G/SPS/GEN/1625  
 
22 June 2018  
(18-3932) Page: 1/4 
Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures    
 
 
FIFTH REVIEW OF THE OPERAT ION AND IMPLEMENTATI ON OF THE AGREEMENT  
ON THE APPLICATION O F SANITARY AND PHYTO SANITARY MEASURES  
OVERVIEW  OF PAPERS AND PROPOSALS SUBMITTED BY MEMBERS  
Note by  the Secretariat1 
Members have submitted the following proposals and suggestions for consideration during the F ifth 
Review of the Operation and Implementation of the Agreement on the Application of Sani tary and 
Phytosanitary Measures:  
1  Argentina, Australia,  Brazil, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, 
Japan, Kenya, Madagascar, New Zealand, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Uganda, the 
United  States,  and Uruguay2 (G/SPS/W/292/ Rev.4) 
1.1.  The Committee should play a constructive role in addressing the  broad range of MRL -related 
issues that are currently having a significant impact on trade in food and agricultural products. The 
submission includes several recommendations for incorporation into the Fifth Review Report in 
order to advance work in the Committ ee on trade -related issues on MRLs . These recommendations 
cover the following themes : (i) e nabling  JMPR to better respond to increased demand and monitor 
progress on new Codex MRLs ; (ii) strengthen ing notification practices of Members for greater 
transparency and predictability on MRLs; (iii) report ing to the Committee on international and 
regional activities on MRLs; (iv) c ollaborating  on solutions for MRLs for minor use and specialty 
crops; and (v) d iscuss ing the role of the Committee in increasing coordination and harmonization.  
2  Australia  (G/SPS/W/ 299) 
2.1.  The Committee should  explore the impediments to the application of the concept and 
practices of equivalence to manage SPS risks in trade. The submissi on includes a suggestion that 
the SPS Committee could expand on existing guidance on recognition of equivalence 
(G/SPS/19/Rev.2) in relation to systems approaches for achieving equivalence in achieving the 
importing Members' appropriate level of protection  of plant, animal and human health while 
permitting trade to begin, continue or resume. In addition, the submission recommends that the 
Fifth Review should draw on the existing and ongoing work of the ISSBs.  
3  Benin, Burkina Faso, Burundi, The Gambia, Ghana,  Kenya, Madagascar, Morocco, 
Nigeria, the United States and Zambia (G/SPS/W/297)  
3.1.  The Committee should examine how to strengthen national SPS committees to enhance 
coordination at the national, regional and international levels. The submission includes a 
recommendation for a workshop or thematic session to be held in late 2018 or early 2019 in order 
to exchange experiences  on several identified topics related to national SPS committees . The 
topics identified for further discussion are: (i ) the mechanism for establishment and composition of 
national SPS committees ; (ii) the role of the private sector in advising or providing input to 
                                                
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 Ministers of Argentina, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, Guatemala, 
Japan, Kenya, Madagascar, Panama, Pa raguay, Peru, Uganda, the United States and Uruguay signed a joint 
statement supporting the recommendations contained in this submission. See WT/MIN(17)/52.  G/SPS/GEN/1625  
 
- 2 - 
 
  national SPS committees ; (iii) the procedures for developing national SPS strategies and positions 
in region al and international organizations; (iv) the use of established information exchange 
mechanisms; and (v) the role of national SPS committees  in advocacy. The submission also 
indicates  that, following the Committee's examination of these matters, other Memb ers' views 
would be welcomed as to whether a "good practices" document would be useful to Members.  
4  Brazil (G/SPS/W/ 300) 
4.1.  The Committee should review the notification procedures under the SPS Committee in order 
to address the challenges arising from measure s not clearly fitting within the scope of the SPS or 
TBT Agreement . In particular, the Committee should review  the practices guiding the notification 
of the measure under one or both of the Agreements , in order to  enhanc e predictability and 
transparency . The submission includes a recommendation to organize  thematic sessions and 
workshops, with a view to developing practical guidelines for notifications.  
5  Brazil (G/SPS/W/ 301) 
5.1.  The SPS Agreement provides a solid base for the treatment of regulatory issues in t he area of 
trade in agricultural products, but it is necessary to reinforce its features to ensure the attainment 
of its objectives. In particular, t he Committee should discuss the following issues , with a view to 
contributing to possible concrete results :  
(i) Scientific justification ( Article 2.2) and risk assessment  – the Committee should 
reaffirm the scientific basis of the SPS Agreement, thereby limiting the use of SPS 
measures as an arbitrary and unjustifiable discrimination or a disguised restriction on 
trade ;  
(ii) Equivalence  (Article 4 ) – Members should recognize t he importance of the Decision 
(G/SPS/19/Rev.2), commit to follow its provisions and reinforce their commitment to enter 
into consultations when requested, following Article 4.2 and the procedures described in 
the Decision itself ;  
(iii) Risk assessment and deter mination of the appropriate level of SPS protection 
(Article 5 ) – Members could discuss guidelines to ensure that the factors to be taken into 
account in risk assessment, as provided for in Articles 5.2 and 5.3, are appraised in ways 
supported by scientifi c evidence and methods . Members could also discuss ways to avoid 
the misuse of Article 5.7 ; and  
(iv) Regionalization  (Article 6 ) – Members could consider the option of automatically 
recognizing a disease status granted by the OIE . A similar recognition by the IPPC should 
also be encouraged.   
6  Canada  (G/SPS/W/ 302) 
6.1.  The Committee should consider holding a workshop  or thematic session on Article 4 
(Equivalence) as part of the Fifth Review , in order to provide Members with an opportunity  to 
expand their knowledge of the concept of equivalence. The submission includes various elements  
which could be examined by Members in the workshop or thematic session : the equivalence 
obligations in the SPS Agreement; the guidance provided in the Decisi on on the Implementation of 
Article 4 of the Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures  
(G/SPS/19/Rev.2); the jurisprudence relating to Article 4 in decisions of the Dispute Settlement 
Body; the work of the ISSBs on developing inte rnational standards, guidelines and 
recommendations referring or relating to equivalence; Members’ experience implementing the 
concept of equivalence; as well as any best practices that can be shared concerning the 
implementation of the obligations, guidel ines or recommendations on equivalence.  
7  The European Union (G/SPS/W/ 298) 
7.1.  The Committee should examine the topic of regionalization (pest- and disease -free areas) 
and ensure that any further work of the SPS Committee on regionalization would build on the on -
going work of the international standard -setting bodies, and on WTO jurisprudence. The 
submission includes specific proposals for action by the SPS Committee: (i) invite the OIE to share 
with the SPS Committee the outcome of its on -going work in relation to regionalization and trade G/SPS/GEN/1625  
 
- 3 - 
 
  facilitation; (ii) invite the IPPC to conduct a similar survey, and to share information about its on -
going activities and about any experience it may have about the implementation of its standards in 
relation to pest -free areas; (iii) with the assistance of the WTO Secretariat, look at recent WTO 
jurisprudence on regionalization both in the animal health and plant health domains; and  
(iv) examine the Guidelines on Article 6 (G/SPS/48) in order to assess thei r effectiveness, to what 
extent they are actually followed by Members and, if needed, identify areas which could be 
improved.  
8  The United States   
8.1.  The United States has also indicated interest in examining the following topics  under the Fifth 
Review : regiona lization, transparency, Annex C, fall armyworm, and risk analysis (including risk 
communication). Proposals on regionalization and fall a rmyworm  are forthcoming .  
 
_______________  
 
 
 
  
  G/SPS/GEN/1625  
 
- 4 -  
ANNEX I: LIST OF TOPICS AND PROPOSALS  
Members  ALOP, Risk 
Assessment  
and Science  Annex C  Equivalence  National SPS 
Committees  Notification 
Procedures / 
Transparency   Pesticide 
MRLs  Regionalization  Other Topics  
Argentina, Australia, Brazil, 
Canada, Chile, Colombia, 
Costa Rica, Dominican 
Republic, Japan, Kenya, 
Madagascar, New Zealand, 
Panama, Paraguay, Peru, 
Uganda, United States and 
Uruguay  - - - - - Joint 
submission - 
G/SPS/W/292/
Rev.4  - - 
Australia  - - G/SPS/W/299  - - Joint 
submission - 
G/SPS/W/292/
Rev.4  - - 
Benin, Burkina Faso, 
Burundi, The Gambia, 
Ghana, Kenya, Madagascar, 
Morocco, Nigeria, 
United  States and Zambia  - - - Joint 
submission - 
G/SPS/W/297  - - - - 
Brazil  G/SPS/W/301  - G/SPS/W/301  - G/SPS/W/300  Joint 
submission - 
G/SPS/W/292/
Rev.4  G/SPS/W/301  - 
Canada  - - G/SPS/W/302  - - Joint 
submission - 
G/SPS/W/292/
Rev.4  - - 
European Union  - - - - - - G/SPS/W/298  - 
United States  Topic of interest: 
risk analysis 
(including risk 
communication)  Topic of 
interest  - Joint 
submission - 
G/SPS/W/297  Topic of 
interest  Joint 
submission - 
G/SPS/W/292/
Rev.4  Topic of interest  
(Proposal 
forthcoming ) Topic of 
interest: f all 
army worm  
(Proposal 
forthcoming ) 
__________