SPS/61 ) (see Section 3.2.2 ). 
3.24.  Since 2013, the Secretariat periodically contacts Members to seek information regarding the 
status (resolved, partially resolved or not resolved) of their STCs that ha ve not been raised for two 
years . The latest exerci se was conducted in 2022, and the results were circulated in document 
G/SPS/GEN/2062/Rev.1 . Members are invited to inform of the status of the STCs they have raised 
to ensure that WTO databases are kept updated. The Secretariat will contac t Members again in 2024 
for this purpose.  
3.2.2   Good offices of the Chair  
3.25.  In 2022, Brazil requested the Good Offices of the Chair under Article 12.2 of the 
SPS Agreement and the ad hoc  consultations procedure  (G/SPS/61 ) regarding issues pertaining to 
the export of swin e meat to Mexico, which were related to three previously discussed STCs ( IDs 263, 
271 and 489). STC ID 489  had been  raised at all three SPS Committee meetings held in 2022.  On 
27 October 2022, Mexico p rovided a response in accordance with paragraph 2.3 of the ad hoc 
consultations procedure. Mexico rejected the request because it had published the requirements to 
be met for the importation of pork from Brazil to Mexico and thus was of the view that it wa s not 
necessary to continue with the Good Offices of the Chair.39 In July 2023, Brazil informed the 
Committee that STC ID 489  was considered as resolved.  
3.26.  In November 2023, Brazil requested the Good Offices of the Chair under Article 12.2 of the 
SPS Agreement  and the ad hoc  consultations procedure ( G/SPS/61 ) regarding is sues pertaining to 
the export of meat, pork, poultry, milk and dairy products, genetic material and live cattle to Nigeria 
(G/SPS/GEN/2189 ), an issue previously discussed under STC ID 523. Nigeria did not provide a 
written response to Brazil's request . 
 
39 Brazil's request and Mexico's response to the request were circulated in documents G/SPS/GEN/2078  
and G/SPS/GEN/2079 . 
G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 6 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 4 
 
- 30 - 
 
  4  PART C – OTHER TRANSPARENCY -RELATED ASPECTS  
4.1  Review of the Operation and Implementation of the SPS Agreement  
4.1.  In November 2023, the SPS Committee adopted the proposed process  for the Sixth Review of 
the Operation and Implementation of the SPS Agreement40, which will take place throughout 2024 
and is scheduled to be completed in early 2025.  Two deadlines (January and April 2024) have be en 
established for Members to submit written proposals for consideration during the Review. Several of 
the proposals received in January referred to transparency, in particular to the use of IT tools such 
as the ePing S PS&TBT Platform  and eAgenda, the improvement of the notification template and the 
consideration of comments by notifying Members.41 The Secretariat is organiz ing a workshop on 
transparency  to be held in March 2024 (see Section 4.2 ). 
4.1.1   Transparency recommendations in the Fifth Review  
4.2.  The Report of the Fifth Review42 was adopted at the June 2020 Committee meeting. The Report 
contains the following recommendation on Notification Procedures and Transparency 
(paragraph  7.13):  
a. Members are encouraged to clearly indicate in their SPS Committee notifications when 
a measure has been notifie d to another Committee.43 Members should include this 
information under the point of the notification format titled "Other relevant documents 
and language(s) in which these are available".  
4.3.  The Report also contains the following recommendations on National SPS Coordination 
Mechanisms (paragraph 6.7):  
a. Members are encouraged to implement appropriate national coordination mechanisms 
to enable consultation and communication between relevant technical and trade policy 
experts to enable the development of coordina ted SPS positions that are consistent with 
the obligations of the SPS Agreement. Members are further encouraged to consider 
ways to strengthen internal coordination on SPS matters.  
b. Members should continue to share experiences on their national coordination  
mechanisms and discuss strategies and approaches to improve SPS coordination and 
engagement at the national level with the aim of strengthening implementation of the 
SPS Agreement, including resolving specific trade concerns.  
c. The Committee requests the Se cretariat to prepare a collection of resources that can be 
useful for Members in implementing their national coordination mechanisms, starting 
with those mentioned at the 2019 Workshop on Transparency and Coordination, and 
including additional resources as  suggested by Members.44 
4.2  Technical assistance and workshops  
4.4.  In light of the steadily increasing volume of documents  circulated , managing the flow of 
notifications and coordinating at the national level on SPS matters  is a challenge for many Members. 
This i s one of the areas where Members have sought technical assistance and guidance on best 
practices.  
4.5.  The WTO Secretariat regularly provides hands -on training on all its tools , as part of its technical 
assistance programmes.45 Some Members significantly increase their notification activity following a 
dedicated training on transparency. Similarly, some Members have updated the contact details of 
 
40 The proposed process is contained in document G/SPS/W/346 .  
41 Detailed information on the Sixth  Review and on the proposals received  is available in the dedicated 
page: https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/sps_e/review_sps_agreement_ e.htm . 
42 G/SPS/64  and G/SPS/64/Add.1 . 
43 Please refer to section 2.7 of the Recommended Procedures for Implementing the Transparency 
Obligations of the SPS Agreement (Article 7) in document G/SPS/7/Rev.5 , which makes reference to notifying 
a regulation contain ing SPS and TBT measures under both the SPS and TBT Agreements.  
44 See document G/SPS/GEN/1850/Rev.1 . 
45 See the latest version of the G/SPS/GEN/521  document series.  G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 6 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 4 
 
- 31 - 
 
  their NNAs and NEPs available in the ePing  SPS&TBT Platform  (see Section 4.3.1.1.2 ) following 
dedicated trainings , further facilitating communication between Members.  
4.6.  Additionally, t ransparency workshops, usually organized every other year, have provided highly 
interactive training on the use of the SP S IT tools . Likewise, these dedicated trainings have also led 
to an increased use of these tools . Following the Workshop on Transparency organized in 202246, 
aimed at provid ing an update on recent developments related to transparency and present the main 
functions of the ePing SPS&TBT Platform , another Workshop on Transparency will be held on 
18-19 March 2024.47 The aim of the workshop will be to  enhance the implementation of SPS 
transparency provisions, and to exchange experiences on the use of online transparency tools, 
including the ePing SPS&TBT Platform , including for coo rdination at the national level.  
4.7.  The first edition of the new SPS Transparency Champions Course , launched  in October  202248, 
concluded with a Follow -up Session held in June 2023.49 This new technical assistance initiative 
followed a unique and cohesive thr ee-part structure, incorporating theoretical training, practical 
exercises, and the implementation of action plans in participants' countries. During the first and 
second part of the course , 18 officials from 13 English -speaking African countries enhanc ed their 
understanding of the transparency provisions of the SPS Agreement  and elaborated action plans to 
address challenges/difficulties encountered in their respective countries . Participants who  
implemented action plans  and submitted periodic prog ress reports  then returned  to Geneva in 2023, 
to report on actions they took to improve the SPS transparency framework in their countries over 
an estimated six -month period.  This dedicated training led to concrete results such as an increase 
in the number of notifications submitted by Members participating in the course and improved 
coordination in national institutions dealing with transparency, among others.  
4.8.  In October 2023, the Committee on Trade and Development in Special Session (CTD -SS) held 
a themati c session to discuss the S&D treatment in the SPS (and TBT) Agreements and developing 
Members’ related challenges, with special focus on transparency provisions, the ePing SPS&TBT 
Platform , as well as transparency related capacity building work.  
4.9.  All the information from previous workshops and thematic sessions on transparency  and 
dedicated trainings organized by the Secretariat  is available in the Events, workshops and training  
page on the SPS gateway.  
4.3  SPS IT tools  
4.3.1   The ePing SPS&TBT Platform  
4.10.  The new ePing SPS&TBT Platform  was officially launched  on 13 July 2022, with the 
participation of senior officials from the three ePing par tner agencies, the  UN Department of 
Economic and Social Affairs (UNDESA), the International Trade Center (ITC) and the WTO.50 
The ePing SPS&TBT Platform  integrate s all previous SPS an d TBT transparency tools into a single 
platform. The Platform allows search es of SPS (and TBT) notifications, STCs and other documents , 
as well as contact information of NNAs and NEPs . Registered  users benefit from additional features, 
including receiving email alerts on notifications on products and/or markets of interest. Officials with 
additional rights can use the ePing SPS&TBT Platform  to submit notifications to the WTO , updat e 
NNA and NEP contact details,  and, on a voluntary basis, disseminate their comments/replies on 
notifications.51 Extracting data from a single source reduces errors and maintenance costs. 
Additionally,  under the single sign -on system recently developed by the WTO Secretariat, users can 
access all WTO databases to which they have rights with a single set of credentials. Since the 
beginning of the project in 2021, the SPS (and TBT) Committee has been regu larly informed of 
 
46 Information on this workshop, including the programme, the presentations and the recording of the 
session, is available in https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/sps_e/workshop_transparency_20jun22_e.htm . 
The report is contained in document G/SPS/R/106 . 
47 Information on this workshop , including the programme,  is available in   
https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/sps_e/sps_1803202410_e/sps_1803202410_e.htm .  
48 See WTO | 2022 News items - DG Okonjo -Iweala stresses importance of SPS, TBT transparency to 
facilitate trade . 
49 A similar course was also offered in the TBT area.  
50 See G/SPS/GEN/2 058-G/TBT/GEN/336 . 
51 See document G/SPS/GEN/2163 -G/TBT/GEN/363  for more information on the different levels of 
access for ePing users. Additional information in available in Members' transparency toolkit . G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 6 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 4 
 
- 32 - 
 
  progress made in the development of the Platform. The following paragraphs summarize the 
functions that are integrated in the ePing SPS&TBT Platform .52 New training materials will be 
developed in due course.  
4.3.1.1   Functionalities  
4.11.  Video tutorials on the main functionalities of the Platform , as well as some frequently asked 
questions and other relevant resources are available on the More info  tab. 
4.3.1.1.1   Notifications , STCs  and other documents  
4.12.  The ePing SPS&TBT Platform  integrate s the search functions for notifications , STCs and other 
documents . The ePing SPS&TBT Platform  also includes the possibility to search both notifications 
and STCs  at the same time, and allows searches across both SPS and TBT domains.  
4.13.  Since  notifications  are increasingly being submitted online (see Section 4.3.1.1.4 ), 
the information available is more complete and harmonized, further improving the quality of 
searches. Members can register to the Platform  to have access to additional features , such as saving 
filters, defining favourite notifications , or access ing chats on specific notifications . 
4.14.  For searches on STCs, the ePing SPS&TBT Platform  mirror s the data contained  in the WTO 
TCD, available to Members since February 2021 .53 This advanced  analytical tool for STCs integrates 
concerns raised in the SPS, TBT, Market Access  and Import Licensing committees . It may incorporate 
concerns raised in other WTO  bodies in the future . The mirroring  of the  TCD in the new Platform 
allows for data to be extracted from a single source, ensuring consistency and reducing maintenance 
costs and errors. For more advanced searches, the ePing SPS&TBT Platform  will redirect users to 
the TCD, which contains more granular information, organized on a per meeting basis, facilitating 
in-depth  analysi s and reporting. The TCD also includes  Member s' profiles and allows users to explore 
and visualize results by objectives, keywords, and HS  codes, among other options. Simila rly, 
the database relates  STCs that may be linked to other concerns discussed in the SPS and other WTO 
Committee s, based on Members' statements or on discussions held in Committee meetings, as well 
as on notifications and measures at issue . This analytical tool is fed from the data available in 
eAgenda  and has been manually completed with historical data on trade concerns available in the 
summary reports of SPS Committee meetings.  
4.15.  In response to a survey undertaken in 202154, a mobile ePing application was made available 
in the second half of 2022, which allows users to access some of the functionalities of the Platform.  
4.3.1.1.2   Contact details of NNAs and NEPs  
4.16.  Contact details of NNAs and NEPs  are also available in the ePing SPS&TBT Platform . 
Members  are responsible, through their notification admin (see Section 4.3.1.1.4 ), of updating their 
contact details.  
4.3.1.1.3   Outreach /Communication  function  
4.17.  The ePing SPS&TBT Platform  include s a publicly available alert system for SPS  and TBT  
notification s. By filling a registration form, users can identify particular products and/or markets of 
interest and subscribe to receive  email alerts regarding SPS and TBT notifications. In addition, users  
continue to be able to share notifications, upload additional information and related documents, as 
well as participate in discussion forums. Additionally , an NNA/NEP  management tool is available to 
facilitate domestic as well as international information sharing and discussion  on notifications . Users 
from relevant institutions in charge of transparency can request outreach rights to benefit from 
 
52 Currently, the Practical Manual for NNAs and NEPs , first circulated in 2011 and revised in 2018, offers 
guidance for governments to facilitate the implementation of  the transparency provisions of the 
SPS Agreement. The Secretariat has prepared an updated overview of the SPS and TBT IT tools . 
These  materials will be reviewed in light of the on -going development on IT tools.  
53 The WTO TCD was launched in beta version in the margins of the February 2021 TBT Committee 
meeting and presented to the SPS Committee at its March 2021 meeting.  The database is available at 
https://tradeconcerns.wto.org/en . 
54 See G/SPS/GEN/1933 -G/TBT/GEN/317 . G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 6 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 4 
 
- 33 - 
 
  additional features55, which include  a chat function to discuss topics of their choice  with other 
outreach admins . As such, the Platform  continue s to help public and private stakeholders, 
in particular small and medium enterprises, to track, consult and comment on measures that a re 
being developed and adapt as necessary to changing regulatory conditions.  
4.18.  As of 31 December 202 3, the number of registered user s had grown  to over 23,300 (including 
over 9,300 users from private sector) from 191 countries  or territories , up from 1 9,500 users 
(including 7,700 users from the private sector) from 18 7 countries or territories at the end of 202 2. 
Some of these users registered after a TA activity had been delivered in their country or their region, 
confirming the efficiency of TA  activiti es to spread the word about the ePing SPS&TBT Platform  and 
get users started with the registration process and the subscription to receive email alerts. More than 
40% of users receive  daily or weekly email alerts of SPS  and/or TBT notifications. Some  additional 
functionalities, such as the national and international discussion fora and the chat for users with 
admin rights, are also of interest to many Members. In total, 438 ePing Outre ach admin users were 
registered on the Platform , covering 130 countries and territories. In  the case of SPS, a  total of 
214 Outreach admin user s from 111 countries were registered.  
4.3.1.1.4   Online s ubmission of notifications  
4.19.  Since  March  2022, Members with the relevant rights can easily and accurately complete and 
submit all SPS notification formats via the ePing SPS&TBT Platform . Increased online submission 
helps imp roving the amount and quality of information provided by Members in the various 
notification formats, as well as the information available for searches. For instance, among other 
features, the Platform includes all versions of the HS  nomenclature . Also, notifications submitted 
online can be faster processed by the Secretariat and circulated to Members.  As previously indicated, 
some regional groupings are currently submitting joint notifications through ePing , circulated in one 
multi-symbol notification, and other regions are exploring the possibility of doing  so. 
4.20.  Online submission of notifications requires registration . Upon registration, users  may be 
granted with the following types of rights : notification drafting rights, allowing the user to draft a 
notification but not to submit it to the WTO ; or notificat ion submission rights, allow ing the user to 
draft and submit notifications to the WTO.56 Within a Member, these rights are granted by the 
notification admin, who can draft and submit notifications, grant these rights to the relevant users, 
and update the c ontact details for their NNAs and NEPs. Members should contact the Secretariat 
(spscommittee@wto.org ) to designate the SPS n otification admin (s) to be granted with admin rights.  
As of 31 December 2023 , 109 users  from 76 countries or territories have received SPS notification 
admin rights . A total of 166 users benefit from  drafting rights and 110 from submission rights . 
The large majority (99%) of SPS notifications are  now submit ted through the Platform . In 2023 two 
additional Members have started notifying online , raising to 67 the total number of Members  who 
have officially submitted notifications through the Platform . 
4.21.  Following the launch of the ePing SPS&TBT Platform , the Secretariat provided numerous 
dedicated training s on online submission of notifications , including  in the dedicated "notificati ons 
clinic", held  virtually during the June 2022 SPS Workshop on Transparency.57 The Secretariat has 
continued to provide dedicated training in numerous transparency activities delivered in 202358, and 
is available to provide additional training upon reque st. 
4.3.1.1.5   Facts and Figures  
4.22.  Under the Facts & figures  tab of the ePing SPS&TBT Platform , users can visualize premade 
graphics and statistics  for one specific Member or globally.  Member profiles  displays  the NNA and 
NEP(s) contact details, graphics  and data of the Member's notification activity , HS codes associated 
with SPS notifications , and Member's involvement in STCs . Users can also access trade policy review 
data if available, and other SPS documents  submitted by a Member . The notifications  tab allows 
 
55 See document G/SPS/GEN/2163 -G/TBT/GEN/363  for more information on the different levels of 
access for ePing users.  
56 See document G/SPS/GEN/2163 -G/TBT/GEN/363  for more information on the different levels of 
access for ePing users.  
57 Information on the Workshop on  Transparency is available in the dedicated webpage: 
https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/sps_e/workshop_transparency_20jun22_e.htm . 
58 See the latest version of the G/SPS/GEN/521  document series.  G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 6 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 4 
 
- 34 - 
 
  users to view a wide range of notifications statistics. Users can also check the Definition of groups , 
either geographic/economic groups or by development status.  For more  specific information on 
STCs, the site redirects users to the TCD. 
4.3.2   eAgenda  
4.23.  The eAgenda  platform , launched  in 2020,  is a collaborative online tool meant  to support the 
work of  WTO bodies, including the  SPS Committee . The SPS eAgenda platform  allows Members , 
ahead of a meeting, to add interventions under any item for inclusion in the annotated draft  agenda, 
including to raise and support STCs. Members  can also upload statements  ahead of their 
interventions, wh ich streamline s the running of the Committee by t he Secretariat, including 
interpreters. Additionally, Members can also choose from different option s to share their statements 
with other Members, contributing to increas ed transparency prior , during or after  the meeting.  
Similarly, at the end of the meeting users have the possibility to download statements uploaded by 
other Members, as well as decisions taken by the Committee, which facilitates reporting on the 
discussions. While it will remain a stand -alone tool, authoriz ed eAgenda users can reach the system 
from the new ePing SPS&TBT Platform , benefitting from the single sign -on system, without having 
to log in again.  
4.24.  As of December 2023, five Committees are now using eAgenda to prepare and run their 
meetings, and other Committees are currently exploring their use. In order to streamline its 
functioning, the different platforms are harmonized, whenever possible to respe ct the working 
procedures and the uniqueness of each Committee. A new practical guide on the functioning of the 
SPS eAgenda is available for registered users . It is updated as further improvements are 
implemented in the platform.  
4.25.  As of 31 December 202 3, 394 users from 88 Members we re registered in SPS  eAgenda, 
of which 181 (46%) had reading rights only , allowing them to consult the proposed agenda for the 
meeting without being able to raise items nor upload statements.  The Secretariat remains available 
to provide training upon request.  
4.4  Standards and Trade Development Facility (STDF)  
4.26.  The STDF  guide on the use of Good Regulatory Practices (GRPs)  is targeted at SPS regulators 
and aims to strengthen and improve the design, development and review of SPS measures. 
The guide includes a focus on transparency, which is a cross -cutting principle of GRPs and relevant 
throughout the regulatory lifecycle of SPS measures . Transparency is embodied in various GRPs, 
such as stakeholder engagement (e.g., consultations), information dissemination, or cooperation 
and coordination mechanisms. The guide also provides an overview of the transparency tools 
available to help with co nsultations, information dissemination, publication, notifications, etc. , 
including the  ePing SPS&TBT Platform . Delegates are encouraged to read and use STDF's GRP guide 
in efforts to  enhance the effectiveness, efficiency, coherence and overall fitness for purpose of their 
SPS measures.  
4.27.  The importance of transparency on SPS measures also features strongly in STDF's work on 
Trade Facilitation , which identifies experiences, lessons and good practices to improve the 
implementation of SPS controls in a way that minimizes transaction costs, while facilitating safe 
trade. For example, improving clarity on control,  inspection and approval procedures is a simple step 
that can produce big benefits. If producers and traders must meet SPS requirements, they first need 
to be aware and understand what they are. Publication of SPS regulations, forms, and fees 
(preferably o nline) will open markets and support good governance. Regular public -private dialogue 
is also important, so that businesses (including MSMEs) know what is required of them, including 
when SPS regulations or procedures change.  
4.28.  Resources to address SPS needs  are limited, which means that developing countries have to 
make difficult choices. The STDF's P-IMA framework  offers an ev idence -based approach to inform 
and improve SPS planning and decision -making processes and link SPS investments to public policy 
goals such as export growth, agricultural productivity or poverty reduction. In this process, 
the framework encourages public -private dialogue, boosts transparency and accountability, and 
improves the economic efficiency of investment decisions. Many other projects developed and funded 
by the STDF also resulted in increased transparency levels by promoting inter -agency coordinatio n G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 6 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 4 
 
- 35 - 
 
  at the national and/or regional level, and by strengthening linkages between government agencies 
and the private sector.  
4.29.  Delegates are invited to contact the STDF Secretariat ( stdfsecretariat@wto.org ) to obtain 
further information on the work carried out by the STDF.   
  G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 6 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 4 
 
- 36 - Table B.2 – STCs (new or previously raised ) discussed and resolved in the SPS Committee  in 202 3, organized in alphabetical order  of Members 
responding to the concern59 
The table below contains all the STCs, new and previously raised, that were discussed in 202 3, organized alphabetically by responding Member. The full list of 
STCs can be accessed here. 
Member 
responding  STC 
ID In 202 3 Title Member(s) raising  Member(s) 
supporting  Primary 
subject 
keyword  First raised 
(subsequently 
raised)  Status  
Australia  193 Subsequently 
raised  General import restrictions 
due to BSE  European Union; 
United States  Canada; Switzerland; 
United States; Uruguay  Animal health  01/06/2004  
(48 times ) PR* 
Australia  559 New Australia's MRLs stricter 
than Codex standards in 
products of interest to India 
– Request to share risk 
assessment 
(G/SPS/N/AUS/555 ) India  Food safety  22/3/2023  
(0 times)  NR 
Bolivia  530 Subsequently 
raised  Bolivia's import restrictions 
on agricultural and livestock 
products  Peru  Plant health  03/11/2021  
(6 times)  NR 
Brazil  193 Subsequently 
raised  General import restrictions 
due to BSE  European Union; 
United States  Canada; Switzerland; 
United States; Uruguay  Animal health  01/06/2004  
(48 times ) PR* 
Canada  568 New (subsequently 
raised in 2023)  Canada's restrictions on 
Brazilian p ork from 
internationally recognized 
FMD free zones without 
vaccination  Brazil   Animal health  12/07/2023  
(1 time)  NR 
China  193 Subsequently 
raised  General import restrictions 
due to BSE  European Union; 
United States  Canada; Switzerland; 
United States; Uruguay  Animal health  01/06/2004  
(48 times ) PR* 
China  392 Subsequently 
raised  China's import restrictions 
due to African swine fever  European Union   Animal health  15/07/2015  
(18 times)  NR 
China  406 Subsequently 
raised  China's import restrictions 
due to highly pathogenic 
avian influenza  European Union; 
United States  European Union; 
United  States  Animal health  16/03/2016  
(20 times)  NR 
China  485 Subsequently 
raised  China's administrative 
measures for registration of 
overseas manufacturers of 
imported food 
(26 November 2019)  Australia; Canada; 
European Union; 
Japan; United States  >10 Members  Other concerns  24/06/2020  
(10 times)  NR 
 
59 Please note that a hyperlink in the ID number redirects to the corresponding STC in the TCD.  
  G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 6 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 4 
 
- 37 - Member 
responding  STC 
ID In 202 3 Title Member(s) raising  Member(s) 
supporting  Primary 
subject 
keyword  First raised 
(subsequently 
raised)  Status  
China  487 Subsequently 
raised  China's actions related to 
COVID -19 that affect trade 
in food and agricultural 
products  Australia; Canada; 
European Union; India; 
Japan; Russian 
Federation; 
Chinese  Taipei; 
United  States  >10 Members  Food safety  05/11/2020  
(9 times)  NR 
China  506 Subsequently 
raised  China's proposed new health 
certificate format for shrimp 
imports  India  Other concerns  25/03/2021  
(5 times) NR 
China 516 Subsequently 
raised  China 's delay in approving 
requests for new listing and 
reinstatement of export 
establishments  Australia; Canada; 
European Union; 
Japan; United States  Canada; 
European  Union; 
Norway; 
United  Kingdom; 
United  States  Other concerns  25/03/2021  
(8 times)  NR 
China  532 Subsequently 
raised  China's import suspension of 
fresh fruits  Chinese Taipei   Plant health  03/11/2021  
(6 times)  NR 
China  561 New (subsequently 
raised in 2023)  China's suspension of beef 
imports due to bovine 
spongiform encephalopathy 
(BSE) restrictions  Canada  European Union  Animal health  22/03/2023  
(2 times)  NR 
China  562 New (subsequently 
raised in 2023)  China's import restrictions 
on heat -treated pet food 
containing poultry 
ingredients due to highly 
pathogenic avian influenza  Canada   Animal health  22/03/2023  
(2 times)  NR 
China  574 New Import restrictions on 
aquatic products after the 
discharge of ALPS treated 
water  Japan   Food safety  15/11/2023  
(0 times)  NR 
Ecuador  193 Subsequently 
raised  General import restrictions 
due to BSE  European Union; 
United States  Canada; Switzerland; 
United States; Uruguay  Animal health  01/06/2004  
(48 times ) PR* 
Ecuador  498 Subsequently 
raised Ecuador's import restrictions 
on grapes and onions  Peru  Food safety  05/11/2020  
(7 times)  NR 
Egypt  193 Subsequently 
raised  General import restrictions 
due to BSE  European Union; 
United States  Canada; Switzerland; 
United States; Uruguay  Animal health  01/06/2004  
(48 times ) PR* 
European 
Union  356 Subsequently 
raised  EU phytosanitary measures 
on citrus black spot  South Africa  Argentina; Brazil; 
Zambia  Plant health  27/06/2013  
(5 times)  NR  
  G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 6 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 4 
 
- 38 - Member 
responding  STC 
ID In 202 3 Title Member(s) raising  Member(s) 
supporting  Primary 
subject 
keyword  First raised 
(subsequently 
raised)  Status  
European 
Union  382 Subsequently 
raised  European Union legislation 
on endocrine disruptors  Argentina; China; 
Dominican Republic; 
Ecuador; Guatemala; 
India; Panama; 
Paraguay; 
United  States  >50 Members  Food safety  25/03/2014  
(26 times)  NR 
European 
Union  442 Subsequently 
raised  EU Commission Decision 
2002/994/EC on animal 
products  China   Food safety  12/07/2018  
(4 times)  NR 
European 
Union  446 Subsequently 
raised  EU review of legislation on 
veterinary medicinal 
products  Argentina; United 
States  Argentina; Australia; 
Brazil; Canada; Chile; 
Colombia; Japan; 
Norway; Paraguay; 
Uruguay  Food safety  12/07/2018  
(12 times)  NR 
European 
Union  448 Subsequently 
raised  EU MRLs for alpha -
cypermethrin, buprofezin, 
chlorothalonil, chlorpyrifos, 
chlorpyrifos -methyl, 
diflubenzuron, 
ethoxy sulfuron, glufosinate, 
imazalil, ioxynil, iprodione, 
mancozeb, molinate, 
picoxystrobin and 
tepraloxydim  Colombia; Costa Rica; 
Côte d'Ivoire; 
Dominican Republic; 
Ecuador; Guatemala; 
India; Panama; 
Paraguay; 
United  States  >25 Members  Food safety  01/11/2018  
(14 times)  NR 
European 
Union  503 Subsequently 
raised  EU restrictions on exports of 
chocolate and cocoa 
products due to the 
application of the 
Commission Regulation 
(EU) N° 488/2014 of 12 May 
2014 Amending Regulation 
(EC) N° 1881/2006 as 
regards maximum levels of 
cadmium in foodstuff  Peru Colombia; Ecuador; 
Indonesia; Malaysia  Food safety  05/11/2020  
(9 times)  NR 
European 
Union  518 Subsequently 
raised  EU's classification of 
'anthraquinone' as a 
pesticide and the MRL for 
imported tea  India  Food saf ety 14/07/2021  
(2 times)  NR  
  G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 6 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 4 
 
- 39 - Member 
responding  STC 
ID In 202 3 Title Member(s) raising  Member(s) 
supporting  Primary 
subject 
keyword  First raised 
(subsequently 
raised)  Status  
European 
Union  526 Subsequently 
raised  EU delays in authorizing 
imports of Samgyetang 
(Korean ginseng 
chicken  soup)  Korea   Other concerns  03/11/2021  
(6 times)  
 NR 
European 
Union  533 Subsequently 
raised  EU restrictions on spice 
imports and other food 
products due to European 
Commission Implementing 
Regulation (EU) 2021/2246 
of 15 December 2021  India  Food safety  22/06/2022  
(3 times)  NR 
European 
Union  534 Subsequently 
raised  EU import tolerances for 
certain pesticides to achieve 
environmental outcomes in 
third countries  Australia; China; 
Colombia; Ecuador; 
India; United States  >15 Members  Other concerns  23/03/2022  
(5 times)  NR 
European 
Union  543 Subsequently 
raised  EU recognition of Mexico as 
a country with WOAH 
negligible BSE risk  Mexico  Brazil  Animal health  22/06/2022  
(3 times)  NR 
European 
Union  546 Subsequently 
raised  EU notifications of matrine 
and oxymatrine in honey  China   Food safety  22/06/2022  
(1 time)  NR 
European 
Union  549 Subsequently 
raised  EU regulation No. 396/2005 
setting pesticide MRLs in 
food and feed of plant and 
animal origin  China; India Argentina; Brazil; 
Canada; China; 
Colombia; Costa Rica; 
Guatemala; Israel; 
Paraguay; Uruguay  Other concerns  09/11/2022  
(3 times)  NR 
European 
Union  550 Subsequently 
raised  EU Commission proposal for 
reduction of the current MRL 
for "nicotine" for imported 
tea from India 
(G/SPS/N/EU/581 ) India  Food safety  09/11/2022  
(3 times)  NR 
European 
Union  551 Subsequently 
raised  EU Regulations 2021/405 
and 2017/185 on vitamin D3  China   Other concerns  09/11/2022  
(1 time)  NR 
European 
Union  552 New EU increased sampling 
frequency for inspection of 
farmed shrimps and newly 
listed fishery establishments 
not permitted to export 
aquaculture products  India  Other concerns  09/11/2022  
(3 times)  NR 
European 
Union  558 Subsequently 
raised  EU import restrictions on 
ostrich meat  South Africa   Animal health  09/11/2022  
(1 time)  NR 
European 
Union  571 New EU Xylella fastidiosa  
surveillance requirements 
for third countries  South Africa   Plant health  15/11/2023  
(0 times)  NR  
  G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 6 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 4 
 
- 40 - Member 
responding  STC 
ID In 202 3 Title Member(s) raising  Member(s) 
supporting  Primary 
subject 
keyword  First raised 
(subsequently 
raised)  Status  
Hong Kong, 
China  574 New Import restrictions on 
aquatic products after the 
discharge of ALPS treated 
water  Japan   Food safety  15/11/2023  
(0 tim es) NR 
India 501 Subsequently 
raised  India's requirement for 
certificate for Non -GM origin 
and GM -free status  China; 
European  Union; 
United States  >10 Members  Food safety  05/11/2020  
(9 times)  NR 
India 553 Subsequently 
raised  India's Draft Food Safety 
and Standards (Import) 
Amendment Regulation  European Union  Canada; Japan; 
New Zealand; 
United States  Other concerns  09/11/2022  
(3 times)  NR 
India 554 Subsequently 
raised  India's Order related to 
requirement of health 
certificate accompanied with 
imported food consignment 
of milk, pork, fish and 
related products  European Union  Australia; Canada; 
Chile; Japan; 
New Zealand; Norway; 
Switzerland; 
United  States  Other concerns  09/11/2022  
(3 times)  NR 
India 565 New (subsequently 
raised in 2023)  India's approval procedures 
to import plants, animals 
and their products  European Union   Other concerns  22/03/2023  
(2 times)  NR 
India 566 New (subsequently 
raised in 2023)  India's undue delay in 
importing twelve species of 
fresh mushrooms  Korea   Other concerns  22/03/2023  
(2 times)  NR 
India 572 New India's suspension of 
imports of apples, pears and 
marigold seeds  China   Plant health  15/11/2023  
(0 times)  NR 
Indonesia  441 Subsequently 
raised  Indonesia's approval 
procedures for animal and 
plant products  European Union; 
Russian Federation  Brazil; Philippines; 
Russian Federation; 
United States  Other concerns  12/07/2018  
(15 times)  NR 
Japan  567 New (subsequently 
raised in 2023)  Japan's approval procedures 
to import plant products  European Union   Plant health  15/11/2023  
(1 time)  NR 
Jordan  193 Subsequently 
raised  General import restrictions 
due to BSE  European Union; 
United States  Canada; Switzerland; 
United States; Uruguay  Animal health  01/06/2004  
(48 times)  PR* 
Korea  193 Subsequently 
raised  General import restrictions 
due to BSE  European Union; 
United States  Canada; Switzerland; 
United States; Uruguay  Animal health  01/06/2004  
(48 times)  PR* 
Korea  393 Subsequently 
raised  Korea's import restrictions 
due to African swine fever  European Union  Russian Federation  Animal health  16/07/2015 
(13 times)  NR 
Korea  456 Subsequently 
raised  Korea's import restrictions 
on poultry due to highly 
pathogenic avian influenza  European Union  Russian Federation  Other concerns  21/03/2019  
(5 times)  NR  
  G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 6 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 4 
 
- 41 - Member 
responding  STC 
ID In 202 3 Title Member(s) raising  Member(s) 
supporting  Primary 
subject 
keyword  First raised 
(subsequently 
raised)  Status  
Korea  490 Subsequently 
raised  Korea's lack of progress on 
pending applications for 
authorization of beef 
imports  European Union  Russian Federation  Other concerns  05/11/2020  
(6 times)  NR 
Korea  557 Subsequently 
raised  Korea's requirement of a 
health certificate with a 
declaration of aquatic 
disease status  India  Other concerns  09/11/2022  
(3 times)  NR 
Macao, 
China  574 New Import restrictions on 
aquatic products after the 
discharge of ALPS treated 
water  Japan   Food safety  15/11/2023  
(0 times)  NR 
Malaysia  193 Subsequently 
raised  General import restrictions 
due to BSE  European Union; 
United States  Canada; Switzerland; 
United States; Uruguay  Animal health  01/06/2004  
(48 times)  PR* 
Mexico  193 Subsequently 
raised  General import restrictions 
due to BSE  European Union; 
United States  Canada; Switzerland; 
United States; Uruguay  Animal health  01/06/2004  
(48 times)  PR* 
Mexico  489 Reported as 
resolved in 2023  Mexico's import restrictions 
on pork  Brazil   Animal health  05/11/2020  
(6 times)  R 
Mexico  563 New (subsequently 
raised in 2023)  Mexico's import restrictions 
due to African swine fever  European Union   Animal health  22/03/2023  
(2 times) NR 
Morocco  548 Subsequently 
raised  Morocco's import ban on 
ornamental plants  European Union   Plant health  22/06/2022  
(3 times)  NR 
Nigeria  523 Subsequently 
raised  Nigeria's import restrictions 
on meat, pork, poultry, milk 
and dairy products, genetic 
material and live cattle  Brazil   Other concerns  14/07/2021  
(4 times)  NR 
New Zealand  560 New New Zealand's amendment 
of MRLs for cyantraniliprole , 
tetracyclines and trichlorfon  
(G/SPS/N/NZL/695 ) India  Food safety  22/03/2022  
(0 times)  NR 
Panama  509 Subsequently 
raised  Panama's undue delays in 
the renewal of 
authorizations for plants of 
fishery and livestock 
enterprises  Peru; European Union  Chile; Costa Rica; 
European Union  Other concerns  25/03/2021  
(8 times)  NR 
Panama  512 Subsequently 
raised  Panama's restrictions 
regarding the procedure to 
regain access for Peruvian 
potatoes and onions  Peru Costa  Rica Other concerns  25/03/2021  
(6 times)  NR 
Peru 193 Subsequently 
raised  General import restrictions 
due to BSE  European Union; 
United States  Canada; Switzerland; 
United States; Uruguay  Animal health  01/06/2004  
(48 times)  PR*  
  G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 6 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 4 
 
- 42 - Member 
responding  STC 
ID In 202 3 Title Member(s) raising  Member(s) 
supporting  Primary 
subject 
keyword  First raised 
(subsequently 
raised)  Status  
Peru 482 Reported as 
resolved in 2023  Peru's import restrictions on 
pork Brazil   Other concerns  24/06/2020  
(2 times) R 
Peru 544 Subsequently 
raised  Peru's non -application of 
regionalization for African 
swine fever  European Union  Brazil  Animal health  22/06/2022  
(4 times)  NR 
Philippines  466 Subsequently 
raised  The Philippines' trade 
restrictions on imports of 
meat European Union; 
Russi an Federation  Russian Federation  Animal health  07/11/2019  
(11 times)  NR 
Qatar  529 Subsequently 
raised  Qatar's new import rules for 
dairy products  European Union  New Zealand  Food safety  03/11/2021  
(6 times)  NR 
Russian 
Federation  508 Subsequently 
raised  Russian Federation - 
Procedures for authorizing 
units eligible for export of 
fish and fish products to 
Eurasian Cus toms Union  India  Other concerns  25/03/2021  
(5 times)  NR 
Russian 
Federation  574 New Import restrictions on 
aquatic products after the 
discharge of ALPS treated 
water  Japan   Food safety  15/11/2023  
(0 times)  NR 
Saudi Arabia  486 Subsequently 
raised  Saudi Arabia's temporary 
suspension of Brazilian 
poultry exporting 
establishments  Brazil  Ukraine  Food safety  24/06/2020  
(8 times)  NR 
South Africa  193 Subsequently 
raised  General import restrictions 
due to BSE  European Union; 
United States  Canada;  Switzerland; 
United States; Uruguay  Animal health  01/06/2004  
(48 times)  PR* 
South Africa  431 Subsequently 
raised  South Africa's import 
restrictions on poultry due 
to highly pathogenic avian 
influenza  European Union  Argentina; 
United  Kingdom; 
United  States  Animal health  02/11/2017  
(16 times)  NR 
South Africa  564 New South Africa's delays in 
granting SPS access for 
poultry, beef, pork, fish and 
seafood  Russian Federation   Animal health  22/03/2023  
(0 times)  NR 
Chinese 
Taipei  193 Subsequently 
raised  General import restrictions 
due to BSE  European Union; 
United States  Canad a; Switzerland; 
United States; Uruguay  Animal health  01/06/2004  
(48 times)  PR* 
Chinese 
Taipei  521 Subsequently 
raised  Chinese Taipei's import 
restrictions on poultry  and 
beef Brazil   Other concerns  14/07/2021  
(6 times)  NR 
Thailand  539 Subsequently 
raised  Thailand's sanitary 
requirements on "wet blue" 
leather imports  Brazil   Other concerns  23/03/2022  
(5 times)  NR  
  G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 6 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 4 
 
- 43 - Member 
responding  STC 
ID In 202 3 Title Member(s) raising  Member(s) 
supporting  Primary 
subject 
keyword  First raised 
(subsequently 
raised)  Status  
Thailand  573 New Thailand's HPAI restrictions 
on live poultry and poultry 
meat Brazil   Animal health  15/11/2023  
(0 times)  NR 
United 
States  193 Subsequently 
raised  General import restrictions 
due to BSE  European Union; 
United States  Canada; Switzerland; 
United States; Uruguay  Animal health  01/06/2004  
(48 times)  PR* 
United 
States  439 Subsequently 
raised  US import restrictions on 
apples and pears  European Union   Plant health  01/03/2018  
(16 times)  NR 
United 
States  471 Subsequently 
raised  US non -recognition of the 
pest-free status in the 
European Union for Asian 
longhorn be etle and citrus 
longhorn beetle  European Union   Plant health  24/06/2020  
(10 times)  NR 
United 
States  542 Subsequently 
raised  US undue delays in opening 
its citrus market  Brazil   Plant health  22/06/2022  
(2 times)  NR 
United 
States  569 New US delays in the 
authorization of sweet citrus 
fruits  Argentina   Other concerns  15/11/2023  
(0 times)  NR 
United 
States  570 New US undue delays in the 
publication of import 
requirements for table 
grapes under a systems 
approach  Chile  Other concerns  15/11/2023  
(0 times)  NR 
Viet Nam  575 New Viet Nam's undue delays in 
the authorization of beef 
imports  Mexico   Other concerns  15/11/2023  
(0 times)  NR 
Certain 
Members  193 Subsequently 
raised  General import restrictions 
due to BSE  European Union; 
United States  Canada; Switzerland; 
United States; Uruguay  Animal health  01/06/2004  
(48 times)  PR* 
* STC 193 is considered as resolved for Philippines; Saudi A rabia; Singapore; Türkiye ; and Ukraine.   
  G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 6 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 4 
 
- 44 - Table B.3 - STCs where  substantive action occurred under the DSU in 202360 
STC ID b Title Member(s) raising  Member(s) 
supporting  Member(s) 
responding  Primary 
subject 
keyword  First raised 
(subsequently 
raised)  Status  
185 Restrictions due to avian influenza  European Union; 
United States  Australia; Canada; 
European Union; 
Switzerland; 
United  States  India Animal health  17/03/2004  
(16 times)  PR / 
DS 430 
356 EU phytosanitary measures on citrus 
black spot  South Africa  Argentina; Brazil; 
Zambia  European Union  Plant Health  26/06/2013  
(5 times)  NR /  
DS 613  
495 Panama's import restrictions on 
animal and plant products  Colombia; Costa Rica   Panama  Other con cerns  05/11/2020  
(0 times)  NR /  
DS 599  
b Panel proceedings occurred in the context of the WTO dispute settlement system. For more information, see https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dis pu_e/dispu_e.htm . 
 
__________  
 
60 Please note that a hyperlink in the ID number redirects to the corresponding STC in the TCD for further details on the concern.