G/TBT/GEN/174  
 
11 November 2014  
(14-6605)  Page: 1/4  
Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade    
 
  THEMATIC SESSION ON CONFORMITY ASSESSMENT PROCEDURES AND  
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND SPECIAL AND DIFFERENTIAL TREATMENT 
REPORT BY THE CHAIRMAN TO THE TBT COMMITTEE1  
This Report was delivered by the Chairman of the WTO TBT Committee at the meeting of  
5-6 November 2014.  
 
_______________ 
 At the Sixth Triennial Review, the Committee agreed to hold thematic sessions in response to specific decisions and recommendations before the Committee.
2 The thematic session held on 4 
November focused on the topics of conformity assessment procedures3 and technical assistance 
and special and differential treatment.4 The final programme as contained in JOB/TBT/111/Rev.1 is 
annexed to this summary report. The presenta tions are available as Room Documents on 
Document Online (under Documents for meetings) and will also be made available on the TBT 
gateway of the WTO website.  
1  CONFORMITY ASSESSMENT PROCEDURES 
1.1.  The thematic session started with a presentation by Mr Fabrizio Sacchetti from the 
European Commission  on the Choice of Conformity Assessment Procedures in Relation to Market 
Surveillance Mechanisms and Product Liability Re gimes. In the EU, market surveillance was the 
combination of activities and measures taken by public authorities to ensure that products comply 
with the requirements set out in the relevant legislation for the protection of health, safety or 
other public interests. He noted that, in the Eu ropean Union, conformity assessment and market 
surveillance functions were strictly separated and the product liability regime placed the ultimate 
responsibility on the manufacturer or the importer . An appropriate level of market surveillance was 
necessary regardless of the applicable conformi ty assessment procedures: there was empirical 
evidence of non-compliant products also when third-party conformity assessment was mandatory; 
in addition there were instances of non-compliance that could only be tackled through market 
surveillance (e.g. products sold on-line, products  with counterfeited conformity marks and related 
certificates; products placed on the market that differ from the samples submitted for certification, etc.) A well-functioning market surveillance mechan ism was therefore necessary to ensure proper 
enforcement of applicable requirements. Furthermore, it gave the regulator the possibility to opt 
for less burdensome conformity assessment procedures in case of low risk products and rely in such cases, for example, more on supplier’s decl aration of conformity (SDoC) and less on third-
party certification. He underlined the need for finding the right balance between conformity 
assessment procedures and market surveillance mechanisms for an efficient protection of consumers and other policy objectives, as well as to guarantee a level playing field for business. 
Finally, the representative of the EU referred to th ree areas currently under consideration in the EU 
which showed interesting examples of possible convergence / interaction between conformity 
assessment and market surveillance in order to make the latter more efficient: (i) pilot voluntary 
                                               
1 Mr. Filipe Ramalheira (Portugal). This Report is  provided on the Chairman's own responsibility.  
2 G/TBT/32, paragraph 26. 
3 The latest decisions and recommendations on conformity assessment procedures are contained in 
Part 1, Section 2 of G/TBT/1/Rev.11.   The summary report of the last  thematic session on conformity 
assessment procedures (29 October 2013) is contained in document G/TBT/GEN/155. 
4 The latest decisions and recommendations on special and differential treatment are contained in 
Part 1, Section 6 of G/TBT/1/Rev. 11. The summary report of the last  thematic session on special and 
differential treatment (29 October 2013) is contained in document G/TBT/GEN/156.  G/TBT/GEN/174 
 
- 2 - 
 
  compliance schemes operated by market surveill ance authorities to integrate the concept of 
market surveillance into the supply chain; (ii)  e-compliance schemes creating a repository of 
documents related to conformity assessment procedures of products and allowing for better risk profiling of products / economic operators; and (i ii) market surveillance schemes for products sold 
online, for instance by making online traders "co-responsible" for ensuring conformity with the 
requirements of the country where the product is sold.  
1.2.  The next three presentations addressed In ternational and Regional Systems for Conformity 
Assessment (covered under Article 9 of the TBT Agreement). Mr Andy Henson from the  Bureau 
International des Poids et Mesures  (BIPM) made a presentation on the role of metrology in 
conformity assessment. Metrology, he said, was th e "science and practice of measurement" with 
the objective of ensuring that measurements we re stable, comparable and coherent and met the 
evolving needs of the economy, society and citize ns. After an overview of the three subfields of 
metrology (scientific or fundamental metrology, applied and industrial metrology, legal metrology), he underlined the importance for international trad e of a common understanding and application of 
metrology worldwide, through the equivalent techni cal infrastructure of the BPIM, OIML, ILAC and 
ISO and through common guides on definitions and measurement uncertainty. The important role of the National Metrology Institutes (NMIs) and legal metrology authorities was emphasised. He 
noted that there were also regional metrology organisations supporting and complementing the 
work of international organisations. He also pointed out that to go up the value chain, it was important to be a part of the international metrology system.  
1.3.  Ms Ileana Martinez from the  United States  made a presentation on the Quality 
Infrastructure Council of the Americas (QICA), an initiative launched by the Ministers of Science 
and Technology of the Organization of American  States (OAS) in November 2011. The initiative 
aimed to foster competitiveness, innovation, trade and consumer safety by enhancing the ability of 
OAS member states to have access to internationally recognized quality infrastructure services. 
The three conceptual pillars of a National Quality Infrastructure (NQI) were identified as standardization, accreditation and metrology. Th e three regional organizations (COPANT, SIM and 
IAAC) that ensure regional cooperation in these three areas had signed an MOU in August 2014 to 
create the Quality Infrastructure Council of the Americas (QICA) and provide a single point of 
contact for action and collaboration to strengthen the national quality infrastructure in the Americas. The proposed activities included awareness raising events, joint seminars and training 
courses as well as initiatives to promote cooperation at the national level among those engaged in 
the three pillars.  
1.4.  Mr Ron Josias from  South Africa made a presentation on Building Quality Infrastructure in 
Africa. Referring to the key role of accreditation in the chain of trust from manufacturer to 
consumer, he noted that there had been significant developments in this area in Africa in the past 10 years, linking Africa more strongly to the international framework of quality infrastructure.  
There were an increasing number of internationally recognized accreditation bodies in Africa (for 
example from Egypt and Tunisia). In addition, the African Accreditation Cooperation (AFRAC) had been launched in 2010, creating the link between national accreditation bodies and the global 
system (ILAC/IAF). He also presented the Pan-African Quality Infrastructure (PAQI) initiative, 
which coordinated regional efforts on the three independently managed but interlinked elements of 
metrology, standardization and accreditation of conformity assessment services.  The regional bodies involved in this initiative (AFRAC, AFRIMETS, AFSEC and ARSO), which provided the link to 
the international quality infrastructure, had had th eir first official meeting with the African Union 
Commission (AUC) in September 2014. The presentation showed that Africa's quality infrastructure had made significant progress. 
2  TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND SPECIAL AND DIFFERENTIAL TREATMENT 
2.1.  Ms Jennifer Stradtman from the United States  made a presentation on Advancements in 
APEC on e-rulemaking in the Internet era. In pa rticular, she outlined the steps taken to implement 
the call of APEC Leaders in 2011 for strengthening the implementation of good regulatory practices 
by conducting public consultations, ensuring internal coordination of regulatory work and assessing 
the impact of regulations. She noted that the internet had revolutionized public consultation mechanisms, easing access and facilitating higher quality comments from around the world. APEC 
Workshops on e-rule-making and public consultation  in the internet era had been held in 2013 and 
2014. The topics discussed had included establishing the legal, technical and administrative framework, developing whole-of-government webs ites for conducting public consultations, G/TBT/GEN/174 
 
- 3 - 
 
  standardizing procedures across ministries and providing opportunities to comment on regulatory 
impact analysis. APEC was continuing to work on strengthening the implementation of public consultations though information technology, und er the Chairmanship of China in 2014 and the 
Philippines in 2015.  
2.2.  Ms Susannah Leslie from  New Zealand presented APEC's efforts to improve regulatory 
coherence in wine trade across APEC economies. She pointed out that the regulatory environment 
was out of step with the increase in wine trade and noted that regulations could result in 
unnecessary obstacles to trade and increased costs for producers, without any demonstrable 
benefit to consumers, producers and regulators . The World Wine Trade Group (WWTG) and the 
APEC Wine Regulatory Forum (WRF) were govern ment and industry partnerships, which worked 
together to facilitate trade in wine and repres ented significant examples of how governments and 
industry could work together to advance good regu latory practices.  The World Wine Trade Group, 
founded in 1998, brought together mainly wine producing countries while the APEC Wine Regulatory Forum, established in 2008, was younger with more diverse participants, but had 
already taken significant steps, such as a consolidated US/China certificate. The work of both 
groups had led to the reduction of barriers to trade in wine and cooperation was being further enhanced. 
2.3.  The final speaker was Mr Melvin Spreij  from the Standards and Trade Development Facility 
(STDF) who provided an overview of the Coordinati on and Funding Role of the STDF in SPS-related 
technical assistance. He explained that the STDF helped to: (i) increase awareness on the importance of building SPS capacity; (ii) mobilize Aid for Trade resources, (iii) strengthen 
collaboration among providers of assistance; and (iv) identify and disseminate good practice. On-
going thematic work focused on trade facilitation in the context of the SPS Agreement, prioritization of SPS investment options for market  access and public-private partnerships to build 
SPS capacity. The STDF also provided su pport and funding for the development and 
implementation of projects that promote comp liance with international standards and SPS 
requirements. The STDF Working Group brought to gether representatives from STDF's founding 
partner agencies - namely FAO (including Codex and IPPC), OIE, World Bank, WHO, WTO -, 
donors, selected developing country SPS experts and other relevant agencies such as ITC and 
UNIDO. Its Secretariat was housed at the WTO. In response to queries as to whether certain TBT issues could be incorporated in STDF's work, he indicated that while there was scope for 
benefitting from synergies, for ex ample in the area of laboratory infrastructure, the mandate of the 
STDF was limited to SPS issues. Further information on the STDF, the secretariat of which is housed at the WTO, is available on their newly upgraded website: 
http://www.standardsfacility.org .   
2.4.  On a personal note , I found it to be a very fruitful thematic session. We touched upon a 
wide-array of topics under conformity assessment an d looked at practices and approaches followed 
in several regions.  The presentations highlighted th e hard task that falls on regulatory bodies and 
the need for them to keep pace with trends in international markets –such as in e-commerce. The 
emphasis of discussions in the area of technical assistance and special and differential treatment  
was on regional and international initiatives, underlining the importance of working together in 
various fora to promote good practices in regulatory cooperation and technical assistance. 
 
 
_______________ 
  G/TBT/GEN/174 
 
- 4 - 
 
   
ANNEX 
PROGRAMME1 
 
1  CONFORMITY ASSESSMENT PROCEDURES 
a. Choice of Conformity Assessment Procedures in Relation to Market Surveillance 
Mechanisms and Product Liability Regimes - Fabrizio Sacchetti, Directorate-General for 
Enterprise and Industry, European Commission 
b. International and Regional Systems fo r Conformity Assessment (Article 9) 
i. Role of Metrology in Conformity Assessment - Andy Henson,  Director, International 
Liaison and Communication Department, Bureau International des Poids et Mesures 
(BIPM)  
ii. Building Quality Infrastructure in the Americas: MOU among Inter-American 
Accreditation Cooperation (IAAC), Inter-American Metrology System (SIM) and the 
Pan American Standards Commission (COPANT) - Ileana Martinez, National Institute 
of Standards and Technology (NIST), Chair IAAC, United States 
iii. Building Quality Infrastructure in Africa: Overview of Accreditation and the Pan 
African Quality Infrastructure (PAQI) - Ron Josias, Chief Executive Officer, South 
African National Accreditation System (SANAS) and Chairperson, African Accreditation Cooperation (AFRAC) 
2  TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND SPECIAL AND DIFFERENTIAL TREATMENT 
a. Advancements in Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) on E-rulemaking in the 
Internet Era - Jennifer Stradtman, Director, Technical Barriers to Trade at Office of the U.S. Trade Representative  
b. APEC Wine Regulatory Forum: Improving regulatory coherence in the wine trade across 
APEC economies - Susannah Leslie, Policy Officer, New Zealand Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade 
c. The Coordination and Funding Role of the STDF in SPS-related technical assistance - 
Melvin Spreij, Counsellor, Agriculture and Commodities Division, WTO and Secretary, Standards and Trade Development Facility (STDF) 
 
 
__________  
                                               
1 The final programme was circulated as JOB/TBT/111/Rev.1 on 31 October 2014