G/SPS/R/80  
 
27 November 2015  
(15-6274)  Page: 1/8  
Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures    
 
 REPORT 
WORKSHOP ON TRANSPARENCY 
MONDAY, 12 OCTOBER – TUESDAY, 13 OCTOBER 2015 
WTO, CENTRE WILLIAM RAPPARD, GENEVA 
NOTE BY THE SECRETARIAT1 
The Secretariat of the World Trade Organization organized a workshop on the transparency 
provisions of the Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures 
(SPS Agreement) in Geneva, Switzerland, on  12 and 13 October 2015. This was the sixth 
SPS workshop on transparency organized by the Se cretariat, the first five having been held in 
1999, 2003, 2007, 2010 and 2012.2 
The workshop was open to all Members, Observer  governments and organizations with observer 
status in the SPS Committee. Various funding arrangements made it possible for a large number of developing country and least developed country (LDC) participants to not only attend the 
workshop but also the subsequent Committee meeting.
3 Approximately 150 participants received 
hands-on training on how to access and use SPS-related information and how to notify their SPS measures. Participants also shared national experiences and debated how to further improve 
transparency in this area. 
The programme
4 and presentations of the workshop ar e available from the "Events, workshops 
and training" section under the WTO SPS Gateway (http://www.wto.org/english/tr atop_e/sps_e/events_e.htm ). 
1  BACKGROUND OF THE WORKSHOP 
1.1.  The workshop programme was developed in light of the SPS Committee's recent discussions 
on transparency, following a joint proposal for actions related to the fulfilment of transparency 
obligations5, submitted in the context of the Fourth Re view of the Operation and Implementation 
of the SPS Agreement. The analysis of the replies to the transparency questionnaire circulated to 
assess the needs and difficulties of Members6 provided further input, as well as specific 
suggestions from Members. In addition, the work shop provided an occasion to present the on-
going project to improve and moderniz e the SPS IMS and NSS applications. 
                                               
1 This document has been prepared under the Secret ariat's own responsibility and is without prejudice 
to the positions of Members or to thei r rights and obligations under the WTO. 
2 The reports of these workshops are contained in documents G/SPS/R/16, G/SPS/R/32, G/SPS/R/47, 
G/SPS/R/60 and G/SPS/ R/68 respectively. 
3 The WTO funded, through assistance from the Doha Development Agenda Global Trust Fund 
(DDAGTF), the participation of 51 go vernmental officials from developi ng country Members and Observers. 
Sponsored participants were selected from 328 applications. In addition, the African Union made it possible for 25 participants from Fr ench- and English-speaking Africa to participate in the workshop while 12 delegates 
from Caribbean countries attended with assistance from the Inter-American Institute for Cooperation on Agriculture 
(both groups used EU funding). 
4 G/SPS/GEN/1446. 
5 Joint proposal submitted by Chile, the European Union, Morocco and Norway (G/SPS/W/278), which 
built on two former proposals regarding transparency (G/SPS/W/274 and G/SPS/W/277). 
6 Questionnaire circulated in document G/SPS/GEN/1382, and analysis of the replies to the 
questionnaire in document G/SPS/GEN/1402. G/SPS/R/80 
 
- 2 - 
 
  2  OBJECTIVE OF THE WORKSHOP 
2.1.  The objective of the workshop was to brin g together officials from Members' SPS Enquiry 
Points, National Notification Authorities and other relevant authorities for an exchange of experiences and for hands-on training on the onli ne SPS tools. More specifically, the workshop 
aimed to: 
 Improve participants' knowledge on ho w to implement and benefit from the 
transparency provisions and procedures of th e SPS Agreement, in particular through the 
sharing of national experiences; 
 Enhance participants' knowledge of the SPS Information Management System (IMS) and 
the new Notification Submission System (NSS) through the use of practical exercises geared at preparing notifications using the NSS and searching for information using the 
IMS; and 
 Identify possible actions on ways to address issues related to the implementation of the 
transparency provisions.
7 
2.2.  Overall, the workshop focused on Members'  experiences in complying with the transparency 
provisions of the SPS Agreement, such as filling in notifications, tracking notifications, handling comments, and obtaining translations. Participants also received information on WTO sources of 
SPS-related information, and the updates alread y made and currently under way to the SPS IMS 
and SPS NSS. Presentations were made by the WTO Secretariat, the United Nations Department of 
Economic and Social Affairs (UN-DESA), and de veloped and developing country Members. The 
workshop provided an open platform for discussion and sharing of national experiences as well as 
best practices concerning the implementation of  the transparency provisions. A summary of the 
various sessions of the workshop is provided below. 
3  WORKSHOP SESSIONS 
3.1  Session 1: Introduction 
3.1.  The  Secretariat provided an overview of the tr ansparency provisions of the SPS Agreement 
included in Article 7 and Annex B, and of relevant Committee and Ministerial Decisions, in 
particular the Recommended Transparency Proced ures (G/SPS/7/Rev.3) and the Doha Ministerial 
Decision on Implementation-Related Issues and Concerns (WT/MIN(01)/17). 
3.2.   The Secretariat outlined why transparency was important, for instance for bringing clarity 
and predictability to the trading system, for providing advance warning, or for improving 
accountability and responsiveness of the regulatory  framework. The main transparency obligations 
of the SPS Agreement are to: (i) notify draft SPS regulations; (ii) designate a National Notification Authority; (iii) establish an Enquiry Point; and (iv) publish SPS regulations. Beyond obligations, 
Members can benefit and take advantage of a transparent system, for example by screening other 
Members' notifications, as was illustrated in subsequent sessions of the workshop. 
3.3.  The Secretariat also provided details on the notification of SPS regulations, specifically on 
what to notify, when to notify, which notification formats to use and the main recommended 
transparency procedures as outlined in G/SPS/7/Re v.3. In addition, the institutional arrangements 
for notifications were described, specifically the duties and obligations of the National Notification Authority (NNA) and the Enquiry Point (EP). Lastly , the Secretariat provided an overview of the 
transparency timeline, from the drafting of a regulation to its entry into force. 
3.2  Session 2: WTO Sources of Information 3.4.  Session 2  provided participants with a detailed overview of different sources of SPS-related 
information. These sources were presented by four speakers from the WTO Secretariat and one 
from UN-DESA. 
                                               
7 These issues emerged from the document on the Analysis of the Replies to the Questionnaire on 
Transparency under the SPS Agreement (G/SPS/GEN/1402). G/SPS/R/80 
 
- 3 - 
 
  3.5.  Mr Stephen Cooper , WTO Secretariat, presented the new WTO Members' website as a "one-
stop shop" for all the relevant information. Mr Cooper provided a detailed explanation of how delegates could access and use the website, as well as an outline of the information available. In 
particular, delegates could find information on upcoming SPS Committee meetings and related 
documents, on any Committee document and decision, and on other bodies through search and 
filter functions. Participants were advised to  request login names and passwords from their 
respective Members' missions to the WTO in order to access all documents, including restricted 
ones. 
3.6.  Mr John Dickson , WTO Secretariat, provided an overview of the Documents Online  
application, which provides access to all official  documentation circulated by the WTO since 1995. 
The database is updated daily and contains over 100,000 documents in the three official 
languages. Different search interfaces allow retr ieving any document, including SPS-related ones. 
All information is public, except for restricted documents, which can be accessed with the Members' login names and passwords. 
3.7.  Mr Jürgen Richtering , WTO Secretariat, outlined SPS-related information available at the 
WTO Integrated Trade Intelligence Portal (I-TIP). Mr Richtering introduced it as a "one-stop shop" for all trade policy measure notifications: it was a comprehensive, analytical and easy to use online 
tool, which was publically available and provided a unified point of access to all relevant WTO trade 
policy information on goods, including tariffs and non-tariff measures (NTMs). Users could view SPS measures in the context of other tariff and NTM measures, which could be filtered through specific criteria, viewed and downloaded. 
3.8.  Mr Roland Mollerus , UN-DESA, presented the ePing Toolkit project for accessing SPS & TBT 
notifications and alerts. The project had been init iated after a needs identification study of LDCs 
had concluded that one of the existing gaps was th e lack of a system to receive alerts of SPS and 
TBT notifications relevant to their exports. Users can sign up on the pilot platform to receive 
filtered SPS and TBT notifications via emails alerts, sorting notifications according to specific products or markets of interest. The platform is accessible to all stakeholders, from government 
agencies to private companies. Mr Mollerus highlighted that the benefits of using ePing included its 
user-friendly format, the ability to narrow the notifications down according to areas of interest, the option to export search results, and the opportunity  to discuss notifications at the national level on 
the platform's forum. 
3.9.  Mr Rolando Alcala , WTO Secretariat, presented the SPS gateway
8 and the new version of 
the SPS Information Management System (IMS), currently under development. The SPS gateway 
includes information on Committee meetings, events, training activities etc. It includes information 
on how to subscribe to receive document alerts for all unrestricted SPS documents by email. The 
gateway also contains a link to the Members' transparency toolkit, which includes notification templates, and SPS transparency-related documents and materials. 
3.10.  Mr Alcala also introduced the SPS IMS
9, which aims to help enquiry points and notification 
authorities, as well as other interested stakeh olders, to keep abreast of new or modified 
SPS measures. Since 1995, over 19,000 SPS notifications had been submitted along with over 2,500 other SPS documents and over 390 specific trade concerns (STCs). The SPS IMS facilitates 
searching and reporting on SPS notifications, SPS documents, and STCs according to a wide range 
of criteria. It also includes the most up-to-date information available to the Secretariat on the contact details of Members' Enquiry Points and Notification Authorities. It is publicly available in 
English, French and Spanish. 
3.11.  Mr Alcala also provided details on th e development of the new SPS IMS system, which 
would replace the current one. The new system would be more user-friendly and would have 
enhanced functionalities. In addition to fixing ex isting "bugs", it would be aligned and harmonized 
with other in-house systems, have streamlined me nus, more intuitive search functionalities, new 
statistical and graphing functions and new reporting feature. It was expected that the new IMS platform would be available for testing during the first semester of 2016. 
                                               
8 http://www.wto.org/sps . 
9 http://spsims.wto.org/ . G/SPS/R/80 
 
- 4 - 
 
  3.3  Session 3: Practical Session on the Use of the SPS IMS 
3.12.  Working sessions were organised in English, French and Spanish during which participants 
were able to use the current SPS IMS system. In these groups, participants were able to 
familiarize themselves with the different function s of the system by being given a hypothetical 
scenario of a cocoa exporting country wishing to obtain relevant information. This included 
conducting searches of: 
a. SPS notifications. Participants learned how to look for a specific notification; how to find 
notifications made by a specific country; how to find notifications covering a specific 
product; how to find notifications relating to a specific issue (e.g. contaminants); and how to customize a search; 
b. SPS documents. Participants learned how to find documents produced by the WTO 
Secretariat; how to find documents submitted by Members and Observer Organizations; 
and how to find documents concerning a specific issue (e.g. private standards); 
c. Specific trade concerns (STCs). Participants learned how to access information related to 
an STC; how to identify STCs  raised in relation to specific Members or products; and 
d. Information on Enquiry Points and Notification Authorities. Participants learned how to 
create contact lists of EPs and NNAs with the use of the predefined reports function; and 
how to find their contact details (e.g. address and phone number). 
3.4  Session 4: Sharing of National Experiences 3.13.  Ms Kimberly Redden , Analyst at the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, presented on 
Canada's experience in tracking, sorting and dist ributing SPS notifications. Ms Redden noted that 
the increased volume of WTO notifications over the past 20 years made sorting through 
notifications and disseminating key information to relevant stakeholders more challenging. To tackle this, Canada used a two-phased approa ch: immediate outreach, followed by targeted 
consultations for government and industry. This entailed first a daily distribution of notifications by 
email to all stakeholders, followed by a weekly distribution of targeted notifications grouped 
according to recipients' subjects of interest. 
3.14.  Ms Mariam Somé Damoué , Responsible for phytosanitary controls and SPS National 
Enquiry Point of Burkina Faso, shared her country's  experience with phytosanitary notifications. 
Ms Somé described the institutional arrangement in Burkina Faso, where the national SPS committee is the relevant platform for discussing SPS-related matters, including notifications. 
Then Ms Somé presented the phytosanitary notificati on process: (i) proposal of the draft text of a 
measure for subsequent review and validation by a working group; and (ii) submission of the 
measure to the NNA for its notification to the WTO. Ms Somé also explained the process of 
managing notifications received from the WTO, citing the specific examples of mangoes and 
sesame seeds. Notifications were typically transferred to relevant focal points, for sorting and distribution. At the end, Ms Somé presented some  recommendations, specifically highlighting the 
importance of: (i) notifying all regulatory requirements for agricultural products; (ii) conforming to 
international standards, or basing regulations on science where relevant standards are absent; and (iii) improving access of the private sector to SPS-related information. 
3.15.  Ms Virginie Spits , Member of the EU SPS Team, detailed the European Union's 
coordination practices in handling the life cycl e of SPS notifications. Ms Spits remarked that 
recently the European Union had been looking at whether any changes were necessary with regards to improving its member States' level of  implementation of the SPS Agreement and the 
transparency obligations. The presentation began wi th an overview of relevant EU authorities for 
SPS notifications. There is one central EU SPS Noti fication Authority and Enquiry Point, which acts 
on behalf of the 28 member States. It is the po int of reference for coordinating and monitoring 
SPS notifications as well as for receiving questions. To better cope with the increased flow of 
SPS notifications and their distribution to relevant stakeholders, the European Union established its own notification database, which is managed by one person. The database is operated manually, but also functions automatically by downloadin g WTO notifications twice a day and immediately 
sending out alerts to a mailing list of experts and stakeholder associations, providing them with 
more time to comment. Moreover, comments can be  received from experts, European member 
States and stakeholders. They are then transferred to the relevant agency for analysis, and G/SPS/R/80 
 
- 5 - 
 
  subsequent submission to the issuing Member. Ms Spits finished the presentation by thanking the 
Members who play an active role in transparency activities and remarked that the European Union 
firmly believed that collaboration was the best way to make the SPS world more transparent. 
3.16.  Ms Roxana Inés Vera Muñoz , Coordinator Agreements Unit, Subdepartment of 
Negotiations, International Affairs Division, presented on the functioning of Chile's National 
Notification Authority. Ms Muñoz explained that the Chilean system was relatively simple and did not require extensive resources, yet it enabled its NNA to fully comply with SPS obligations. The 
main tools used to manage notifications are well-trained staff, and a computer with internet 
access. Four professionals and one coordinator ar e in charge of managing incoming information 
and issuing notifications by email. The team uses a shared Excel database with notification lists. Ms Muñoz emphasized that the staff received regu lar training and that a guidebook on the NNA's 
operation was available. The NNA receives information on possible notifications from the relevant 
authorities, which are registered in an internal database. Similarly, notifications received are immediately analysed and circulated through differe nt lists to a wide range of public and private 
stakeholders. Lastly, Ms Muñoz highlighted that the increase in staff and time spent on 
notifications was a good indicator of improved transparency, and reiterated the importance of 
operational manuals. 
3.17.  Ms Julia Doherty , Senior Director of SPS & Agricultural Affairs at the Office of the 
US Trade Representative, shared the US experience in implementing the SPS obligation to take comments into account. Ms Doherty reminded the participants that according to paragraph 5 of Annex B of the SPS Agreement, Members "shall take the comments and the results of the 
discussions into account". This ensured accountability, made regulations more secure and 
accessible, reduced the influence of special inte rests and thereby created an environment more 
open to competitive trade and investment. Ms Do herty shared the US definition for "meaningful 
opportunity to comment", as one where the public was able to critique the proposal and formulate 
an alternative, and for "significant comments", as relevant points which might require a change in the proposed rule. The internal process for taking comments into account is generally the same for 
all agencies and provides for good governance by explaining rationale and substance of final rules 
in light of comments and by providing step-by-step explanations for why comments are consequently accepted or rejected. Lastly, Ms Doherty underscored the need for qualified staff – 
officials, economists, lawyers – and the utility of spreadsheets for categorising and grouping. 
3.18.  Ms Sally Jennings, Senior Policy Analyst at the Ministry for Primary Industries in 
New Zealand, highlighted the importance of commu nication in ensuring transparency. Ms Jennings 
accentuated three specific points in this regard. First was the importance of inter-agency 
communication on SPS policy, and the need for staff to be trained on the SPS Agreement 
obligations. The second point related to the absence of translations – sometimes a major inhibition to communication and thus transparency. Members should work together to share translations of 
regulations. The last point was on the utility of the internet in facilitating compliance with 
transparency obligations, by making documents easily accessible. Ms Jennings also provided some tips on how to best include SPS information on government websites by showcasing the practices 
in New Zealand. The key messages of the presenta tion were: to make sure that SPS regulations 
were published, provide training on SPS and tr ansparency, share translations among Members, 
and use the internet where possible. 
3.19.  Morocco took the floor to share its experience in handling SPS notifications. Morocco 
highlighted that the creation of a single national agency responsible for SPS matters, including the 
NNA and NEP, made coordination much easier and faster. Morocco also gave an overview of how 
notifications were handled in the country and offered to provide assistance in this regard to other 
French-speaking African countries. 
3.20.  Côte d'Ivoire highlighted that the main problem in Africa was the lack of ownership of 
SPS measures. It was important to have motivated and committed individuals to overcome the lack of political will and to raise awareness among the general public of the importance of 
SPS measures. 
3.21.  Belize shared its experience in establishing the Belize Agricultural Health Authority (BAHA), 
which is one body responsible for plant health, animal health, food safety and quarantine. G/SPS/R/80 
 
- 6 - 
 
  3.5  Session 5: 20 Years of Transparency 
3.22.  The second day of the workshop began with  the Secretariat's Overview Regarding the Level 
of Implementation of the Transparency Provisio ns of the SPS Agreement, based on the latest 
annual report circulated in document G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.8. Since in 2015 the WTO was 
celebrating its 20-year anniversary, charts, graphics and statistics reflected information from 1995 
until 2015, when possible. 
3.23.  As of mid-September 2015, 153 of the 161 WTO Members had informed the Secretariat of 
their designated SPS National Notification Author ity (NNA) and 157 Members of their SPS National 
Enquiry Point (NEP). 119 Members out of 161 had su bmitted at least one SPS notification to the 
WTO. There were eight Members who had notified for the first time in 2015: Burkina Faso, Central 
African Republic, Guinea, Haiti, Kyrgyz Republic, Nigeria, Togo and Tunisia. 
3.24.  Since 1995, there had been a general up ward trend in the number of notifications. 
Considering all types of notifications together, as of mid-September 2015, Members had submitted 
a total of 19,062 notifications to the WTO. In 2014,  the number of notifications had reached a new 
annual peak of 1,633 and the number of notifica tions continued to be on the rise in 2015. 
3.25.  Considering notifications by developing co untry Members (including LDCs), a similar trend 
could be observed with a new peak reached in 20 14, surpassing for the first time the 1,000 mark. 
In terms of the share of total notifications by developing country Members, it had consistently 
been higher than 50% since 2007. As of mid-Sept ember 2015, it had reached its highest peak of 
73%. 
3.26.   Looking at the geographic regions from which the notifications originated, the Secretariat 
noted that over the past 20 years the majority of  notifications had come from the North American 
region, followed by Asia, and then South and Central America and the Caribbean.10 
3.27.  Considering relevance of international standards, the Secretariat recalled that the 
Recommended Transparency Procedures encouraged Members to notify all regulations that were 
based on, conformed to, or were substantially the same as an international standard, guideline or recommendation, if they were expected to have a significant impact on trade of other Members. 
The Secretariat noted that it was reassuring to observe that the relevant international standards 
addressed many emergency situations. Indeed, from 15 September 2014 to 15 September 2015, 95% of emergency notifications had identified a relevant international standard, out of which 99% had indicated that the measure conformed to the relevant international standard. For regular 
notifications, 53% had identified a relevant international standard, of which 64% had indicated 
that the proposed regulation conformed to that relevant standard. 
3.28.  During the past year, the majority of regular notifications had not provided specific dates in 
the fields "proposed date of publication", "propose d date of adoption" and "proposed date of entry 
into force". The recommended 60-day comment period checkbox had been selected in 58% of regular notifications.
11 
3.6  Session 6: Overview of the SPS NSS 
3.29.  This session focused on the fulfilment of one of the obligations contained in the 
transparency provisions: notifying SPS measur es, whether new or modified. The Secretariat 
recalled that notifications could be submitted via email, fax or mail, with the notification formats 
provided on the WTO website. However, they  could also be submitted online through the 
SPS Notification Submission System (SPS NSS). Th e system made the processing of notifications 
easier and substantially faster for both, Members and the Secretariat. Notifications were also more 
                                               
10 The geographical groupings used rely on WTO working definitions as identified in the Integrated 
Database (IDB) for analytical purposes ( idb@wto.org ). The same groupings are used in the WTO Annual 
Reports. They can be consulted through the SPS IMS by clic king on "definitions of groups" on the left-hand side 
menu bar. 
11 Annex B, paragraph 5 of the SPS Agreement provides that notifications should take place at an early 
stage, when amendments can still be introduced and comments taken into account. The Recommended Transparency Procedures state that a 60- day comment period should be provided. G/SPS/R/80 
 
- 7 - 
 
  accurate and complete. As of October 2015, 66 Members had been given access and 37 had used 
it at least once. 
3.30.  The Secretariat also presented the new, improved SPS NSS. The new system is more user-
friendly, corrects "bugs" in the current system, and is based on updated technology in line with 
other in-house applications such as I-TIP and the TBT NSS. It also supports rich text format, which 
was a major limitation in the current system for some Members. The Secretariat thanked the Members who had participated in the testing of th is pilot platform made available after the 2015 
March meeting. Testing and development of the new platform would continue after the October 
meeting. The Secretariat confirmed that an u pdated procedural manual would be needed and 
welcomed any volunteers, thanking Sally Jennings from New Zealand for writing the old guide with contributions from other Members. 
3.31.  Several Members highlighted the advantage of using the online notification system. It 
reduced errors and time required to fill in and submit notifications. The new SPS NSS application was expected to be finalized and launched during the first semester of 2016, in parallel with the 
new SPS IMS. 
3.7  Session 7: Practical Session on Ho w to Prepare Notifications (SPS NSS) 
3.32.  As with the SPS IMS system, participan ts had the opportunity to use the new SPS NSS 
system in a hands-on exercise in three language groups. Participants used the test site of the new 
system to produce a fictional regular notification based on the information provided. 
3.8  Session 8: Improving the Implementa tion and Benefits of SPS Transparency 
Provisions 
3.33.  Participants engaged in group discussions based on issues that emerged from the Analysis 
of the Replies to the Questionnaire on  transparency under the SPS Agreement
12, and how these 
could be addressed. These discussions proceeded in fo ur groups (two in English, one in French and 
one in Spanish). 
3.34.  From the transparency questi onnaire the following topics emerged: 
a. Difficulties in filling in notifications; 
b. Identifying trade facilitating measures; 
c. Identifying and targeting interested stakeholders; 
d. Handling comments; 
e. Dealing with, and obtaining translations for, notified documents not in one of the WTO 
languages. 
3.35.  Each group was assigned two topics for discu ssion, the first of which was the priority, while 
the second was to be addressed if there was spar e time. Rapporteurs from each group reported on 
the main issues identified and possible solutions to the plenary. 
3.36.  English-speaking group A discussed identifying and targeting interested stakeholders . The 
group agreed that bringing stakeholders togeth er was challenging due to a lack of formal 
organizations, limited participation, difficulties to reach outliers and a lack of SPS knowledge and 
awareness. Some of the solutions proposed in cluded the development of: (i) criteria for 
stakeholder engagement; (ii) global to local enga gement; (iii) an institutional support structure; 
(iv) a consumer-based advocacy; and (iv) a legislative framework. 
3.37.  English-speaking group B first discussed the handling comments . The group identified some 
of the main issues, including how to prioritize and deal with a large volume of comments, how to obtain the opinions of all relevant stakeholders and how to deal with a lack of resources and 
political will. Possible solutions included holding regular public consultations, developing contact 
lists of relevant stakeholders, and developing operational manuals for improving coordination. Secondly, the group discussed difficulties in dealing with, and obtaining translations for, notified 
                                               
12 G/SPS/GEN/1402. G/SPS/R/80 
 
- 8 - 
 
  documents not in one of the WTO languages , including the lack of human and financial resources. 
It was suggested that countries cooperate and share translations, for instance through an informal online platform, akin to the IPPC ePhyto resource page. Additionally, a register of experts available 
to translate documents pro bono (i.e. retired professionals) could be created. 
3.38.  The French-speaking group discussed the difficulties in filling in notifications , including 
collecting relevant data, absence of legislation, limited access to internet, and lack of collaboration between the NNA and other competent authoritie s. Another issue highlighted was the high 
turnover of staff in charge of notifications. Solutions proposed included: (i) raising awareness and 
links between political and technical authorities; (ii) training for new staff, including with e-learning modules on notifications; or (iii) South-South technical assistance (as offered by Morocco). 
3.39.  The Spanish-speaking group first discussed identifying trade facilitating measures . A key 
issue seemed to be the lack of a definition, an d possible restrictive measures being notified as 
trade facilitating, obviating the comment period. Possible solutions put forward by the group were to: (i) request, in accordance with Article 11, a brief justification on the trade facilitating nature of 
a measure to be included in the notification; (ii) organize a thematic sessions to exchange 
experiences on trade facilitating measures; and (iii) offer a comment period of 10-15 days for 
other Members to comment on the trade-facilitating nature of the notified regulation.
13 Secondly, 
the group discussed the difficulties in dealing with, and obtaining translations for, notified 
documents not in one of the WTO languages . Possible solutions identified by the group were to 
recommend and encourage Members to use the suppl ement notification format, to provide longer 
comment periods for measures in non-WTO languages (more than 60 days), to ask other 
developed Members for unofficial translations, and to share these translations in a more informal 
way, for example by posting them on a website. 
3.40.  The group presentations were followed  by questions and comments which generated 
interesting discussions on some of the possible solutions identified. 
3.41.  In his concluding remarks, the Chairperso n highlighted the high level of participation and 
interaction in all sessions of the workshop. He announced his intention to provide a brief report of 
the workshop to the SPS Committee. He invited participants to reflect on the suggestions made, 
which could inform future discussions in the Committee. 
 
__________  
                                               
13 Paragraph 13 of G/SPS/7/Rev.3 encourages Members to allow a period of at least 60 calendar days 
for comments, except for prop osed measures which facilitate trade and those which are substantially the same 
as an international standard, guideline, or recommendation.