G/SPS/62  
 
25 July 2017  
(17-4097) Page: 1/47 
Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures    
 
REVIEW OF THE OPERAT ION AND IMPLEMENTATI ON 
OF THE SPS AGREEMENT  
REPORT ADOPTED BY  THE COMMITTEE  ON 14 JULY 20171 
1  INTRODUCTION  
1.1.  Article 12.7 of the Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures 
("the Agreement") provides that "the Committee shall review the operation and implementation of 
this Agreement three years after the date of entry into force of the WTO Agreement, and 
thereafter as the need arises". A Fi rst Review of the Agreement was completed in March 1999.2 
1.2.  At the Fourth Session of the Ministerial Conference, Ministers instructed the Committee to 
review the operation and implementation of the Agreement at least once every four years. The 
Second Review of the Agreement was completed in July 20053 and the Third Review in May 2010.4 
At its October 2013 meeting, the Committee adopted a procedure and timetable to undertake the 
Fourth Review of the Agreement.5 The Review process provided a number of opportuni ties for 
Members to identify issues to be addressed as part of the Fourth Review, and submit specific 
proposals on the identified issues. Since October 2013, the Committee has held informal and 
formal meetings to consider the issues and proposals identifie d by Members. The draft report of 
the Review6 was discussed at the July 2014 meeting of the Committee and Members were invited 
to submit written comments on the draft report by 31 July 2014.  
1.3.  In accordance with the procedures for the Fourth Review, the Comm ittee considered the 
revised report  of the Review7 for adoption at its October 2014 meeting. The report was further 
revised8 based on Members' comments and suggestions at the October 2014 meeting , and  
Members were invited to submit comments in writing by the end of 2014 , with a view to its 
adoption during the March 2015 regular meeting.  Members accepted the inclusion of the first two 
suggestions contained in document G/SPS/W/282. However, the Committe e did not reach 
consensus on the report's  adoption and Me mbers continued discussions during 2015 and 2016 to 
bridge differences particularly on a recommendation under section 14 on SPS -related private 
standards. At its July 2017 regular meeting, the Committee agreed on the inclusion of new 
language in section 14 , circulated in document RD/SPS/15 and adopted the report on the Fourth 
Review of the Operation and Implemen tation of the SPS Agreement . 
1.4.  As in the preceding reviews, in the Fourth Review the Committee has considered operation 
and implementation issues rela ted to:  
 Monitoring the use of international standards (Article 3.5 and 12.4);  
 Equivalence (Article 4);  
 Consistency (Article 5.5);  
                                                
1 This report reflects the work of the SPS Committee as of October 2014, except where stated 
otherwise.  
2 G/SPS/12.  
3 G/SPS/36.  
4 G/SPS/53.  
5 G/SPS/W/270 and G/SPS/W/270/Add.1.  
6 G/SPS/W/280.  
7 G/SPS/W/280/Rev.1.  
8 G/SPS/W/280/Rev.2.  G/SPS/62  
 
- 2 - 
 
   Regionalization (Article 6);  
 Transparency (Article 7 and Annex B);  
 Technical assistance and training activities (Article 9);  
 Special and differential treatment (Article 10);  
 Dispute settlement activities (Article 11);  
 Implementation of the Agreement (Articles 12.1 and 12.2) – Specific trade concerns;  
 Implementation of the Agreement (Article 12.2) – Use of ad hoc consultations;  
 Cooperation with Codex Alimentarius (Codex), International Plant Protection Convention 
(IPPC) and the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) (Article 12.3);  
 Good regulatory practice; and  
 SPS-related Private Standards.  
1.5.  In addition, in this Fourth Review  the Committee also considered:  
 Risk Analysis: risk assessment (Article 5), risk management and communication; and  
 Catalogue of instruments to manage SPS issues.  
1.6.  Information presented in this document, particularly in sections 6 and 10 below, has been 
retrieved from the SPS Information Management System (SPS IMS: http://spsims.wto.org ). 
The categories of level of development and the geographical groupings used rely on the WTO IDB 
reference database ( idb@wto.org ). 
1.7.  Appendix A of this document provides a summary of Committee activities between the Third 
Review in 2010 and October 2014. Appendix B provides a list of documents submitted by Members 
during that same period re levant to the various issues raised in this report. Appendix C provides 
information about SPS -related dispute settlement activities in this period.  
2  MONITORING THE USE O F INTERNATIONAL STAN DARDS (ARTICLES 3.5 AND 12.4)  
2.1.  Articles 3.5 and 12.4 of the SPS Agree ment require the Committee to develop a procedure to 
monitor the process of international harmonization and the use of international standards, 
guidelines and recommendations. The Committee initially adopted a monitoring procedure in 1997, 
which was revise d in November 2004.9 In June 2006, the Committee decided to extend this 
procedure indefinitely, and to review its operation as an integral part of the periodic review of the 
operation and implementation of the Agreement under Article 12.7.  
2.2.  The monitoring o f the use of international standards is a standing item on the agenda of 
regular Committee meetings and, in accordance with the agreed procedure, the Committee has 
produced annual reports relating to the process of monitori ng international harmonization.10 
2.3.  In October 2010, Members agreed to prioritize three issues for consideration under the work 
of the Committee arising from the Third Review: (i) the cooperation between the SPS Committee 
and the Three Sisters; (ii) improving the procedure for monitoring the  use of international 
standards; and (iii) control, inspection and approval proc edures (Article 8 and Annex C).11 
2.4.  In June 2011, there was discussion related to the lack of adoption of Codex standards 
relating to ractopamine.12 Several Members were concerned that unjustified opposition to the 
adoption of a science -based international standard threatened the institutional integrity of the 
Codex. Furthermore, non -adoption of MRLs could result in systemic problems that jeopardized 
Codex' role in food safety and p osed a risk to the credibility of JECFA, the scientific advisory body 
of the Codex, and Codex. These Members all shared the concerns that had been raised regarding 
                                                
9 G/SPS/11/Rev.1.  
10 G/SPS/37, G/SPS/42 and G/SPS/42/Corr.1, G/SPS/45, G/SPS/49, G/SPS/51 and G/SPS/51/Corr.1, 
G/SPS/54, G/SPS/56, G/SPS/59, G/SPS/GEN/1332.  
11 G/SPS/GEN/1086.  
12 G/SPS/GEN/1092 and G/SPS/56.  G/SPS/62  
 
- 3 - 
 
  the need to ensure that the basic principles and processes of Codex be respected.13 At the sa me 
time, other Members, while recognising the importance of science in the development of 
international standards, emphasised that it was imperative to understand the role of science as 
part of the risk analysis approach. Codex, as a risk manager, had to c onsider a wider range of 
factors. These Members shared the concern that overlooking divergent scientific conclusions and 
the lack of a consensus on the adoption of MRLs for ractopamine would create systemic concerns 
and jeopardize the role of Codex as the leading food safety standard -setting body. In October 
2012, Members drew attention to Codex' adoption of specific MRLs for ractopamine, on 7 July 
2012.  
2.5.  At the March 2012 meeting, some Members raised a horizontal concern regarding the 
number of SPS measures  that were not based on international standards, guidelines and 
recommendations.14 These Members reaffirmed: (i) the need for science -based international 
guidelines, standards and recommendations; (ii) the need to support and strengthen confidence in 
SPS in ternational standard -setting bodies; and (iii) the need for SPS measures that resulted in a 
higher level of protection than would be achieved by measures based on the relevant international 
standards to be established on the basis of science.  
2.6.  In July 2012,  Argentina submitted a proposal15 to revise the monitoring procedure16 so as to 
enable the Secretariat to include, in the annual report, issues that had been raised under the 
agenda item on Specific Trade Concerns when these related to the non -use of interna tional 
standards or the absence of existing standards, unless the submitting Member requested 
otherwise. While agreeing that the monitoring procedure appeared to be under -utilized, some 
Members noted that no clear problem with the procedure had been articu lated and maintained that 
it was their right to decide under which agenda item they wished to raise such problems. The 
Chairperson encouraged bilateral discussions among Members on the subject.  
2.7.  Also in July 2012, Brazil noted the increase in demand for sci entific advice to support food 
control systems and the need for Members to ensure that adequate resources were available for 
these bodies to carry out their functions.17 In particular, a number of Members agreed on the 
crucial role of the scientific advice bodies.  
2.8.  At the October 2012 meeting, the United States encouraged all Members to promote the use 
of international standards in their national SPS programmes and to actively participate in the on -
going work of the three standard -setting bodies recognised un der the SPS Agreement, as 
international standards were critical for ensuring safe food for consumers and facilitating trade. 
Members also stressed the importance of international standards and emphasized that 
international standard -setting bodies needed to  be incl usive to achieve harmonization.18 
2.9.  Codex indicated that it did not have a specific system of monitoring like the IPPC, but 
regularly gathered information on how Codex standards were being used, the needs of member 
countries and/or why standards were not being used in certain regions. Codex used a 
questionnai re for this monitoring process.19 
2.10.   At the October 2012 and March 2013 meetings of the Committee, the IPPC reported on its 
Implementation Review and Support System (IRSS).20 The IRSS provides a help de sk to address 
specific issues identified by members. A summary of the major actions, review and support 
activities completed through the IRSS can be found in G/SPS/GEN/1225.  
2.11.   In June 2013, Argentina and Chile reiterated their proposal that the SPS Committee's 
monitoring procedure adequately reflect how international standards are used by Members. 
                                                
13 The concern was first raised by Brazil at the October 2009 Committee meeting. The issue was raised 
again at the June 2010 Committee meeting. At the meeting of March 2011, Brazil noted the continuing failure 
of Codex to adopt MRLs for ractopamine.  
14 G/SPS/G EN/1143/Rev.2.  
15 G/SPS/W/268.  
16 G/SPS/11/Rev.1.  
17 G/SPS/GEN/1165 and G/SPS/59.  
18 G/SPS/W/269.  
19 Ibid. 
20 G/SPS/GEN/1204.  G/SPS/62  
 
- 4 - 
 
  Argentina noted that the topic of monitoring the use of international standards could be addressed 
in the context of the Fourth Review of the Operation and  Implementation of the SPS Agreement.  
2.12.   In October 2013, Argentina recalled its proposal and suggested that this topic be addressed 
in the context of the Fourth Review, and in particular that it could be included in the catalogue of 
tools available to WTO Me mbers for the management of  SPS issues proposed by Canada.21 
2.13.   The IPPC reported on the activities of the Implementation Review and Support System 
(IRSS), including a general survey on the IPPC and 32 standards.22 The IPPC requested 
contracting parties to comp lete a survey on pest reporting and regulated pest listing as soon as 
possible, as this information would help identify ways that the IPPC Secretariat and the IRSS 
program could better assist countries to fulfil related IPPC obligations. The IRSS website a nd help 
desk had been launched and IPPC was seeking donors for translation of existing IRSS analyses, 
tools and resources, as well as donors for the second 3 -year cycle of the IRSS.  
2.14.   Recommendations : 
 The Committee should continue to monitor the use of inter national standards at each of its 
regular meetings (G/SPS/11/Rev.1). It should continue to review the monitoring procedure 
as part of the periodic reviews of the SPS Agreement, as foreseen in the Decision to Modify 
and Extend the Provisional Procedure to M onitor the Process of International 
Harmonization.23 
 Members are encouraged to provide information regarding their experiences, or lack 
thereof, in the implementation of international standards (Articles 3.5 and 12.4).  
 Members should ensure their full imple mentation of the transparency provisions of the SPS 
Agreement, and to the extent possible, follow the recommended procedures established by 
the Committee (G/SPS/7/Rev.3), including those relating to the notification of measures 
conforming to international standards.  
3  EQUIVALENCE (ARTICLE  4) 
3.1.  The Committee adopted an initial decision regarding the implementation of Article 4 on 
equivalence in October 2001. This initial decision included a commitment to develop a specific 
work programme to further the implement ation of Article 4, which was concluded by the adoption 
of the current version of the equi valence guidelines in July 200424 and the agreement that 
equivalence would be a standing agenda item for the regular meetings of the Committee.  
3.2.  In March 2011, Chile re ported that it was working with the European Union on two issues 
relating to equivalence as outlined in their Plan of Action Agreement, namely with regard to 
molluscs and exports of EU packaged beef. This is the only experience regarding equivalence that 
has been reported to the Committee.  
3.3.  In October 2011, Codex provided information regarding the development of guidelines for the 
judgement of equivalence of food control systems by the Codex Committee on Food Import and 
Export Inspection and Certification Sy stems (CCFICS). It was proposed that the principle of 
recognition, which provides that other systems could be capable of meeting the same food safety 
objectives, be included in the general guidelines for food control systems. This could be applied at 
the n ational and international levels. The Principles and Guidelines for National Food Control 
Systems were adopted by Codex at its 36th session in July 2013.25 Codex guidelines already exist 
for the development of equivalence agreements regarding import and export certification and 
inspection systems and for the judgment of equivalence of sanitary measures.  
3.4.  In March 2012, IPPC indicated that it had engaged CABI to undertake a study on the 
application of the concept of equivalence in the phytosanitary area. ISPM 24, adopted in 2005, 
provides guidelines for determination and recognition of equivalence of phytosanitary measures, 
                                                
21 G/SPS/W/279/Rev.1.  
22 G/SPS/GEN/1284.  
23 G/SPS/40, paragraph 2.  
24 G/SPS/19/Rev.2.  
25 CAC/GL 82 -2013.  G/SPS/62  
 
- 5 - 
 
  and ISPM 1 includes principles on equ ivalence. In the case of the IPPC, equivalence is managed at 
the level of application of phytosanitary measures. These measures are applied as single 
measures, combined measures, or as a package of measures in systems approaches. Most of 
these measures are  negotiated based on agreements at bilateral or multi -lateral levels. The study 
seeks to provide a clearer picture of the importance and frequency of the use of this concept and 
recognition of the IPPC's application of the concept.  
3.5.  The OIE has developed gu idelines for determining the equivalence of sanitary measures 
contained in Article 5.3 of the Terrestrial Animal Health Code.  
3.6.  Recommendations : 
 The Committee should maintain equivalence as a standing item of the agenda for its 
regular meetings.  
 Members are encouraged to provide information regarding their experiences, or lack 
thereof, in the implementation of Article 4 and in the use of the guidance developed by the 
Committee (G/SPS/19/Rev.2). In particular, Members are encouraged to notify any 
agreement rea ched on the recognition of equivalence in accordance with the agreed 
procedure.  
 The relevant international organizations are invited to keep the Committee informed of any 
work they undertake with regard to the recognition of equivalence.  
4  CONSISTENCY (ARTIC LE 5.5)  
4.1.  Article 5.5 required the Committee to develop guidelines to further the practical 
implementation of that provision. The Committee adopted suc h guidelines (G/SPS/15) in 
July 2000, and subsequently agreed to review them as part of the periodic review s of the 
operation and implementation of the SPS Agreement. To date no Member has suggested a need to 
modify these guidelines. Although there is no standing agenda item regarding Article 5.5, there is 
opportunity for Members to provide information regardin g their experiences in this regard under 
the Agenda Item "Activities of Members" . 
4.2.  Recommendations : 
 Members are encouraged to provide information regarding their experiences in the 
implementation of Article 5.5 and in the use of the guidelines (G/SPS/15).  
 As foreseen in the Guidelines to further the Practical Implementation of Article 5.5 and in 
the Third Review, the Committee should continue to review these guidelines as part of the 
periodi c reviews of the SPS Agreement.26 
5  REGIONALIZATION (ART ICLE 6)  
5.1.  Follow ing adoption of the "Guidelines to Further the Practical Implementation of Article 6 of 
the Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures", the Committee agreed 
to monitor the implementation of Article 6, on the basis of information p rovided by Members 
through notifications and from information presented during SPS Committee meetings, and to 
revise the guidelines, if necessary, in light of experience gained through the implementation of the 
Agreement and the use of the guidelines thems elves. Three reports have been issued by the 
Secretariat: the first one covering the year 2009 through the end of 201127; the second one 
covering the year 2012 through the first quarter of 201328; and the third one covering the period 
from 1 June 2013 until 31 March 2014.29 
5.2.  Both the IPPC and the OIE have provided guidance for countries seeking to establish, or to be 
recognized for, pest - or disease -free status.  
                                                
26 Introduction, G/SPS/15 and paragraph 14, G/SPS/53.  
27 G/SPS/GEN/1134.  
28 G/SPS/GEN/1245.  
29 G/SPS/GEN/1333.  G/SPS/62  
 
- 6 - 
 
  5.3.  The IPPC currently has several directly relevant standards: ISPM 4 on requirements for the 
establish ment of pest -free areas; ISPM 10 for the establishment of pest -free places of production 
and production sites; ISPM 22 on requirements for the establishment of areas of low pest 
prevalence; ISPM 26 on the establishment of pest -free areas for fruit flies; a nd ISPM 29 on the 
recognition of pest -free areas and areas of low pest prevalence. In addition, IPPC has a number of 
supporting standards, including guidelines for pest surveillance.  
5.4.  The IPPC concluded a study on the implementation by its members of their national reporting 
obligations in May 2013. The study found that WTO Members had notified to the IPPC less than 
5% of the obligatory information that they were reporting to the WTO Secretariat. This could be 
due to a lack of understanding, communication, r esources, capacities or coordination. 
Governments should be aware that providing information regarding pests at the SPS Committee 
meetings or through SPS notifications is not sufficient to meet their obligat ions under the IPPC or 
the OIE.30 
5.5.  The OIE Terrestr ial Animal Health Code describes the requirements for obtaining disease -free 
status including requirements for surveillance and monitoring based on the concept of geographic 
zones. During its annual General Sessions the OIE has adopted a number of resoluti ons related to 
recognition of disease -free areas. In 2011 the World Assembly adopted Resolution 18, declaring 
that the world had achieved freedom from rinderpest. This is the first animal disease eradicated 
globally, and represents a great achievement o f national Veterinary Services.31 
5.6.  At the 80th General Session, in 2012, the OIE adopted the revised Chapter 12.1 on African 
horse sickness (AHS), and from 2013, AHS is one of the diseases for which OIE provides official 
disease status recognition. During the 8 1st General Session, in 2013, the Assembly adopted the 
revised Chapters 14.8 and 15.2 to provide official recognition of disease -free status for peste des 
petits ruminants and swine fever. Official free status recognition by the OIE can now be granted 
for six diseases: foot -and-mouth disease (FMD); African horse sickness (AHS); classical swine 
fever (CSF); contagious bovine pleuropneumonia (CBPP); peste des petits ruminants (PPR); and 
bovine s pongiform encephalopathy (BSE).32 
5.7.  The OIE  has undertaken, in collaboration with the CBD Secretariat, to consider the 
development of guidelines on risk assessment for invasive animal species.33 Two volumes of the 
OIE Scientific and Technical Review were dedicated to the issue of inv asive species 
(G/SPS/GEN/1043).34 
5.8.  In June 2013 the OIE tabled a document describing the OIE BSE risk assessment process 
that had been in place since 2004.35 OIE also indicated that the latest results of the official disease 
status recognition of OIE members were available f or FMD, BSE, contagious bovine 
pleuropneumonia and, for the first time, al so for African Horse sickness.36 
5.9.  Recommendations : 
 The Committee should maintain regionalization as a standing item of the agenda for its 
regular meetings.  
 Members are encouraged to pr ovide information on their experiences in the 
implementation of Article 6, including on the use of the Guidelines adopted by the 
Committee in that regard (G/SPS/48).  
                                                
30 For more information on the IPPC work, see documents G/SPS/GEN/1321 , G/SPS/GEN/1344 , 
G/SPS/GEN/1345 for 2014; G/SPS/GEN/1226 , G/SPS/GEN/1247 , G/SPS/GEN/1283 for 2013; 
G/SPS/GEN /1152 , G/SPS/GEN/1171 , G/SPS/GEN/1201 for 2012; G/SPS/GEN/1102 , G/SPS/GEN/1123 for 
2011; and G/SPS/GEN/999 , G/SPS/GEN/1028 , G/SPS/GEN/1049 for 2010.  
31 See for more information Annex 1 of document G/SPS/GEN/1096.  
32 The full list of countries and their recog nised disease status for FMD, CBPP, BSE and AHS can be 
found in Annex 1 of document G/SPS/GEN/1255.  
33 G/SPS/GEN/1120.  
34 See for more information on the OIE work documents G/SPS/GEN/1317 , G/SPS/GEN/1343 for 2014; 
G/SPS/GEN/1231 , G/SPS/GEN/1255 , G/SPS/GEN/1277 for 2013; G/SPS/GEN/1141 , G/SPS/GEN/1164 , 
G/SPS/GEN/1198 for 2012; G/SPS/GEN/1073 , G/SPS/GEN/1096 , G/SPS/GEN/1120 for 2011; and 
G/SPS/GEN/1000 , G/SPS/GEN/1024 , G/SPS/GEN/1043 for 2010.  
35 G/SPS/GEN/1256.  
36 G/SPS/GEN/1255.  G/SPS/62  
 
- 7 - 
 
   The observer organizations are invited to keep the Committee informed of their activities 
relevant to the recognition of pest - or disease -free areas or areas of low pest or disease 
prevalence.  
6  TRANSPARENCY (ARTICL E 7 AND ANNEX B)  
6.1.  A step -by-step procedural manual for the operation of Enquiry Points and National 
Notification Authorities was made available in February 2011, on the basis of the transparency 
procedures and notification form ats contained in G/SPS/7/Rev.3.37 
6.2.  Up-to-date information on SPS notifications as well as Committee documents, specific trade 
concerns and Members' National Enquiry Points and Notifications Authorities continues to be 
available electronically via the SPS Information Management System (SPS IMS). This facilitates the 
conduct of searches according to specific needs and interests (product codes, geographic groups, 
etc.) a nd also the preparation of reports and summaries which can be shared with interested 
stakeholders.  
6.3.  At the March 2011 meeting, the Secretariat launched the SPS Notification Submission System 
(SPS NSS) which allows National Notification Authorities to fill o ut and submit SPS notifications 
online. The SPS NSS allows for more accurate and complete notifications, and a substantial 
reduction in the time required for the WTO to circulate them. The system was made available to 
Members on 1 June 2011 upon request. I nterested Members are requested to send an email to the 
Secretariat so that their National Notification Authority can receive a login name and access 
passwords. As of mid -September 2014, 56 Members had requested and been given access to the 
system, and 31 of these have officially submitted notifications via the SPS NSS. About half of 
SPS notifications are now submitted via the online system.  
6.4.  The Secretariat organized workshops on transparency in October 2010 and 2012 (see also 
paragraph 6.8 below). The latt er was the fourth SPS workshop on transparency organized by the 
WTO Secretariat since 1999. The workshop was a highly interactive, "hands -on" training event 
focussing in particular on the use of the SPS IMS and SPS NSS, as well as sharing of national 
exper iences thereof. This training was complemented by information from Codex, IPPC and OIE 
("Three Sisters") on their online tools.  
6.5.  The main recommendations from the October 2012 workshop involved the following issues: 
suggestions for technical and substantial  changes to the SPS IMS and SPS NSS; and the need to 
provide LDCs with training in the use of the SPS NSS. Budgetary approval was granted in 2014 for 
a project to improve the two systems. Training to LDCs and other developing country Members has 
become a r egular component of technical assistance activities. In addition, the WTO Secretariat 
has provided demonstration sessions on the SPS IMS and the SPS NSS during the SPS Committee 
meetings and responded to ad hoc requests from Members and other interested pa rties for 
assistance.  
6.6.  The Secretariat continues to provide annual updates on the level of implementation of the 
transparency provisions of the SPS Agreement; the latest revision to the background note, 
G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.7, was issued in October 2014. The S PS IMS facilitates the compilation and 
analysis of data related to the implementation of the transparency provisions. Furthermore, 
Members' implementation of the recommendations on transparency, as provided for in 
G/SPS/7/Rev.3, should result in substantia lly enhanced information.  
6.7.  Managing information on transparency remains, however, challenging for many developing 
country Members and many have flagged their need for assistance and support to resolve their 
individual transparency difficulties, for example with the process of sending notifications to the 
WTO. Other difficulties faced by developing country Members relate to the operation of their 
SPS National Notification Authority and their National Enquiry Point(s).  
6.8.  As of mid -September 2014, Members had sub mitted 11,612 regu lar notifications, 
1,589  emergency notifications (plus related addenda and corrigenda). The Committee has also 
adopted a special format and recommended procedures for the notification of determination of the 
                                                
37 http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/sps_e/transparency_toolkit_e.htm . G/SPS/62  
 
- 8 - 
 
  recognition of equivalence of sanitary or phytosanitary measures, now included in the 
transparency procedures. Furthermore, the Secretariat has established a mechanism for Members 
to inform each other of the availability of translations of notified measures into one of the official 
languages of the WTO. These are submitted in the form of supplemental notifications. As of mid -
September 2014, two equivalence and 18 supplemental notifications had been circulated.  
6.9.  Out of the 160 WTO Members, 111 (69%) had submitted at least one notification  to the 
WTO. Members which had not submitted any notification inclu ded 19 developing countries, 
21 LDCs, and one developed country. In addition, a number of EU member States have not 
submitted notifications; however, most SPS measures are notified by the E uropean Union on 
behalf of all its member States.38 
6.10.   As can be seen in Chart 1, the share of notifications submitted by developing country 
Members (excluding LDCs) reaches 51% while the share of those submitted by developed country 
Members is 48%, reflecting  the steady increase in notifications from developing country Members 
over the years. A very small share comes from LDCs.  
Chart 1 – Development status of notifying Members as of 15 September 2014  
 
6.11.   Looking at the geographic regions from which the notificat ions originate, Chart 2 shows that 
the majority of notifications come from North America, followed by Asia, and then South and 
Central America and the Caribbean.39 
                                                
38 See G/SPS/GEN/456 for notification procedures for the European Union and its member States.  
39 The geographical groupi ngs used rely on WTO working definitions as identified in the Integrated 
Database (IDB) for analytical purposes. The same groupings are used in the WTO Annual Reports. North 
America (NA) here, as well as in Chart 2, includes Canada, Mexico and the United S tates.  
48%
51%1%
Developed Developing Least-developedG/SPS/62  
 
- 9 - 
 
  Chart 2 – Notifications by geographical region as of 15 September 2014  
 
6.12.   Under the SPS Agreem ent, Members are required to notify both an Enquiry Point to provide 
answers to all reasonable questions from interested Members and a National Notification Authority 
to implement the notification procedures detailed in the Agreement. Among the 160 WTO 
Members, 152 Members had, as of mid -September 2014, designated a "Notification Authority". 
Those which had not yet done so include six LDCs and two developing country Members. Of the 
160 WTO Members, 155 had provided the WTO with the contact information of th eir Enquiry 
Point(s). Those which had not done so included four LDCs and one developing country. 
The updated lists containing the contact information of National Enquiry Points and of National 
Notification Authorities are available from the SPS IMS.  
6.13.   At eac h meeting, Members are invited to raise any questions or concerns with regard to the 
implementation of the transparency provisions of the Agreement. Contributions made by Members 
since 2010 are listed in Appendix A.  
6.14.   Transparency regarding SPS measures and policies is also provided by Members reporting 
on relevant activities and developments under the agenda item "Information from Members". 
Members frequently use this opportunity to present information on new regulatory policies, risk 
assessment practices, e stablishment of national SPS coordinating committees, etc. The standard -
setting observer organizations also provide relevant information under this agenda item, further 
enhancing transparency.  
6.15.   In the context of the Fourth Review, the European Union, Chile,  Morocco and Norway made 
submissions related to transparency.40 At the March 2014 meeting, the European Union noted that 
with the rapidly growing number of SPS notifications, it was crucial that the information provided 
be clear, complete, reliable and time ly. It proposed that the recommended procedures be 
reviewed, with a view to improve such matters as: (i) the quality and completeness of the 
information provided in the notification; (ii) the timeliness of the publication of regular and 
emergency notificat ions; (iii) interactions with trading partners; and (iv) access to all measures 
adopted and proposed by a Member. Many Members recognized the importance of transparency 
and supported the proposal, and one Member suggested that it was also important to iden tify the 
problems encountered by countries and further improve technical assistance in this area.  
6.16.   The Secretariat recalled that the Committee had agreed to hold a transparency workshop 
every three years and that the next one would take place in 2015. This was an opportunity to 
                                                
40 EU general communication, G/SPS/W/274, and the joint submission by Chile, the European Union, 
Morocco and Norway, G/SPS/W/277.  
G/SPS/62  
 
- 10 - 
 
  ensure the participation of a large number of national notification authorities to discuss and agree 
on changes to notification formats and templates. The Secretariat also reported that a project to 
revise and modernize the SPS NSS an d SPS IMS tools had been approved and would start in 2014.  
6.17.   Chile, the European Union, Morocco and Norway submitted a proposal for actions related to 
the fulfilment of transparency obligations. They proposed that actions take two forms: (i) specific 
proposa ls for modifications in the Recommended Procedures for implementing the Transparency 
Obligations o f the SPS Agreement (Article 7)41; and (ii) recommendations to the Secretariat on 
revising and modernizing the SPS Information Management System and (SPS IMS) and 
Notification Submission System (SPS NSS).42 The European Union stressed that the rationale for 
the proposal was to improve the quality and completeness of notifications. Norway further stressed 
the issue of timeliness of regular and emergency notifications, and Chile highlighted the issue of 
compliance with international standards and the need to define criteria for trade facilita ting 
measures.  
6.18.   The Secretariat welcomed proposals to improve the quality and completeness of 
notifications as well as specific guidelines for the Secretariat as of how to address the issues 
presented in the proposal. The Secretariat encouraged Members to u se the online SPS NSS, which 
facilitates the notification process, and drew attention to recent improvements in the WTO 
Documents Online application.  
6.19.   Argentina suggested that a diagnosis of the needs of and difficulties encountered by 
Members could be carr ied out through questionnaires or workshops, to provide useful input before 
changing the current notification procedures.  
6.20.   At the October 2014 Committee meeting, the European Union thanked several Members for 
their comments. The proponents noted that there seemed to be a general agreement on the 
importance of the transparency provisions and the need to improve their implementation before 
considering a revision of the current Recommended Transparency Procedures as contained in 
G/SPS/7/Rev.3. The proponents we re open to considering alternative approaches on how to move 
forward with this issue, in particular in preparation of the October 2015 transparency workshop.  
6.21.   The Secretariat suggested that such a diagnosis of the needs and difficulties of Members be 
carried out through a questionnaire, similarly to what had been done for past transparency 
workshops. It was also possible that some of the problems encountered by Members could be 
addressed within an on -going project that aimed to improve and modernize the SPS IMS and NSS 
applications. Members were invited to submit suggested questions for inclusion in the 
questionnaire by 28 November 2014.  
6.22.   Recommendations : 
 The Comm ittee should maintain transparency as a standing item of the agenda for its 
regular meetings.  
 Members should ensure their full implementation of the transparency provisions of the 
SPS Agreement, and to the extent possible, follow the Recommended Procedures  
established by the Committee in G/SPS/7/Rev.3.  
 Developing country Members should clearly identify specific problems they face in 
implementing the transparency provisions of the Agreement. Assistance should be 
provided to least -developed and developing cou ntry Members, and to their National 
Notification Authority and Enquiry Points, as required, in order to enable them to fully 
implement the transparency provisions and to make use of the benefits associated with 
transparency.  
 Recognizing that the Recommende d Procedures established by the Committee 
(G/SPS/7/Rev.3), while not creating legal obligations, can facilitate Members' 
implementation of the provisions of the SPS Agreement, the Committee should consider, 
as appropriate:  
                                                
41 G/SPS/7/Rev.3.  
42 G/SPS/W/278, dated 26 May 2014.  G/SPS/62  
 
- 11 - 
 
  o Specific proposals for modificati ons in the Recommended Procedures 
for implementing the Transparency Obligations of the SPS Agreement 
(Article 7), taking into account Members' difficulties in implementing 
them; and  
o Recommendations to the Secretariat to take into account when 
revising and modernizing the SPS Information Management System 
and (SPS IMS) and Notification Submission System (SPS NSS).  
7  TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE  AND TRAINING ACTIVIT IES (ARTICLE 9)  
7.1.  Technical assistance is a standing agenda item. At each regular meeting, Members and 
Observers are invited to identify any specific technical assistance needs which they may have, 
and/or to report on any SPS -related capacity building activities in which they are involved.  
7.2.  A number of Members have used the occasion of the SPS Committee meetings  to comment 
on particular projects or activities that have enhanced their capacity to implement and benefit 
from the SPS Agreement. Some Members, in particular Australia, Canada, the European Union, 
Japan and the United States, have provided periodic updat es regarding their SPS -related t echnical 
assistance activities.43 
7.3.  In July 2014, Australia reported on its SPS -related technical assistance aimed at helping 
developing country Members adjust to, and comply with, SPS measures in their export markets, as 
well as to improve their capacity to develop and implement their own SPS measures based on 
science. Between July 2011 and June 2013, technical assistance activities funded by Australia 
amounted to over AUD 55 million, benef itting 51 developing countries.44 
7.4.  Canad a provided information on its technical assistance to developing c ountries in calendar 
year 2013.45 Canada delivered or initiated a total of 17 SPS -related technical assistance projects 
targeting various geographic regions, amounting to approximately CAD 7. 74 million. Of note, a 
third contribution of CAD 1 million – part of a multi -year, multi -million dollar contribution - was 
made by Canada to the STDF.  
7.5.  Japan provided an update on SPS -related technical assistance it had delivered between 
1 April 2013 and 31  March 2014.46 Since 2009, 48 programmes on technical assistance had been 
provided, targeting more than 30 countries and amounting to a total of JPY 3.4 billion. The  
overseas aid programme was managed by the Japan International Co -operation Agency (JICA).  
7.6.  In its latest submission in March 2014, the European Union reported on its SPS -related 
activities during 2013.47 The European Union provided approximately EUR 75 million via 
300 projects all over the world – while preserving its commitment to provide technic al assistance 
to third countries despite the global economic downturn. EU assistance took the form of both 
development assistance and aid directed at improving opportunities for trade, animal health, plant 
health, and food safety. The European Union contri buted not only at regional or national levels, but 
also at the international level to the work of the international standard -setting bodies as well as to 
the STDF. The assistance provided aimed to secure new markets for developing countries and to 
find sup plies of safe food for the European Union. Developing countries should address technical 
assistance requests to the EU delegation in their country or to the European Commission in 
Brussels, Belgium.  
7.7.  The United States also provided an update on its t echnica l assistance activities.48 Between 
October 2011 and September 2012, the United States sponsored 316 SPS technical assistance 
activities for 72 developing countries, which were worth more than USD 45 million. These activities 
provided technical building bloc ks for strong animal health and plant systems. In 2012, the 
US Government had developed a partnership with the Government of Chile to provide SPS training 
                                                
43 Contributions made by Members since 2010 are listed in Appendix B, tables C.1 and C.2.  
44 G/SPS/GEN/717/Add.4.  
45 G/SPS/GEN/1342 and G/SPS/GEN/1342/Corr.1.  
46 G/SPS/GEN/1160/Add.2.  
47 G/SPS/GEN/1139/Add.2.  
48 G/SPS/GEN/181/Add.10.  G/SPS/62  
 
- 12 - 
 
  to El Salvador. In 2013 and 2014, this partnership expanded to provide training to Guatemala and 
Honduras. 
7.8.  Other Members provide such information on an ad hoc basis. In July 2011 and July 2012, 
Chile reported on its technical assistance programme in the areas of animal husbandry, 
agricultural services and phytosanitary service, which provided assistance t o neighbouring 
countries.  
7.9.  The WTO Secretariat, as well as observer organizations, also regularly report on their 
assistance activities. WTO's technical assistance activities in the SPS area increase participants' 
awareness about rights and obligations unde r the SPS Agreement and its implications at the 
national level. In the organization of SPS technical assistance activities, the levels of familiarity 
with the Agreement and advancement in its implementation are taken into consideration to meet 
and respond to individual country/regional needs. The programmes of national/regional activities 
include presentations on the transparency obligations, dispute settlement, implementation 
problems, specific trade concerns and technical/scientific issues such as risk an alysis and 
equivalence, as well as the work undertaken by the Three Sisters.  
7.10.   A three -week advanced course on the application of the SPS Agreement provides in -depth 
and "hands -on" SPS training, where at the end of the course participants must elaborate an 
"action plan" to address identified SPS needs in their countries. Progress on the implementation of 
the action plans is then monitored through periodic reporting and is presented at the ten -day 
follow -up session the subsequent year. The Secretariat also off ers an E -Learni ng Course on the 
SPS Agreement.49 
7.11.   Since 2010, Members have been informed at the beginning of each year of all SPS -related 
planned technical assistance activities and interested officials are invited to submit applications for 
specific events.  The latest revision of G/SPS/GEN/997 contains all the detailed information on 
eligibility criteria, deadlines, funding, pre -requisites and application processes. In 2013, an online 
application form50 was used for the first time to solicit applications for SPS technical assistance 
activities.  
7.12.   The Secretariat has developed a number of tools to assist Members with the understanding 
and implementation of the Agreement. In particular, a booklet discussing the text of the 
SPS Agreement was published under the WTO  Agreements Series (Volume No. 4). The Secretariat 
has also issued a Procedural Step -by-Step Manual for SPS National Notification Authorities and 
SPS National Enquiry Points to facilitate the implementation of the transparency provisions of the 
SPS Agreeme nt. 
7.13.   In October 2010 and 2012, the Committee held special workshops on the transparency 
provisions of the SPS Agreement.51 The participation of officials from Members' SPS Enquiry Points 
and Notification Authorities was particularly encouraged in these training workshops. The objective 
of the 2010 workshop was to enhance the implementation and benefits of the transparency 
provisions, in particular by sharing experiences on how to operate an effective SPS National 
Notification Authority and Enquiry Point. Many of the presentations from this workshop highlighted 
the importance of internal coordination within and across the publi c and private sector. The 2012 
workshop was a highly interactive, "hands -on" training event focusing on the use of the 
SPS Information Management System (SPS IMS) and on the system for the on -line submission of 
SPS notifications (SPS NSS). The workshop ben efitted from presentations by government officials 
on their national experiences with submitting SPS notifications through the SPS NSS. Codex, IPPC 
and OIE also provided information on their online tools.  
7.14.   In October 2011, the Secretariat organized a worksh op entitled "SPS Coordination at 
National and Regional Levels". This workshop was held in response to a recommendation adopted 
at the October 2009 workshop on the Relationship between the SPS Committee and the Three 
                                                
49 More information on these training tools and material is available on the SPS webpage 
(http://www.wto.org/sps ). 
50 This application form is accessible via a web link, which is included in the latest version of 
G/SPS/GEN/997.  
51 Summary reports of the 2010 and 2012 workshops were circulated as G/SPS/R/60 and  G/SPS/R/68, 
respectively.  G/SPS/62  
 
- 13 - 
 
  Sisters52 that the SPS Committee identify  ways to improve coordination at a national level among 
the relevant representatives of the Three Sisters and SPS representatives, and Japan's proposal in 
this regard.53 In October 2013, the Secretariat held a workshop entitled "SPS -related Market 
Access Ch allenges and Opportunities", which brought together officials, selected from among 
former participants to the Advanced SPS Course, for an in -depth session focusing on specific 
SPS-related challenges faced by Members in their agricultural exports an d how th ese had been 
addressed.54 Several former participants of the Advanced SPS Course and other invited speakers 
presented experiences in gaining and maintaining market access. The role of government, public 
and private sector collaboration and technical cooperation in enhancing SPS -related market access 
was also highlighted in the presentations. The IPPC and OIE presented the technical aspects of 
enabling market access and a new IPPC manual "Market Access: A guide to phytosanitary issues 
for national plant protection organizations" was  introduced. The Secretariat reports annually on all 
SPS-related technical assistance activities provided by the WTO Se cretariat since September 
1994.55 
7.15.   For the period 1994 to 2013, the WTO Secretariat had undertaken a total of 288 technical 
assistance acti vities on the SPS Agreement, including 84 regional (or sub -regional) and 
127 national seminars. Table 1 provides information about the number of sub -regional and 
national activities per year since the last review of the operation and implementation of the 
SPS Agreement in 2010. Table 2 shows the overall number of activities per region since 1994.  
Table 1: Number of SPS technical assistance activities provided by the Secretariat  
Year Type of Activity  
Total  National Seminar  (Sub)Regional 
Workshop  Other  
2010 11 3 3 17 
2011 10 4 6 20 
2012 14 4 7 25 
2013 7 3 9 19 
Total  42 14 25 81 
Table 2: SPS technical assistance activities per region (1994 -2013) provided by the 
Secretariat  
Region  Type of Activity  
Total  National Seminar  (Sub)Regional 
Workshop  Other  
Africa  41 28 13 82 
Arab and Middle East 
Countries  14 8 4 26 
Asia and the Pacific  30 15 17 62 
Central and Eastern 
Europe and Central Asia  10 7 5 22 
Europe  1 3 7 11 
Latin America and the 
Caribbean  31 23 8 62 
North America  - - 1 1 
Global  - - 2256 22 
Total  127 84 77 288 
                                                
52 G/SPS/R/57.  
53 G/SPS/W/251.  
54 A summary report of the workshop was circulated as G/SPS/R/72.  
55 G/SPS/GEN/521, latest revision.  
56 This category also includes the Advanced SPS Course.  G/SPS/62  
 
- 14 - 
 
  7.16.   At the March and July 2014 meetings of the Committee, the Secretariat reported on 
technical assistance and training activities carried out or scheduled in 2014.  
The Standards and Trade Development Facility (STDF)  
7.17.   The Standards and Trade Development Facility (STDF) was established in 2002 following the 
commitment made by the Heads of the FAO, the OIE, WHO, the WTO and the World Bank at the 
Doha Ministerial Conference to explore new technical and financial mechanisms  to promote the 
efficient use of resources in SPS -related activities. Other organizations involved in SPS -related 
technical cooperation, donors contributing funds to the STDF and selected developing country 
experts participate actively in the Facility's wo rk. The STDF is managed and housed by the WTO, 
and has reported to Members on its activities and projects in each SPS Committee meeting. The 
STDF supports developing countries in building capacity to implement international SPS standards, 
guidelines and re commendations as a means to improve their human, animal and plant health 
status and ability to gain and maintain access to markets. In doing so, it contributes to sustainable 
economic growth, poverty reduction, food security and environmental protection in  developing 
countries. More specifically, the STDF increases awareness, mobilizes resources, strengthens 
collaboration and identifies and disseminates good practice to enhance the effectiveness of 
SPS assistance. The STDF also provides support to beneficia ries on issues related to SPS project 
development and finances the development and implementation of projects that promote 
compliance with international SPS r equirements.57 
7.18.   As part of its coordination function, the STDF has undertaken work and organized a series of 
events that provided information and assistance to Members on several cross -cutting thematic 
SPS capacity building issues. In 2009, the STDF produced a film: "Trading Safely: protecting 
health, promoting development", which, to date, continues to  be widely distributed and used by 
STDF partners, donors, beneficiaries and other organizations in awareness raising and training 
activities. In 2011, the STDF produced Arabic, Chinese and  Russian versions of this film.58 
7.19.   In 2010, the STDF organized an inte rnational workshop on public -private partnerships 
(PPPs) to build SPS capacity, in The Hague, the Netherlands, followed by the release of a joint 
STDF/IDB publication on this topic in 2012. The paper analyses the emergence, operation and 
performance of sel ected SPS -related partnerships between government agencies responsible for 
food safety, animal and plant health and/or trade and the private sector. It raises awareness about 
the potential value and role of PPPs in enhancing SPS capacity and provides pract ical guidance to 
facilitate and promote PPPs for SPS capacity development. In July 2013, the STDF organized a 
side-event on this topic during the Fourth Global  Review of Aid for Trade.59 
7.20.   In October 2009, on the margins of the SPS Committee meeting, the STDF  organized a 
workshop on the use of economic analysis to inform SPS decision -making. Building on the 
recommendations of this event, the STDF has supported the development of a decision -support 
tool, based on Multi Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA), to help  developing countries prioritize 
investments needed to strengthen SPS capacity for market access. The tool, which has been 
applied in several countries60, helps to: (i) enhance the economic efficiency of SPS resource 
allocation decisions so that scarce reso urces are allocated in a manner that best meets a country's 
economic development, poverty alleviation, public health and/or other objectives; (ii) promote 
more transparent and accountable choices between multiple investment options; and (iii) facilitate 
dialogue and coordination among public and private sector SPS stakeholders and encourage more 
inclusive decision -making processes. The STDF aims to revise and fi nalize this tool in 2014.61 
7.21.   Two publications were issued on the role and functioning of regional a nd national 
SPS coordination mechanisms in Africa.62 Conclusions and recommendations, including the 
                                                
57 More information on the STDF and its activit ies, including projects and project preparation grants, is 
available on the STDF website ( http://www.standardsfacility.org ). Members can also subscribe to the STDF 
mailing list to receive news on relevant ac tivities ( http://www.standardsfacility.org/mailchimp_archive ). 
58 See http://www.standardsfacility.org/video -gallery . 
59 See for  more information:  http://www.standardsfacility.org/public -private -partnerships . 
60 Including Belize, Mozambique, Viet Nam and Zambia. In addition, the tool was used in Ethiopia, 
Malawi, Rwanda and Uganda  with support from the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa 
(COMESA) and the United States De partment for Agriculture (USDA).  
61 See for more information: http://www.standardsfacility.org/p -ima. 
62 See for the publications:  http://www.standardsfacility.org/stdf -publications . G/SPS/62  
 
- 15 - 
 
  identification of concrete ways to enhance their operation and effectiveness, were presented at a 
WTO workshop on this topic in 2011. Both papers illustrated  that strengthening coordination 
among relevant government institutions at the national and sub -national level, and with the 
private sector, reduces information gaps, promotes synergies in the implementation of 
SPS measures and enhances the effectiveness o f available resources. Participants recommended, 
inter alia , that the Committee consider the development of guidelines on national SPS coordination 
and/or a manual of good practices on SPS coordination. The papers and the subsequent briefing 
note on enhanc ing SPS coordination at the country level may provide useful input and guidance if 
the Committee were to decide to undertake additional work in this area.  
7.22.   In 2012, on the margins of the Committee meeting, the STDF organized a seminar on 
International Trade  and Invasive Alien Species (IAS), which considered the mutually supportive 
objectives of the SPS Agreement and the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). Participants 
agreed on the contribution of effective SPS control systems to help protect against t he entry, 
establishment and spread of harmful species, including pests, diseases and other IAS. 
A publication on this topic, released in 2013 in collaboration with the IPPC and the OIE, reviews 
and analyses key concepts and principles relevant to IAS and i nternational trade in the context of 
the SPS Agreement and the CBD, and in relation to the IPPC and OIE (i.e. the relevant standard -
setting bodies under the SPS Agreement). It also considers various initiatives to enhance 
capacities for managing the entry and spread of IAS (including plant pests and animal diseases), 
reviews common challenges and good practices, and makes a number of targeted 
recommendations.  
7.23.   In 2012, the STDF initiated work on the implementation of SPS measures in the context of 
trade faci litation. This work seeks to identify, analyse and foster dialogue on experiences, lessons 
and good practices to improve the implementation of SPS controls in a way that facilitates safe 
trade. The objectives are to: (i) raise awareness about the synergies  between the implementation 
of SPS measures and trade facilitation; (ii) identify key needs, opportunities and good practices to 
improve the implementation of SPS measures in a way that ensures the appropriate level of health 
protection while minimizing tr ade transaction costs; and (iii) make recommendations to enhance 
future work and technical cooperation focused on SPS capacity building and trade facilitation. 
As part of this work, in 2013 -14, the STDF carried out research in selected countries in Southea st 
Asia and Africa (in collaboration with TradeMark Southern Africa) on how SPS measures are 
implemented in practice for specific product groups based on the provisions of the SPS Agreement. 
Relevant government agencies and the private sector collaborated in this research. Parallel 
research was carried out in Latin America by the Inter -American Development Bank (IDB).The 
preliminary findings of this work were presented in a half -day seminar on 26 March 2014, on the 
margins of the Committee meeting.63 
7.24.   An inde pendent review of the Facility recently judged that "the results are impressive and a 
testament to the effective operation of the STDF" and praised the STDF's role in coordinating 
assistance project s as "significant value added".64 
7.25.   Recommendations : 
 The Committee should maintain technical assistance as a standing item of the agenda of 
its regular meetings.  
 Members requiring technical assistance are encouraged to identify their specific needs in a 
clear and detailed manner that will permit these needs to b e effectively addressed.  
 Members providing technical assistance are encouraged to keep the Committee informed 
of specific programmes of assistance, including hard or soft infrastructure developments or 
any other technical assistance approaches.  
 Members are  encouraged to report on the effectiveness of the technical assistance they 
have received to assist them in complying with international and official standards.  
 Members are invited to share information on their experiences regarding the use of the 
tools de veloped by the Secretariat to assist Members with the understanding and 
implementation of the SPS Agreement.  
                                                
63 See for more information: http://www.standardsfacility.org/facilitating -safe-trade . 
64 See for further information: http://www.wto.org/english/news_e/news13_e/sps_29nov13_e.htm . G/SPS/62  
 
- 16 - 
 
   The Secretariat is requested to keep the Committee informed of its relevant technical 
assistance activities and of the activities of the STDF.  
 The observer organizations are invited to keep the Committee informed of their capacity 
building activities relevant to the SPS Agreement.  
8  SPECIAL AND DIFFEREN TIAL TREATMENT (ARTI CLE 10)  
8.1.  Special and differential treatment continues to be a standing agenda item , although no 
Member has raised any specific matter under this agenda item subsequent to the Third Review. 
The Secretariat has kept the SPS Committee informed of discussions in the Committee on Trade 
and Development Special Session on proposals relating to  Articles 10.2 and 10.3 of the SPS 
Agreement.  
8.2.  Recommendations : 
 The Committee should maintain special and differential treatment as a standing item of the 
agenda for its regular meetings.  
 The Committee should continue to consider specific, concrete actions to address the 
problems faced by developing country Members and, in particular, least -developed country 
Members, in the implementation of the SPS Agreement and in making use of the benefits 
of the Agreement.  
 Members are encouraged to provide information re garding the special and differential 
treatment or technical assistance they have provided in response to specific needs 
identified by Members in accordance with the procedure adopted by the Committee 
(G/SPS/33/Rev.1), to be periodically compiled in a repor t by the Secretariat.  
 As foreseen in the Procedure to Enhance Transparency of Special and Differential 
Treatment in Favour of Developing Country Members, the Committee should review its 
implementation as part of the periodic reviews of the SPS Agreement.65 
9  DISPUTE SETTLEMENT  
9.1.  Article 11 of the SPS Agreement indicates that the Dispute Settlement Understanding applies 
to SPS disputes, and provides for the consultation of experts when a dispute involves scientific or 
technical issues. As of mid -October 2014, mor e than 480 disputes had formally been raised under 
the WTO's dispute settlement system. Of these, 41 alleged violation of the SPS Agreement, and 
the SPS Agreement was relevant also in two other disputes. 23 resulted in the establishment of a 
dispute settle ment panel. These panels were established to look at 16 different SPS issues, listed 
below. Subsequent to the Third Review, action has occurred on DS367 and on the last five 
disputes listed below, as  further detailed in Appendix C66: 
a. Canada and the United States' complaint against Australia's measures affecting the 
importation of salmon (DS18 and DS21);  
b. Canada and the United States' complaint against the European Communities' measures 
concerning meat and meat products (ban on meat treated with growth -promot ing 
hormones, DS26 and DS48);  
c. The United States' complaint against Japan's measures affecting agricultural products 
(requirement to test different fruit varieties with regard to treatment efficacy, DS76);  
d. Ecuador's complaint against Turkey's import procedu res for fresh fruit (DS237);  
e. The United States' complaint against Japan's measures affecting the importation of apples 
(restrictions due to fire blight concerns, DS245);  
                                                
65 Paragraph 7, G/SPS/33/Rev.1.  
66 Please note that in four disputes, the panels (and the Appellate Body) made findings principally under 
the TBT Agreement. These cases concerned Canada's complaint against the European Communities' ban on 
asbestos and prod ucts containing asbestos, Canada and Mexico's complaint against the United States' country 
of origin (COOL) labelling requirements, and Indonesia's complaint against the United States' ban on clove 
cigarettes.  G/SPS/62  
 
- 17 - 
 
  f. The Philippines' complaint against Australia's measures affecting the importation of f resh 
fruit and vegetables (DS270);  
g. The European Communities' complaint against Australia's quarantine procedures (DS287);  
h. Argentina, Canada and the United States' complaint against EC measures affecting the 
approval and marketing of biotech products (DS291 -293);  
i. The European Communities' complaint against Canada and the United States regarding 
their continued suspension of obligations relating to the EC -Hormones dispute (DS320);  
j. New Zealand's complaint against Australia's measures affecting the importation of apples 
(restrictions due to concerns related to fire blight and two other plant pests; panel and 
appellate body reports adopted, DS367);  
k. The United States' complaint against the European Communities' measures affecting 
poultry meat and poultry meat prod ucts (DS389);  
l. Canada's complaint against Korea's restrictions on bovine meat and meat products 
(mutually agreed solution notified, DS391);  
m. China's complaint against United States' measures affecting imports of poultry (panel 
report adopted, DS392);  
n. The Uni ted States' complaint against India's measures concerning the importation of 
certain agricultural products (due to concerns about avian influenza; panel report 
circulated, DS430);  
o. Argentina's complaint against United States' measures affecting the importat ion of 
animals, meat and other animal products (due to concerns about foot -and-mouth disease; 
panel proceedings on -going, DS447); and  
p. The European Union's complaint against Russian measures affecting the importation of live 
pigs pork, pork products and cer tain other commodities (due to concerns about African 
swine fever; panel established, DS475).  
10  IMPLEMENTATION OF TH E AGREEMENT – SPECIFIC TRADE CONCE RNS 
10.1.   Part of each Committee meeting is devoted to the consideration of specific trade concerns 
raised by Memb ers. At the March 2000 meeting of the SPS Committee, the Secretariat was 
requested to prepare a paper summarizing the specific trade concerns that had been brought to 
the Committee's attention since 1995 and to update this document annually to include new 
information provided by Members. The statistics below are derived from the fourt eenth revision of 
G/SPS/GEN/20467, and include all issues which have been raised at SPS Committee meetings 
through to the end of 2013.  
10.2.   Altogether, 368 specific trade concerns we re raised between 1995 and the end of 2013.68 
Chart 3 shows the number of new concerns raised each year; about 20 new concerns have been 
raised annually since 2010. Chart 4 categorizes the trade concerns raised since 2010 into food 
safety, animal or plant h ealth issues. It is important to keep in mind, however, that some issues 
may relate to more than one of these categories. Concerns relating to zoonoses, for example, may 
relate to measures taken with both animal health and food safety objectives. For the p urposes of 
these graphs, a single objective has been designated as the principal concern, however all relevant 
keywords have been assigned for purposes of electronic searches of the data on specific trade 
concerns. Since 2010, 45% of trade concerns raised relate to food safety, 17% relate to plant 
health, and 6% concern other issues such as certification requirements or translation. 32% of 
concerns raised relate to animal health and zoonoses. The animal health and zoonoses category is 
further divided into f oot-and-mouth disease (FMD), transmissible spongiform encephalopathies 
(TSEs), avian influenza (AI) and other animal health concerns (OAH). Chart 5 shows that TSEs 
account for 24% of animal health concerns raised since 2010, and issues related to FMD also 
account for 24%. The remaining 52% relate to OAH concerns and AI.  
                                                
67 G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.14 was circulated to Membe rs on 4 March 2014.  
68 Information relevant to this section, but which precedes the period under review, can be found in 
former revisions of document G/SPS/GEN/204.  G/SPS/62  
 
- 18 - 
 
  10.3.   In the 2010 Review, the Committee encouraged Members to make use of the Committee's 
meetings to share, on an ad hoc basis, information regarding their experiences in the 
implementation of Ar ticle 13. Members were reminded that specific problems relating to the 
implementation of Article 13 may be raised as specific trade concerns.  
Chart 3 – Number of new issues raised  
 
Chart 4 – Trade concerns since 2010, by subject  
 
2112423
13
102942
29
2131
1016 16
1322
16 1624
051015202530354045
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Animal Health
32%
Food Safety
45%Plant Health
17%Other
6%G/SPS/62  
 
- 19 - 
 
  Chart 5 –Trade concerns since 2010, related to animal health and zoonoses  
 
10.4.   Developing country Members have been participating actively under this agenda item in the 
SPS Committee meetings. Chart 6 indicates that over the last four years, developing countr y 
Members have raised 56 trade concerns (on many occasions more than one Member has raised, 
supported or maintained an issue) compared to 28 raised by developed country Members and one 
raised by a least -developed country Member. A developing country Member  has supported another 
Member raising an issue in 54 cases, compared to 34 for developed country Members and two for 
least-developed country Members. In 35 cases, the measure at issue was maintained by a 
developed country Member, and in 40 cases it was mai ntained by a developing country Member. 
Only one trade concern regarding measures maintained by least -developed country Members has 
been raised. Chart 7 shows the number of new issues raised since 201 0 by each category of 
Member.69 
Chart 6 – Participation b y WTO Members (2010 -2013)  
 
                                                
69 As any individual trade concern can potentially be raised by more than one Member, this explains the 
apparent double -counting shown in Charts 4 and 5 compared with the overall count of the 78 specific trade 
concerns raised since 2010.  
TSE
24%
FMD
24%
AI
8%OAH
44%
353428
405456
121
0 20 40 60Members Maintaining the
Measure in QuestionSupporting MembersMembers Raising the IssueNumber of Members
Least-Developed Countries Developing Countries Developed CountriesG/SPS/62  
 
- 20 - 
 
  Chart 7 – Number of new issues raised by Members since 2010  
 
10.5.   Members are regularly invited to report on resolved issues without delay. Chart 8 indicates 
that 141 trade concerns have been reported as resolved out of the 368 trad e concerns raised over 
the 18 years. 62 issues were reported as resolved between 2010 and 2013, 40 of these in 2013 
alone. 13 trade concerns were reported as partially solved during the period under review. In 
these instances, trade may have been allowed f or selected products or by some of the importing 
Members maintaining the measure in question. No solutions have been reported for the remaining 
196 trade concerns. It is also likely that other concerns have been resolved without the Committee 
being made aw are of these developments.  
Chart 8 – Solved trade concerns  
 
578818
12
1016
1
02468101214161820Number of Issues
Developed countries Developing countries Least-Developed Countries
196
141
31
050100150200250
No solution reported Solution reported Partial solution reportedNumber of Issues
StatusG/SPS/62  
 
- 21 - 
 
  10.6.   Recommendations : 
 The Committee should continue to consider specific trade concerns raised by Members as a 
standing item of the agenda of its regular meetings.  
 Members are encouraged to make use o f this opportunity to identify specific trade 
problems and to seek to find expeditious and mutually satisfactory resolutions of these 
problems.  
 Members are encouraged to inform the Committee of all specific trade concerns resolved.  
 The Secretariat is reque sted to continue to provide regularly updated information on the 
specific trade concerns considered by the Committee.  
11  IMPLEMENTATION OF TH E AGREEMENT – USE OF AD HOC CONSUL TATIONS  
11.1.   Article 12.2 states that the Committee "shall encourage and facilitate ad hoc consultations 
or negotiations among Members on specific sanitary or phytosanitary issues". In each of the 
previous reviews, the Committee has recognized the usefulness of Article 12.2, and in particular of 
the good offices of the Chairperson, as a mean s of facilitating th e resolution of trade problems.70 
11.2.   Following the Committee's decision in the Third Review to expeditiously conclude this issue, 
several Members submitted proposals for a procedure to facilitate the use of ad hoc consultations 
and negotiat ions among Members.71 In May 2011, the Secretariat circulated a document that 
sought to combine the proposals made, to facilitate the identification and consideration of those 
areas where there were substantive d ifferences among the proposals.72 The document  was 
subsequently revised several times to reflect comments received from Members and discussions at 
informal meetings of the Committee.  
11.3.   At its meeting in October 2012, the Committee established an electronic Working Group (e 
WG) to make progress between C ommittee meetings. Individual delegates offered to act as 
stewards or co -stewards, working towards compromises in five areas where important differences 
remained. The resulting fifth revision was discussed in March 2013 by the e -WG and in an informal 
meeti ng of the Committee. After this meeting, the stewards considered all comments received and 
revised their proposed compromise texts. After more inputs from Members, a sixth revision of the 
proposal was circulated to Members.  
11.4.   At the June 2013 meeting, the Co mmittee discussed the sixth revision and few substantive 
concerns were raised by Members. These were taken into account in the preparation of a seventh 
revision, which was presented for adoption at the October 2013 meeting of the Committee. There 
was no co nsensus to adopt the proposal. Members unable to join the consensus were requested to 
submit constructive suggestions for compromise language by 17 December 2013. As no 
compromise language was suggested by the deadline, the Committee considered again the 
adoption of the seventh revision at its March 2014 meeting.  
11.5.   At the SPS Committee meeting in March 2014, India sought clarification on several specific 
issues relating to the procedure outlined in G/SPS/W/259/Rev.7. In response, the Chairperson 
invited India  to submit in writing its specific queries in order for these to be circulated to all 
Members. This was done in RD/SPS/4, dated 6 May 2014. The stewards and co -stewards of the e -
WG reviewed the queries submitted by India, and provided the requested clarifi cations in 
RD/SPS/5, dated 13 June 2014.  
11.6.   At its July 2014 meeting, the Committee adopted the Recommended Procedure to 
Encourage and Facilitate the Resolution of Specific Sanitary and Phytosanitary Issues among 
Members in Accordance with Article 12.2, with the changes suggested by India, on an ad 
referendum basis. No Member raised an objection by the deadline, and the final decision was 
circulated as G/SPS/61.  
                                                
70 G/SPS/12, paragraph 24; G/SPS/36, paragraphs 87 -88; G/SPS/53, paragraphs 116 -126. 
71 G/SPS/W/243/Rev.4 and J OB/SPS/1.  
72 G/SPS/W/259.  G/SPS/62  
 
- 22 - 
 
  11.7.   Recommendations : 
 As foreseen in the Recommended Procedure to Encourage and Facilitate the Resolutio n of 
Specific SPS issues among Members in Accordance with Article 12.2, the Committee should 
review its implementation as part of the periodic rev iews of the SPS Agreement.73 
 Members are encouraged to provide their experiences in the use of ad hoc consultations, 
including through the good offices of the Chairperson of the SPS Committee, to facilitate 
the resolution of specific trade concerns . 
12  COOPERATION WITH THE  CODEX, IPPC AND OIE  
12.1.   Following a proposal submitted by Japan on cooperation between the SPS Committee and 
the Three Sisters, the WTO Secretariat organized, on 17 October 2011, a Geneva -based workshop 
on coordination of SPS matters at national and regional levels. The objective of the workshop was 
to bring together officials responsible for pa rticipation in and implementation of the SPS 
Agreement, Codex, IPPC and/or OIE for an in -depth discussion, at a technical level, on best 
practices in coordination at national and regional levels. In the workshop, the Secretariat 
presented a background docu ment74 that described and compared the procedures used by the 
Three Sisters to develop standards. Codex, IPPC and OIE outlined the strengths and challenges of 
their respective standard -setting procedures, and changes under consideration. The WTO 
Secretariat , in its report on the coordination workshop, highlighted two specific recommendations 
resulting from it, namely a possibility to develop guidelines for good national coordination and/or a 
manual of good practices.75 Also, at its October 2011 meeting, the S PS Committee formally agreed 
to a proposal from Canada and Japan to encourage the Three Sisters to undertake joint work on 
cross-cutting issues, such as, inter alia, certification, inspection, approval p rocedures and/or risk 
analysis.76 A preliminary analys is of the treatment of SPS matters in Regional Trade Agreements 
was also presented by the Secretariat, and the Standards and Trade Development Facility (STDF) 
presented the results of two studies concerning national and regional coordination in Africa.  
12.2.   Recommendations : 
 Members are encouraged to provide information on their experiences in coordinating their 
involvement in the work of Codex, IPPC and OIE at the national level.  
 The relevant international organizations are invited to keep the Committee informed  of any 
work related to the SPS Agreement.  
13  GOOD REGULATORY PRAC TICE  
13.1.   In March 2013, the Secretariat recalled that in the past two reviews of the SPS Agreement, 
one of the issues that had been raised by Members related to good regulatory practices. There had  
been several suggestions for the Committee to look at guidelines on Good Regulatory Practice 
(GRP), but the Committee had not agreed to do so.  
13.2.   Recommendations : 
 Members are invited to provide information regarding their experiences in the use of the 
guidel ines developed by the Committee with respect to transparency, equivalence, 
recognition of pest - or disease -free areas, and the avoidance of arbitrary or unjustifiable 
distinctions in levels of protection.  
14  SPS-RELATED PRIVATE STAN DARDS  
14.1.   The effects of SPS -related private standards ("private standards") on trade and the 
appropriate role of the SPS Committee has been discussed by the Committee since the issue was 
first raised in 2005 by Saint Vincent and the Grenadines with regard to EurepGAP (now called 
GLOBAL GAP) requirements on pesticides used on bananas destined for sale in European markets.77 
                                                
73 Paragraph 5.1. in G/SPS/61.  
74 G/SPS/GEN/1115.  
75 G/SPS/R/65.  
76 G/SPS/58.  
77 G/SPS/R/37/Rev.1, paras.16 -20. G/SPS/62  
 
- 23 - 
 
  After considerable discussion in the SPS Committee, an ad hoc working group was established to 
identify "Possible Actions for the SPS Committee Regarding SPS -Related Pr ivate Standards".78 
At its March 2011 meeting, the Committee endorsed five of the six actions put forward by the ad 
hoc working group.79 Despite further revision and discussions, consensus was not reached on 
Action  6.80 In addition, six other actions were als o identified by the working group on which 
consensus could not be reached. These six proposed actions are listed in Annex I of the ad hoc 
working group report, along with a brief explanation of the main differences of opinion.  
14.2.   Since 2011, the Committee's d iscussions on private standards have focused on the five 
actions agreed by the Committee and, in particular, on Action 1 relating to the development of a 
working definition of SPS -related private standards. The Committee discussed a working definition 
on the basis of draft definitions prepared by the Secretariat b ased on proposals from Members.81 
However, as no consensus emerged, China and New Zealand, the only Members having submitted 
new proposals for a definition by a 19 April 2013 deadline, were requeste d to work on developing a 
joint proposal.  
14.3.   A first joint proposal was discussed in June 2013, and taking into account the comments 
made during the meeting and additional comments submitted by Members, China and New 
Zealand tabled a revised joint working def inition of an SPS -related private standard for discussion 
at the October 2013 inf ormal meeting of the Committee.82 As there was no consensus on the joint 
definition tabled by China and New Zealand, the Committee agreed to move the process forward 
by forming  an electronic working group (e -WG) focussed on developing a working definition of an 
SPS-related private standard, with China and New Zealand as "co -stewards".  
14.4.   The co -stewards circulated a  report on the work of the e -WG83, for discussion at the March 
2014 meeting. The report noted that no consensus had been reached by the e -WG on a working 
definition, thus the co -stewards had put forward, as part of their report, a compromise working 
definition on their own responsibility.  
14.5.   Following a suggestion by Canada, the Secretariat circulated a note on existing definitions of 
"private standards" in other international organizations, revised to take into account additional 
definitions reported by Argentina and C anada at the July 2014 meeting.84 The Committee agreed 
that the e-WG would pursue its work on a definition of SPS -related private standards, based on the 
working definition tabled by the e -WG co -stewards in document G/SPS/W/276. Members were 
invited to submit any comments on this definition by 5 September 2014. Th e Committee requested 
the co -stewards of the e -WG to circulate a report on a compromise working definition for 
consideration at the October 2014 meeting of the Committee.  
14.6.   At the October 2014 Committee, the co -stewards introduced their second report on the 
work of the e -WG,85 and presented the proposed working definition of an SPS -related private 
standard contained therein. The co -stewards also referred to a room document circulated at a 
special meeting of the e -WG which contained the proposed definition with , one version 
incorporating a disclaimer as part of the text of the Decision, and the other as a footnote. 
E-WG members were expected to revert to the co -stewards, within a timeline to be agreed, so that 
discussions on a working definition could successful ly be concluded by the March 2015 meeting of 
the Committee.  
14.7.   The Committee agreed to give the co -stewards and the e -WG more time to pursue their 
efforts in trying to bridge differences and come up with a compromise working definition that could 
be presented  for consideration and adoption by the Committee as soon as possible.  
14.8.   Since 2011, the Committee has also discussed the implementation of the other four agreed 
actions. On Action 2, it was noted that information exchange mechanisms between the 
                                                
78 The March 2011 report of this working group is contained in document G/SPS/W/256.  
79 G/SPS/55.  
80 G/SPS/W/261.  
81 G/SPS/W/265, G/SPS/W/265/Rev.1 and G/SPS/W/265/Rev.2.  
82 G/SPS/W/272.  
83 G/SPS/W/276.  
84 G/SPS/GEN/1334 and G/SPS/GEN/1334 /Rev.1.  
85 G/SPS/GEN/281.  G/SPS/62  
 
- 24 - 
 
  SPS Committee  and the Three Sisters were already in place and functioning. Some Members 
encouraged Codex, IPPC and OIE to contact the private schemes identified by Members in 
document G/SPS/GEN/932/Rev.1 to promote the use of international standards, and report back 
to the Committee on those contacts. Codex provided updates on its work on the issue of private 
standards, including its discussions on private standards in the framework of Codex regional 
bodies. The OIE highlighted steps it had taken to promote compatibilit y and avoid conflict between 
private and official standards, and drew attention to the OIE General Assembly's R esolution on 
Private Standards.86 The IPPC noted that it had requested that ISO clarify that there were no 
obligations to implement ISO standards in order to comply with IPPC standards.  
14.9.   On Action 3, the Secretariat has kept the Committee informed of relevant discussions in 
other WTO fora,  including: (i) the publication of the 2012 World Trade Report that focused on TBT 
and SPS measures; (ii) a session on Non -Tariff Measures at the 2012 WTO Public Forum; and 
(iii) the thematic discussion on standards organized during the March 2013 and Mar ch 2014 
TBT Committee meetings.87 
14.10.   On Action 4, it was noted that useful ideas could be shared amongst Members regarding 
their efforts to reach out to entities involved in private standard -setting in their territories. China 
suggested that when communicating with private standard -setting entities, Members make 
reference to the Code of Good Practice of the TBT Agreement and to the TBT Committee's Decision 
on the "Six Principles" for the preparat ion of international standards.88 Belize also noted that 
Action 4 co uld be enhanced by sensitizing private standard -setting entities to the list of concerns in 
paragraph 24 under Action 6 of document G/SPS/W/256.89 Belize drew Members' attention to its 
recommendations regarding the implementation of Action 4 in document G/S PS/GEN/1290, and 
encouraged Members to give those recommendations due consideration.  
14.11.    Several Members noted the importance of sensitizing private standard -setting entities and 
actors and reported on efforts undertaken at the national level. Members who wer e already 
communicating with private standard -setting entities in their territories were encouraged to share 
their experiences in that regard. The Philippines reported on regional and national briefing sessions 
jointly organized by the Department of Agricu lture and the United Nations Forum on Sustainability 
Standards (UNFSS). China referred to its submission G/SPS/GEN/1261 on Action 4, and noted that 
some Members were already communicating with private entities in their territories involved in the 
developme nt, application and certification of private standards.  
14.12.   On action 5, the Secretariat referred to various relevant examples relating to the 
collaboration between the SPS Committee and the Three Sisters to develop and/or disseminate 
informative materials on the importance of international standards. In particular, the Secretariat 
highlighted: (i) the usefulness of the STDF film on Trading Safely; (ii) the joint regional 
SPS workshops with the Three Sisters; as well as (iii) the development of a new e -learning  module 
with the Inter -American Development Bank. The Secretariat also noted that Codex had developed 
brochures, as well as a promotional video in the context of its 50th anniversary, on the role Codex 
standards could play in ensuring the trade of safe foo d. Members could use those new Codex 
materials as well as materials that already existed from the other sisters, and disseminate them to 
their private sector. While both financial and human resources were limited, dissemination efforts 
would continue.  
14.13.   IPPC drew attention to a publication on the application of international phytosanitary 
standards developed by IPPC with the FAO Forestry Division and to similar guidelines for the seeds 
sector. The IPPC noted that all IPPC communications, including its standar ds, were available in its 
six official languages. The IPPC continued to raise the awareness of its members on the issue of 
private standards, and would address any future appearance of private standards in the plant 
health area. The OIE noted that all its publications were available in its three official languages and 
that any further translation, while encouraged, was at the discretion of the end -user. The OIE also 
noted that it constantly emphasized the importance of adopting and adhering to international  
standards. Some Members noted the importance of increased awareness about the operations of 
                                                
86 G/SPS/GEN/1024.  
87 JOB/TBT/41/Rev.1, JOB/TBT/42 and JOB/TBT/42/Corr.1, and G/TBT/GEN/144  and 
G/TBT/GEN/144/Add .1. 
88 G/SPS/GEN/1261.  
89 G/SPS/GEN/1290.  G/SPS/62  
 
- 25 - 
 
  private standard -setting bodies, and referred to the OIE resolution guiding OIE's relations with 
private standard -setting bodies. The collaboration of both Codex a nd OIE with private standard -
setting bodies was encouraged in order to foster the development and implementation of science -
based food safety and other standards, whether official or private. It was further suggested, in 
particular by Argentina, that Codex , IPPC and OIE liaise directly with the various private schemes 
identified by Members in document G/SPS/GEN/932/Rev.1. Such contact could then inform the 
Three Sisters' efforts in developing and/or disseminating materials underlying the importance of 
international standards. The Secretariat noted that this suggestion had been reflected in the 
relevant Chair summaries, which in turn were reflected in the Secretariat's regular reports on 
relevant Committee activities, including the consideration of private st andards, to the IPPC's CPM, 
the OIE World Assembly of Delegates and the Codex Alimentarius Commission.  
14.14.   The Committee also discussed how to address the seven outstanding proposed actions on 
which consensus had not been reached. Some Members suggested moving  forward on outstanding 
Actions 6 to 12 through a voluntary working group. However, other Members indicated that they 
were not prepared to work on those actions where there had been no consensus.  
14.15.   Regarding Action 6, some Members were of the view that priva te standards are outside the 
scope of the SPS Agreement and thus related information exchanges should take place on the 
margins of the Committee meetings. Others, however, believed that private standards did fall 
within the jurisdiction of the SPS Committe e and that information exchange on these issues should 
be on the agenda of the Committee.  
14.16.   Belize drew Members' attention to document G/SPS/GEN/1291, which flagged the need to 
consider Actions 6 to 12 in parallel with those in document G/SPS/55, and which a lso provided 
specific recommendations for the implementation of Actions 10 and 11. Belize also noted that 
IICA's report on private food standards in the Southern Cone (G/SPS/GEN/1100) contained several 
recommended actions for the Committee and/or governmen ts to address concerns associated with 
SPS-related private standards. With regards to Action 10, Belize encouraged Members to review 
the TBT Code of Good Practice and determine its applicability for the implementation of the action. 
On Action 11, Belize en couraged Members liaising with entities involved in private standards to 
share their experience with the Committee as the approaches used could be considered in t he 
implementation of Action 11.90 Belize supported by several Members, expressed concerns 
regar ding the proliferation of private standards and how these affected market access and stressed 
the relevance of addressing the issue of private standards in the SPS Committee.91 
14.17.   On other matters related to private standards, Belize registered its concern reg arding the 
evolution in food safety certification requirements, as governments were responsible for setting 
SPS measures, with guidance from international standards.92 Belize noted that a country's 
appropriate level of protection should not be set by the pr ivate sector, and stressed that the 
SPS Committee had a vital role to play in addressing the issues related to private standards and 
their impact on international trade.  
14.18.   ISO encouraged increased engagement between ISO, Codex, OIE and non -governmental 
organ izations working on private standards such as the Global Food Safety Initiative (GFSI). These 
organizations were encouraged to move away from private standard -setting to focus on 
implementation and harmonization. ISO also flagged the publication of a broch ure entitled 
International Standards and Private Standards . IICA reported on the study undertaken on the 
impact of private food standards in the Southern  Cone.93 Work in other fora relating to private 
standards was also presented, in particular the creation  of the UNFSS by the FAO, ITC, UNCTAD, 
UNEP and UNIDO. The UNFSS is intended to provide an unbiased and credible policy dialogue with 
analytical, empirical and capacity -building activities, based on demand by developing countries and 
involving all concerne d non-governmental stakeholders.94 
14.19.   At the March 2014 meeting, the ITC presented the most recent iteration of its online 
"Standards Map", an interactive web -tool which provides information on over 130 private and 
                                                
90 G/SPS/GEN/1291.  
91 G/SPS/GEN/1240.  
92 G/SPS/GEN/1374.  
93 G/SPS/GEN/1088.  
94 http://www.unfss.org . G/SPS/62  
 
- 26 - 
 
  public voluntary standards, across 700 differ ent criteria of analysis. The ITC confirmed that the 
terminology of "voluntary standards" and the schemes identified in the Standards Map 
encompassed both government and private voluntary standards, but these could be separated 
through a dedicated search. In relation to the concern expressed about the multiplication of testing 
and costs for producers, as well as the proliferation of private schemes, ITC confirmed that it had 
been consulted by ISEAL and GIZ95 regarding the development of a Sustainability Stan dards 
Comparison Tool. The tool was being developed and should be piloted by the end of 2014.  
14.20.   Despite open discussions among Members, the Committee has been unable to agree to the 
inclusion of a  bullet point in paragraph 14.21  recommending that the Committ ee "will consider 
specific problems identified by a Member that arises from an SPS -related private standard that 
affects its exports".  Adoption of this report is without prejudice to the views of Members on the 
scope of the WTO Agreement on the Application  of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures regarding 
SPS-related private standards and their effects on international trade.  
14.21.   Recommendations : 
 Members and Observer Governments are encouraged to provide information on any 
relevant studies or analysis which they  have undertaken, or of which they are aware . 
 The Committee should continue its implementation of agreed actions one to five 
(G/SPS/55). The Committee may also continue its considerations of other outstanding 
issues (G/SPS/W/256) and of relevant activities . 
15  RISK ANALYSIS: RISK ASSESSMENT (ART. 5),  RISK MANAGEMENT AND 
COMMUNICATION  
15.1.   In the context of the Fourth Review, the United States proposed the organization of a 
workshop on risk analysis.96 The United States noted that since the last workshop on this topic in 
2000, a significant amount of work must have been carried out by Members and the Three Sisters.  
15.2.   Many Members supported the proposal and proposed that a session on risk communication 
be included in the programme. It was also suggested that the session related to dispute 
settlement be presented by WTO staff. Furthermore, given the amount of material to be covered, 
the possibility of splitting the workshop into two events was discussed, but  funding was available 
for a two -day workshop only.  
15.3.   At the March 2014 meeting, the Committee agreed that risk analysis be the topic of the 
thematic October 2014 workshop. The Committee also considered South Africa's proposal on risk 
assessment and the appr opriate level of protection (ALOP), submitted in th e context of the Fourth 
Review.97 One Member proposed that the issue of special and differential treatment should also be 
taken into account when establishing the ALOP. The Committee agreed to address South  Africa' 
proposal, which consisted of two questions related to the implementation of Article 5.4 of the 
SPS Agreement, in the context of the workshop on risk analysis.  
15.4.   Members were invited to submit suggestions regarding the programme, based on that 
contai ned in the US proposal, and a revised programme was circulated for discussion at the July 
2014 meeting98, which built on the US proposal, and reflected South Africa's proposal related to 
the implementation of Article 5.4 of the SPS Agreement as well as othe r comments received from 
Members. The Secretariat invited Members to submit any further comments on the programme 
and to help identify appropriate speakers by 25 July 2014. The Secretariat noted that in addition to 
government officials, participation was o pen to non -governmental entities provided their number 
remained limited. Over 500 applications for WTO funding had been received by the deadline. 
In selecting 50 participants for WTO funding, priority was given to LDC government officials and 
those holding  responsibilities in the risk analysis area.  
                                                
95 International Social and Environmental Accreditation and Labelling Alliance ( ISEAL); and Deutsche 
Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ).  
96 G/SPS/W/275.  
97 G/SPS/GEN/1307.  
98 G/SPS/GEN/1336.  G/SPS/62  
 
- 27 - 
 
  15.5.   The workshop on risk analysis was held on 13 -14 October 2014. It provided a platform for 
discussion and experience sharing and best practises concerning SPS -related risk analysis. Delayed 
streaming of the worksh op was made possible through a partnership with IICA. The presentations 
made at the workshop, as well as audio and video clips are available on the WTO website.  
16  CATALOGUE OF INSTRUM ENTS FOR THE MANAGEM ENT OF SPS ISSUES  
16.1.   In the context of the Fourth Review, Canada proposed that the Committee develop a 
"Catalogue of Instruments Available to the WTO Members to manage SPS issues"99, noting that 
the timely use of these tools could help Members avoid, manage or escalate issues. The proposed 
catalogue would include all mechanisms relevant to the SPS Agreement framework; for instance, 
the right to provide comments on notifications and to discuss them, the targeted or strategic use 
of the STC agenda item, and the use of the IPPC or OIE dispute settlement procedures.  
16.2.   Many Members welcomed the proposal and highlighted the usefulness of developing a 
compendium of all the actions available. It was proposed that the Secretariat collaborate with 
Canada on preparing a draft of the catalogue, for subsequent comments by other Me mbers. 
The draft catalogue, jointly submitted by Canada and Kenya, was circulated as G/SPS/W/279, on  
18 June 2014. At the July 2014 meeting the Committee agreed to have a revised version 
circulated in advance of the October 2014 meeting.  
16.3.   At the October 201 4 meeting, Canada presented its revised draft catalogue submitted 
jointly with Kenya (G/SPS/W/279/Rev.1), which incorporated comments received by Members 
since the July meeting. The instruments were now grouped by thematic areas in a progressive 
manner, st arting from bilateral contacts up to the use of the WTO dispute settlement mechanism. 
Kenya highlighted that the Catalogue regrouped all instruments available with their corresponding 
document references. It also referred to the work of the Three Sisters, which were invited to 
submit comments.  
16.4.   Several Members highlighted the usefulness of such a compendium of instruments available 
to address SPS -related trade issues, and expressed their interest in reviewing it before its 
adoption. Comments on the catalogue  of instruments were to be submitted by 28 November 2014, 
and Canada and Kenya were invited to prepare a revision of  the document, if needed, by 
20 February 2015, for endorsement at the March 2015 meeting.  
 
_______________  
 
 
 
 
                                                
99 G/SPS/W/271.   
  G/SPS/62  
 
- 28 - APPENDIX A - SUMMARY OF MAJOR SPS COMMITTEE ACTIVITIES, 2010 -2014 
Subject  Year Type of Activity  Related Documents  
Transparency  2010 Implementation of the Transparency Obligations as of 26/02/2010  G/SPS/GEN/27/Rev.20  
 2010 Overview Regarding the Level of Implementation of the  
Transparency Provisions of the SPS Agreement  G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.3  
 2010 Draft Programme for Transparency Workshop  G/SPS/GEN/1021/Rev.1  
 2010 Workshop on transparency held on 18 and 22/10/2010  G/SPS/R/60  
 2011 Implementation of the transparency obligations as of 10/03/2011  G/SPS/GEN/27/Rev.21  
 2011 Update on the mentoring system of assistance relating to the 
transparency provisions of the SPS Agreement  G/SPS/GEN/1097  
 2011 Overview regarding the level of implementation of the transparency 
provisions of the SPS Agreement  G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.4  
 2012 Implementation of the transparency obligations as of 1 7/02/2012 G/SPS/GEN/27/Rev.22  
 2012 Overview regarding the level of implementation of the transparency 
provisions of the SPS Agreement  G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.5 and 
G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.5 /Corr.1  
 2012 Programme for Transparency Workshop  G/SPS/GEN/1156/Rev.1  
 2012 Workshop on Transparency  G/SPS/R/68  
 2013 Procedure to monitor the process of international harmonization - 
Draft fifteenth annual report  G/SPS/W/269  
 2013 Overview regarding the level of implementation of the transparency 
provisions of the SPS Agreement  G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.6  
Monitoring International Standards  2010 Procedure to monitor the process of International Harmonization – 
Twelfth Annual Report  G/SPS/54  
 2010 Summary Report of the Workshop on the Relationship between the 
SPS Committee and the International Standard -Setting 
Organizations  G/SPS/R/57  
 2011 Procedure to Monitor the Process of International Harmonization – 
Thirteenth Annual Report  G/SPS/56  
 2011 Monitoring the Use of International Standards  G/SPS/GEN/1086  
 2011 Joint Work by Codex, IPPC and OIE on Cross -cutting Issues – 
Decision of the Committee  G/SPS/58  
 2011 Three Sisters Standard -setting Procedures  G/SPS/GEN/1115  
 2012 Summary Report of the Workshop on SPS Coordination at the 
National and Regional Levels – 17 October 2011  G/SPS/R/65  
 2012 Procedure to Monitor the Process of International Harmonization – 
Fourteenth Annual Report  G/SPS/59  
 2013 Procedure to Monitor the Process of International Harmonization – 
Fifteenth Annual Report  G/SPS/60  
 2014 Procedure to Monitor the Process of International Harmonization – 
Draft Sixteenth  Annual Report  G/SPS/GEN/1332   
  G/SPS/62  
 
- 29 - Subject  Year Type of Activity  Related Documents  
Technical Assistance  2010 SPS Technical Assistance and Training Activities  G/SPS/GEN/521/Rev.5 and 
G/SPS/GEN/521/Rev.5 /Corr.1  
 2010 WTO SPS Technical Assistance Activities in 2010 – General 
Information, Selection Processes and Application Form  G/SPS/GEN/997  
 2010 Update on the Operation of the Standards and Trade Development 
Facility (STDF)  G/SPS/GEN/1002  
 2010 Agency for International Trade Information and Cooperation 
(AITIC)  G/SPS/GEN/1009  
 2010 Update on the Operation of the STDF  G/SPS/GEN/1029  
 2010 Update on the Operation of the STDF  G/SPS/GEN/1046  
 2011 SPS Technical Assistance and Training Activities  G/SPS/GEN/521/Rev.6  
 2011 WTO SPS Technical Assistance Activities in 2011 – General 
Information, Selection Processes and Application Form  G/SPS/GEN/997/Rev.1  
 2011 Update on the Operation of the STDF  G/SPS/GEN/1075  
 2011 Update on the Operation of the STDF  G/SPS/GEN/1089  
 2011 Update on the Operation of the STDF  G/SPS/GEN/1114  
 2012 SPS Technical Assistance and Training Activities  G/SPS/GEN/521/Rev.7  
 2012 Update on the Operation of the STDF  G/SPS/GEN/1144  
 2012 Update on the Operation of the STDF  G/SPS/GEN/1158  
 2012 Update on the Operation of the STDF  G/SPS/GEN/1193  
 2012 WTO SPS Technical Assistance Activities in 2012 – General 
Information, Selection Processes and Application Form  G/SPS/GEN/997/Rev.2  
 2013 Update on the Operation of the STDF  G/SPS/GEN/1221  
 2013 Update on the Operation of the STDF  G/SPS/GEN/1251  
 2013 Update on the Operation of the STDF  G/SPS/GEN/1279  
 2013 SPS Technical Assistance and Training Activities  G/SPS/GEN/521/Rev.8  
 2013 WTO SPS Technical Assistance Activities in 2013 – General 
Information, Selection Processes and Application Form  G/SPS/GEN/997/Rev.3  
 2014 Mid-term review of the standards and trade development facility 
(STDF)  G/SPS/GEN/1304  
 2014 WTO SPS Technical Assistance Activities in 201 4 – General 
Information, Selection Processes and Application Form  G/SPS/GEN/997/Rev.4 and 
G/SPS/GEN/997/Rev.4/Add.1  
 2014 Update on the Operation of the STDF  G/SPS/GEN/1311  
 2014 SPS Technical Assistance and Training Activities  G/SPS/GEN/521/Rev.9  
 2014 Update on the Operation of the STDF  G/SPS/GEN/1337  
Implementation of the Agreement – 
Specific Trade Concerns /Ad Hoc 
Consultations  2010 Proposed Recommended Procedure for Ad Hoc Consultations or 
Negotiations among Members u nder the SPS Agreement 
(Article  12.2)  G/SPS/W/243/Rev.3  
 2010 Specific Trade Concerns  G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.10 and Addenda   
  G/SPS/62  
 
- 30 - Subject  Year Type of Activity  Related Documents  
 2011 Proposed Recommended Procedure for Ad Hoc Consultations or 
Negotiations among Members under t he SPS Agreement 
(Article  12.2)  G/SPS/W/243/Rev.4  
 2011 Proposed Recommended Procedure to Encourage and Facilitate Ad 
Hoc Consultations or Negotiations among Members under the SPS 
Agreement (Article 12.2)  G/SPS/W/259/Rev.1  
 2011 Specific Trade Concerns  G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.11 and Addenda 
and Corrigenda  
 2012 Proposed Recommended Procedure  to Encourage and Facilitate 
Ad Hoc Consultations or Negotiations among Members under the 
SPS Agreement (Article 12.2)  G/SPS/W/259/Rev.4 and 
G/SPS/W/259/Rev.4 /Corr.1  
 2012 Specific Trade Concerns  G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.12  
 2013 Proposed Recommended Procedure  to Encourage and Facilitate 
Ad Hoc Consultations or Negotiations among Members under the 
SPS Agreement (Article 12.2)  G/SPS/W/259/Rev.7  
 2013 Specific Trade Concerns  G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.13 and 
G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.13 /Corr.1  
 2014 Specific Trade Concerns  G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.14  
 2014 Procedure to Encourage and Facilitate the Resolution of Specific 
Sanitary or Phytosanitary Issues among Members in Accordance 
with article 12.2 – Decision of the Committee  G/SPS/61  
Private Standards  2010 Possible Actions for the SPS Committee Regarding Private SPS 
Standards  G/SPS/W/247/Rev.3  
 2010 The Global Food Safety Initiative (GFSI)  G/SPS/GEN/1004  
 2011 Report of the Ad Hoc Working Group on SPS -related Private 
Standards to the SPS Committee  G/SPS/W/256  
 2011 Actions Regarding SPS -related Private Standards – Decision of the 
Committee  G/SPS/55  
 2011 Proposed Revisions to Action 6 of the Report of the Ad Hoc Working 
Group on SPS -related Private Standards (G/SPS/W/256)  G/SPS/W/261  
 2012 Proposed Working Definition on SPS -related Private Standards  G/SPS/W/265/Rev.2  
 2014 Existing Definitions of Private Standards in Other International  
Organizations  G/SPS/GEN/1334 and 
G/SPS/GEN/1334/Rev.1  
Regionalization  2012 Annual Report on the Implementation of Article 6 of the Agreement 
on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures  G/SPS/GEN/1134  
 2013 Annual Report on the Implementation of Article 6 of the Agreement 
on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures  G/SPS/GEN/1245  
 2014 Annual Report on the Implementation of Article 6 of the Agreement 
on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures  G/SPS/GEN/1333   
  G/SPS/62  
 
- 31 - Subject  Year Type of Activity  Related Documents  
Other  2010 Review of the Operation and Implementation of the SPS Agreement 
– Report adopted by the Committee on 18 March 2010  G/SPS/53  
 2010 Report (2010) on the Activities of the Committee on Sanitary and 
Phytosanitary Measures  G/L/943  
 2010 Membership in WTO and International Standard -Setting Bodies  G/SPS/GEN/49/Rev.10  
 2011 Report to the Council for Trade in Goods on China's Transitional 
Review  G/SPS/57  
 2011 Programme for a Workshop on SPS Coordination at National and 
Regional Levels  G/SPS/GEN/1110  
 2011 Outstanding Requests from International Intergovernmental 
Organizations – Criteria for Observer Status  G/SPS/GEN/1112  
 2011 Report (2011) on the Activities of the Committee on Sanitary and 
Phytosanitary Measures  G/L/969  
 2011 Membership in WTO and International Standard -Setting Bodies  G/SPS/GEN/49/Rev.11  
 2012 Observers in the SPS Committee - Their Role and Outstanding 
Requests  G/SPS/GEN/1157  
 2012 Report (2012) on the Activities of the Committee on Sanitary and 
Phytosanitary  Measures  G/L/1013  
 2012 Revised Secretariat Procedures for Production and Distribution of 
Certain SPS Committee Documents  G/SPS/INF/18/Rev.1  
 2013 Programme - Workshop on SPS -related Market Access Challenges  
and Opportunities  G/SPS/GEN/1270  
 2013 Proposed Process for the Fourth Review of the Operation and 
Implementation of the SPS Agreement  G/SPS/W/270 and 
G/SPS/W/270 /Add.1  
 2013 Report on Workshop on SPS -related Market Access Challenges and  
Opportunities  G/SPS/R/72  
 2014 Fourth Review of the Operation and Implementation of the SPS 
Agreement - Summary of Proposals submitted by Members  G/SPS/GEN/1307  
 2014 Fourth Review - Background Document  G/SPS/GEN/1312 and 
G/SPS/GEN/1312/Corr.1  
 2014 Inter-Agency Liaison Group on Invasive Alien Species - Recent 
activities of group members  G/SPS/GEN/1320  
 2014 Fourth Review – Draft Report  G/SPS/W/280 and 
G/SPS/W/280/Corr.1  
 2014 Workshop on Risk Analysis - Draft programme  G/SPS/GEN/1336  
 2014 India's Request for Information on Organic Product Notification  G/SPS/GEN/1354  G/SPS/62  
 
- 32 - 
 
  APPENDIX B: LIST OF SPS COMMITTEE DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED BY MEMBERS 2010 -
2014 
A. Comments/Proposals regarding Transparency (Article 7 and Annex B)  
Year Member  Title/Subject  Symbol  
2010 European Union  Experience After the Revision of the 
Transparency  Provisions of the SPS 
Agreement  G/SPS/GEN/1044  
 Morocco  Authority Responsible for the Implementation 
of the WTO SPS Agreement and Serving as 
the Enquiry Point G/SPS/GEN/1017  
 Morocco  Moroccan Authority Responsible for 
Implemen tation of the WTO SPS Agreement  G/SPS/GEN/1039  
 Morocco  Measures Taken by Morocco to Implement 
the Transparency O bligations of the SPS 
Agreement  G/SPS/GEN/1047  
B. Comments/Proposals regarding monitoring the use of international standards 
(Article 3.5 and 12.4)  
Year Member  Title/Subject  Symbol  
2010 Argentina  Procedure  to monitor the use of international 
standards  G/SPS/W/255  
 Canada  Work of the Committee Arising from the Third 
Review – Proposed Priorities – Cooperation 
between the SPS Committee and the 
International Standards -Setting Bodies  G/SPS/W/253  
 Indonesia  Implementation of the International Standard 
for Phytosanitary Measures (ISPM) No. 15 
concerning Wood  Packaging Material  G/SPS/GEN/998  
 Japan  Work of the Committee Arising from the Third 
Review – Proposed Priorities – Cooperation 
between the SPS Committee and the 
International Standards -Setting Bodies  G/SPS/W/251  
2011 Canada/Japan  Review of the Operation and Implementation 
of the SPS Agreement Proposal to Advance 
Recommendation 3 of the Workshop between 
the SPS Committee and the International 
Standard -setting Bodies (G/SPS/R/57)  G/SPS/W/258  
 Costa Rica  Defense of the Scientific Pr inciples of Codex - 
Ractopamine  G/SPS/GEN/1092  
2012 Argentina  Revision of the Procedure to Monitor the 
Process of International Harmonization  G/SPS/W/268  
 Argentina/  
Australia/Brazil/
Canada  
Chile/Colombia/
Costa  Rica/ 
New Zealand/  
Paraguay/Peru/
Philippines/  
United States of 
America  SPS Measures and International Standards, 
Guidelines and Recommendations  G/SPS/GEN/1143/Rev.2  
 Chile/United 
States  of 
America  International Standard -Setting Bodies' 
Involvement in the WTO SPS Committee on 
Specific Trade Concerns – Proposal by Chile 
and the United States  G/SPS/W/267  
2013 Brazil  50th anniversary of the Codex Alimentarius 
Commission - The importance of the scientific 
principle  G/SPS/GEN/1253  G/SPS/62  
 
- 33 - 
 
  C.1 Information regarding Members' provision of  technical assistance and training 
activities (Article 9)  
Year Member  Title/Subject  Symbol  
2010 Australia  Technical Assistance to Developing Countries 
provided by Australia  G/SPS/GEN/717/Add.2  
 Canada  Technical Assistance to Developing Countries  G/SPS/GEN/1008 and 
G/SPS/GEN/1027  
 Philippines  EU Trade -Related Technical Assistance 
Project – Standards Harmonization and SPS 
Conformity  G/SPS/GEN/995  
 United States  of 
America  Technical Assistance to Developing Countries  G/SPS/GEN/181/Add.8  
2011 Canada  Technical Assistance to Developing Countries  G/SPS/GEN/1099  
 European Union  Overview of SPS Related Technical 
Assistance Activities  G/SPS/GEN/1074  
 United States  of 
America  Technical Assistance to Developing Countries  G/SPS/GEN/181/Add.9/
Rev.1  and 
G/SPS/GEN/181/Add.9/
Rev.1 /Corr.1  
2012 Australia  Technical Assistance to Developing Countries  G/SPS/GEN/717/Add.3  
 Canada  Technical Assistance to Developing Countries  G/SPS/GEN/1149 and 
G/SPS/GEN/1196  
 European Union  Technical Assistance to Developing Countries  G/SPS/GEN/1139  
 European 
Union/  
Philippines  Standards Harmonization and SPS 
Conformity under the Trade Related 
Technical Assistance Project 2 (TRTA 2) – A 
Joint Project of the Philippines and the 
European Union  G/SPS/GEN/1154  
 Japan  Technical Assistance to Developing Countries  G/SPS/GEN/1160  
2013 European Union  Technical Assistance to Developing Countries  G/SPS/GEN/1139/Add.1  
 Japan  Technical Assistance to Developing Countries  G/SPS/GEN/1160/Add.1  
and 
G/SPS/GEN/1160/Add.1
/Corr.1  
 United States  of 
America  Technical Assistance to Developing Countries  G/SPS/GEN/181/Add.10  
2014 Australia  Technical Assistance to Developing Countries  G/SPS/GEN/717/Add.4  
 Canada  Technical Assistance to Developing Countries  G/SPS/GEN/1318, 
G/SPS/GEN/1342  and 
G/SPS/GEN/1342/Corr.1  
 European Union  Technical Assistance to Developing Countries  G/SPS/GEN/1139/Add.2  
 Japan  Technical Assistance to Developing Countries  G/SPS/GEN/1160/Add.2  
C.2 Information regarding Members' technical assistance and training needs 
(Article  9) 
Year Member  Title/Subject  Symbol  
2010 Dominican 
Republic  Technical Assistance  G/SPS/GEN/1034  
 Kenya  Technical Assistance  G/SPS/GEN/1020  
 Madagascar  Establishment of a National SPS Committee  G/SPS/GEN/1011  
 Morocco  National SPS Workshop organized by the 
WTO in Morocco (Rabat) on 18 and 19 
September 2012  G/SPS/GEN/1199  
 Pakistan  Need for Technical Assistance and Global 
Cooperation  G/SPS/GEN/1188/Rev.1  
2013 Belize  Technical assistance - Information from 
Members  G/SPS/GEN/1239  
 Botswana  National SPS Workshop in October 2012  G/SPS/GEN/1223  
 Costa Rica  National Seminar on the SPS Agreement  G/SPS/GEN/1294  G/SPS/62  
 
- 34 - 
 
  Year Member  Title/Subject  Symbol  
 Philippines  Report on the follow -up national workshop on 
the SPS agreement for the Philippine 
Department of Agriculture Regulatory 
Agencies and the SPS W orkshop for Regional 
Regulatory  G/SPS/GEN/1275  
D. Comments/Proposals regarding special and differential treatment (Article 10)  
Year Member  Title/Subject  Symbol  
2010 Cuba Statement on the Issues of Technology 
Transfer and Private Standards  G/SPS/GEN/1055  
E. Information regarding Members' experience related to Regionalization (Article 6)  
Year Member  Title/Subject  Symbol  
2010 Argentina  Actions Aimed at the Implementation of the 
WTO SPS Agreement  G/SPS/GEN/994  
 Argentina  Analysis of Risk Factors Associated with BSE 
in Argentina  G/SPS/GEN/1038  
 Argentina  National Programme for the Prevention and 
Eradication of Lobesia Botrana  G/SPS/GEN/1059  
 Madagascar  Detection of Varroasis in Madagascar  G/SPS/GEN/1012  
 Paraguay  Health Status Report  G/SPS/GEN/1023  
 Philippines  FMD Status  G/SPS/GEN/1031  
2011 Argentina  Information on Official OIE Recognition of 
Food and Mouth Disease Free Status  G/SPS/GEN/1128  
 China  An Introduction to China's Regionalization 
Management System on Food Safety  G/SPS/GEN/1101  
 Colombia  Bovine Tuberculosis Status  G/SPS/GEN/1060  
 Colombia  Brucellosis Status  G/SPS/GEN/1061  
 Colombia  National Plan for the Detection, Control and 
Eradication of Fruit Flies  G/SPS/GEN/1064  
 Colombia  Avian Influenza Situation  G/SPS/GEN/1083  
 Costa Rica  Detection of a Focus of the Huanglongbing 
Bacterium  G/SPS/GEN/1070  
 European 
Union  Foot and Mouth Disease Status in Bulgaria  G/SPS/GEN/1072 and 
G/SPS/GEN/1072 /Add.1  
 Jamaica  Information on the Activities to Control 
Huanglongbing  G/SPS/GEN/1118  
 Korea, 
Republic of  Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza Situation  G/SPS/GEN/1116  
 Mexico  Report on the Epidemiological Analysis of 
Outbreaks of Venezuelan Equine Encephalitis 
(Enzootic IE Strain)  G/SPS/GEN/1124  
 Paraguay  Report  on Health Status Developments  G/SPS/GEN/1077 and 
G/SPS/GEN/1081  
2012 Argentina  Information on the Recognition of Fruit Fly 
Free Areas  G/SPS/GEN/1178  
 Argentina  Sanitary Status of Foot and Mouth Disease 
(FMD)  G/SPS/GEN/1179  
 Argentina  Health Status with regard to Bovine 
Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) and other 
Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathies 
(TSE)  G/SPS/GEN/1180  
 Botswana  Re-entry into the EU Beef Market by 
Botswana  G/SPS/GEN/1162  
 Chile Establishing Compartmentalization as a Tool 
for Health  Management  G/SPS/GEN/1147  
 European 
Union  Review of the EU Plant Health Regime – 
Update  G/SPS/GEN/1145  G/SPS/62  
 
- 35 - 
 
  Year Member  Title/Subject  Symbol  
 European 
Union  Application of Article 6 of the Agreement on 
Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures  G/SPS/GEN/1159  
 European 
Union  Restriction to Trade adopted in relation to the 
occurrence of the Schmallenberg Virus in the 
European Union  G/SPS/GEN/1161  
 Mexico  Information on Outbreaks of the AH7N3 
Avian Influenza  Virus G/SPS/GEN/1175  
 Mexico  Declaration  of Mexico as an Area Free from 
Avian Salmonellosis  G/SPS/GEN/1184  
 Mexico  Declaration of Mexico as an Area Free from 
Classical  Swine Fever  G/SPS/GEN/1185  
 Mexico  Declaration of the State of Tabasco as an 
Area Free from Aujeszky's Disease  G/SPS/GEN/1189  
 Mexico  Declaration of the State of Coahuila, 
excluding  the Lagunera Region, as an Area 
Free from Aujeszky's Disease  G/SPS/GEN/1190  
 Mexico  National Tick ( Boophilus  Spp.) Control 
Campaign  G/SPS/GEN/1192  
 Mexico  Declaration of Various Municipalities and 
Communities  in the State of Guerrero as 
Areas with a Low Prevalence of Fruit Flies of 
the Genus Anastrepha  G/SPS/GEN/1207  
 Mexico  Declaration of Various Municipalities in the 
State of Chihuahua as Areas Free from Pink 
Bollworm and Boll Weevil  G/SPS/GEN/1208  
 Mexico  Declaration of Certain Regions in the State of 
Morelos  as Areas Free from Fruit Flies of the 
Genus Anastrepha  G/SPS/GEN/1209  
 Mexico  Declaration of the Municipality of Sayula, 
Jalisco, as an Area Free from Avocado Seed 
Weevils and Moths  G/SPS/GEN/1210  
2013 Brazil  Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy case in 
Brazil  G/SPS/GEN/1232  
 Chile Declaration of Chile as a country free from 
caprine and ovine Brucellosis  G/SPS/GEN/1229  
 Costa Rica  Statement  by Costa Rica on the sanitary 
status of bovine spongiform encephalopathy 
(BSE)  G/SPS/GEN/1263  
 Guatemala  Declaration  of areas free of Mediterranean 
fruit fly (Ceratitis capitata wied) and other 
fruit flies  G/SPS/GEN/1274  
 Honduras  Declaration of a pest free area (for Ceratitis 
Capitata  Wied. ) in accordance with ISPM no. 
10 G/SPS/GEN/1222  
 Japan  Current  status after the nuclear power plant 
accident  G/SPS/GEN/1233  
 Mexico  Communication  regarding two new cases of 
highly pathogenic avian influenza in the State 
of Aguascalientes, Mexico  G/SPS/GEN/1212  
 Mexico  Declaration of the State of Nayarit as an area 
free from Aujeszky's disease  G/SPS/GEN/1214  
 Mexico  Declaration of the State of Tlaxcala as an 
area free from the tick Boophilus spp  G/SPS/GEN/1215  
 Mexico  Declaration  of the municipality of Purépero, 
Michoacán, as an area free from avocado 
seed weevils and moths  G/SPS/GEN/1265  
 Mexico  Declaration of municipalities in the State of 
Aguascalientes  as an area free from fruit flies 
of the genus Anastrepha  G/SPS/GEN/1266  G/SPS/62  
 
- 36 - 
 
  Year Member  Title/Subject  Symbol  
 Mexico  Decision declaring the Municipality of 
Asientos  in the State of Aguascalientes to be 
an area free from fruit flies of the quarantine -
significant genus  G/SPS/GEN/1267  
 Mexico  Declaration of various communities in the 
State of Michoacán as areas with a low 
prevalence of fruit flies of the genus 
Anastrepha  G/SPS/GEN/1268  
 Mexico  Declaration of the State of Sonora as an area 
free from the tick Boophilus  spp. G/SPS/GEN/1286  
 Mexico  Declaration  of the Municipality of Urique, 
Chihuahua, as an area free from the tick 
Boophilus  spp. G/SPS/GEN/1287  
 Paraguay  Phytosanitary  emergency due to the 
detection of citrus greening disease 
(Huanglongbing, HLB)  G/SPS/GEN/1219  
 Paraguay  Sanitary status concerning foot and mouth 
disease - 2013 G/SPS/GEN/1238  
 Paraguay  Citrus greening  disease (Huanglongbing, 
HLB) G/SPS/GEN/1273  
 Peru Peru: country  free from citrus black spot, 
sweet orange scab, citrus canker, citrus 
variegated chlorosis, citrus leprosis and 
Huanglongbing  G/SPS/GEN/1243  
 Peru OIE recognition of Peru as a foot -and-mouth 
disease -free country  G/SPS/GEN/1281  
 Philippines  Philippines area freedom from mango pulp 
weevil ( MPW) and mango seed weevil (MSW)  G/SPS/GEN/1278  
2014 Argentina  OIE recognition of Argentina as a country free 
from contagious bovine pleuropneumonia and 
peste des petits  ruminants  G/SPS/GEN/1347  
 Armenia  Animal health risk assessment and zoning 
reports  G/SPS/GEN/1309  
 Guatemala  Questions posed by the Delegation of Senegal 
concerning areas free from Mediterranean 
fruit fly  G/SPS/GEN/1326  
 Honduras  Declaration of a pest free area (for Ceratitis 
Capitata Wied. ) in accordance with ISPM No. 
10 G/SPS/GEN/1300  
 Mexico  Declaration of areas free from large avocado 
seed weevils (Heilipus Lauri), small avocado 
seed weevils (Conotrachelus Aguacatae and 
C. Perseae) and avocado seed moths 
(Stenoma Catenifer)  G/SPS/GEN/1297  
 Mexico  Declaration of an area with a low prevalence 
of fruit flies of the genus Anastrepha of 
quarantine significance and rhagoletis 
Pomonella  G/SPS/GEN/1298  
 Mexico  Declaration of area free from large avocado 
seed weevils, small avocado seed weevils and 
avocado seed moths  G/SPS/GEN/1299  
 Mexico  Declaration of area free from large avocado 
seed weevils, small avocado seed weevils and 
avocado seed moths  G/SPS/GEN/1301  
 Mexico  Declaration of areas free from large avocado 
seed weevils, small avocado seed weevils and 
avocado seed moths  G/SPS/GEN/1302  
 Mexico  Declaration of the State of Mexico as an area 
free from Aujeszky's disease  G/SPS/GEN/1303  G/SPS/62  
 
- 37 - 
 
  Year Member  Title/Subject  Symbol  
 Mexico  Declaration of areas free from large avocado 
seed weevils, small avocado seed weevils and 
avocado seed moths  G/SPS/GEN/1349  
 Peru Declaration as a country free of bluetongue  G/SPS/GEN/1331  
 Thailand  Declaration of Thailand as an area free from 
Pantoea stewartii subsp. stewartii  G/SPS/GEN/1352  
F. Comments/Proposals regarding Monitoring Implementation of the Agreement 
(Articles 12.1 and 12.2) – Specific trade concerns/Use of Ad Hoc Consultations  
Year Member  Title/Subject  Symbol  
2010 Brazil  Ad Hoc Consultations  G/SPS/GEN/1052  
 European 
Union  Updated List of Specific Trade Concerns 
Raised in the SPS Committee  G/SPS/GEN/1051  
 Morocco  Brazilian Draft Technical Regulation on the 
Identity and Quality of Canned Sardines  G/SPS/GEN/1048  
 Nicaragua  Measures Applied by Mexico to Imports of 
Bovine Meat  G/SPS/GEN/1056  
2011 Canada  Canadian Experience Using Article 12.2 Ad 
Hoc Consultations to Facilitate the Resolution 
of an SPS Trade -related Issue  G/SPS/GEN/1080  
 Chile Ad Hoc Consultations of Negotiations among 
Members under Article 12.2 of the SPS 
Agreement  G/SPS/W/263  
 Madagascar  EU Decision Concerning Certain Protective 
Measures with Regard to Certain Products 
Originating from Madagascar  G/SPS/GEN/1113  
 Norway  Quarantine  and Testing Procedures Applied 
to Salmon Imported from Norway – 
Questions to China  G/SPS/GEN/1090  
 Paraguay  Maximum Residue Limits for Certain 
Agricultural  Pesticides Applied to Sesame  G/SPS/GEN/1091  
 Peru Regulation 258/97 of the European 
Parliament  and of the Council Concerning 
Novel Foods  G/SPS/GEN/1087  
 Peru Implementation  of Regulation 258/97 
Concerning Novel Foods  G/SPS/GEN/1117  
2012 Cameroon/  
Colombia/  
Ecuador/Ghana
/Mexico/  
Nicaragua/Peru  New Maximum Cadmium Levels for Foodstuff 
in the European  Union  G/SPS/GEN/1173/Rev.1  
 Peru Restrictions  on Access to the European 
Market through the Implementation of 
Regulation 258/97 concerning Novel Foods  G/SPS/GEN/1137  
 Peru Implementation  of Regulation. 258/97 
concerning Novel Foods  G/SPS/GEN/1194  
2013 European 
Union  Notification G/SPS/N/RUS/8  G/SPS/GEN/1216  
 European 
Union  Updated list of specific trade concerns raised 
in the WTO SPS Committee  G/SPS/GEN/1269  
 Paraguay  Maximum  residue limits for certain 
agricultural pesticides applied to sesame  G/SPS/GEN/1220  
 Paraguay  Maximum residue limits for certain 
agricultural  pesticides applied to sesame by 
Japan  G/SPS/GEN/1272  
 Peru Implementation of Regulation. 258/97 
concerning  Novel Foods  G/SPS/GEN/1218  
 Peru Application  and amendment of European 
Union Regulation. 258/97 concerning Novel 
Foods  G/SPS/GEN/1280  G/SPS/62  
 
- 38 - 
 
  Year Member  Title/Subject  Symbol  
2014 European 
Union  Notification G/SPS/N/RUS/48  G/SPS/GEN/1305  
 European 
Union  Comments on Notification G/SPS/N/RUS/49  G/SPS/GEN/1313  
 Nicaragua  Analysis of the Sanitary Regulations for the 
Importation of Brazilian M eat into the United 
States  G/SPS/GEN/1330  
 Russian 
Federation  Comments on G/SPS/GEN/1305  G/SPS/GEN/1315  
G. Review of the Agreement  
Year Member  Title/Subject  Symbol  
2010 Argentina  Work of the Committee Emanating from the 
Third Review – Proposed Priority Issues  G/SPS/W/252  
2011 Canada/  
New Zealand  Work of the Committee Emanating from the 
Third Review – Proposed Priority Issues – 
Comments on the Communication from 
Argentina  G/SPS/W/257  
2013 Canada  Fourth Review – Catalogue of Instruments  G/SPS/W/271  
2014 Canada/  
Kenya  Fourth Review  – Catalogue of instruments 
available to WTO Members to manage SPS 
issues  G/SPS/W/279  
 Chile/Morocco/ 
Norway/ 
European 
Union  Fourth Review – Transparency (Article  7 and 
Annex B)  G/SPS/W/277  
 Chile/Morocco/ 
Norway/ 
European 
Union  Fourth Review – Transparency (Article 7 and 
Annex B) – Proposals for Actions  G/SPS/W/278  
 European 
Union  Fourth Review  - Transparency (Article 7 and 
Annex B)  G/SPS/W/274  
 United States 
of America  Fourth Review – Workshop on decision 
making and communication during the risk 
analysis process  G/SPS/W/275  
H. SPS-Related Private Standards  
Year Member  Title/Subject  Symbol  
2010 Cuba Statement on the Issues of Technology 
Transfer and Private Standards  G/SPS/GEN/1055  
2013 Belize  Concerns with Private and Commercial 
Standards  G/SPS/GEN/1240  
 Belize  Actions regarding SPS -related Private 
Standards  G/SPS/GEN/1290  
 Belize  Actions regarding SPS -related Private 
Standards  G/SPS/GEN/1291  
 China/  
New Zealand  Proposed Working Definition of SPS -related 
Private Standards  G/SPS/W/272  
 China  Actions regarding SPS -related Private 
Standards  G/SPS/GEN/1261  
2014 Belize  SPS-related Private Standards  G/SPS/GEN/1327  
 China/  
New Zealand  Report of the Co-Stewards of the Private 
Standards E -Working Group on Action 1 
(G/SPS/55)  G/SPS/W/276  
 China/  
New Zealand  Second Report of the Co -Stewards of the 
Private Standards E -Working Group on Action 
1 (G/SPS/55)  G/SPS/W/281  G/SPS/62  
 
- 39 - 
 
  I. Other  
Year Member  Title/Subject  Symbol  
2010 Argentina  Phytosanitary  Import Authorizations (AFIDI)  G/SPS/GEN/1041 and 
G/SPS/GEN/1041 /Add.1  
 Argentina  On-site Audit Procedures  G/SPS/W/254  
 Dominican 
Republic  Activities  of Members  G/SPS/GEN/1014  
 Kenya  Activities  of Members  G/SPS/GEN/1019  
 Malawi  Information  on Relevant Activities  G/SPS/GEN/1013  
 Mexico  Publication  of the National Standardization 
Programme for 2010  G/SPS/GEN/491/Add.11 
and 
G/SPS/GEN/491/Add.12  
 Philippines  Pilot Implementation of the INS Trade 
Software System  G/SPS/GEN/1001  
 Zambia  Report on SPS Activities of the Plant 
Quarantine  and Phytosanitary Service  G/SPS/GEN/996  
2011 Argentina  National Plan for the Prevention of Entry and 
Transmission  of Pests and Diseases through 
Waste Regulation  G/SPS/GEN/1129  
 Argentina  Organizational Structure of SENASA – 
National Agriculture and Food Health and 
Quality Service  G/SPS/GEN/1130  
 Belize  Comprehensive Surveillance Programme for 
Bovine Tuberculosis, Bovine Brucellosis, BSE 
and the Implementation of an Animal 
Identification System  G/SPS/GEN/1107  
 Canada  Entry into Force of Canada's Aquatic Animal 
Health Regulations  G/SPS/GEN/1122  
 European 
Union  Transitional Review Mechanism Pursuant to 
Para. 18 of the Protocol on the Accession of 
China – Questions from the EU to China 
concerning SPS  G/SPS/W/262  
 European 
Union  Establishment of a List of Approved or 
Registered Establishments and Plants for the 
Import or Transit of Animal By -products  G/SPS/GEN/1063  
 European 
Union  The European Union's Approach to SPS 
Audits and Inspections  in Third Countries  G/SPS/GEN/1095  
 Korea, 
Republic of  Quarantine Inspection Agency  G/SPS/GEN/1104  
 Mexico  Use of Electronic Sanitary and Phytosanitary 
Certificates  in World Trade  G/SPS/W/264  
 Mexico  National Standardization  Programme for 
2011 G/SPS/GEN/491/Add.13 
and 
G/SPS/GEN/491/Add.14  
 New Zealand  Amalgamation  of the New Zealand Food 
Safety Authority and the Ministry of 
Agriculture and Forestry  G/SPS/GEN/1071  
 New Zealand  Change to Format for Phytosanitary 
Certificates  G/SPS/GEN/1103  
2012 Argentina  New Version  of Phytosanitary Certificate  G/SPS/GEN/1191  
 Brazil  Importance of Scientific Advice Body – 
Science for Safe Food  G/SPS/GEN/1165  
 Canada  Transition Process for Foods Marketed as 
Natural Health Products to the Food 
Regulator Framework  G/SPS/GEN/1170  
 European 
Union  General Guidance on Implementation and 
Interpretation  of Article 24 of Council 
Directive 97/78/EC – Re-enforced Checks  G/SPS/GEN/1167  
 European 
Union  New Models of Health Certificates for the 
Import of Aquatic Animals and Fishery 
Products  G/SPS/GEN/1211  G/SPS/62  
 
- 40 - 
 
  Year Member  Title/Subject  Symbol  
 Mexico  National Standardization Programme for 
2012 G/SPS/GEN/491/Add.15 
and 
G/SPS/GEN/491/Add.16  
 Mexico  Publication of the Regulations relating to the 
Federal Law on Animal Health in the Official 
Journal of 21 May 2012  G/SPS/GEN/1176  
 Mexico  Agreement establishing the Additives and 
Processing Aids in Food, Beverages and Food 
Supplements, the use thereof and Health 
Provisions  G/SPS/GEN/1177  
 Mexico  Import and Export Certificates for 
Agricultural , Livestock, Aquaculture and 
Fisheries Products  G/SPS/GEN/1183  
 New Zealand  Change of Name for the New Zealand 
Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry  G/SPS/GEN/1142  
2013 Argentina  Phytosanitary  Import Authorizations (AFIDI)  G/SPS/GEN/1041/Add.2  
 Australia  Responses to Comments Received Following 
Release of the Draft Biosecurity Bill and 
Inspector -General of Biosecurity Bill  G/SPS/GEN/1213  
 Canada  A New Regulatory  Framework for Federal 
Food Inspection: Discussion Document  G/SPS/GEN/1282  
 Costa Rica  Phytosanitary  Certificate  G/SPS/GEN/1244 and 
G/SPS/GEN/1244 /Corr.1  
 Costa Rica  Ban on the Use of Methyl Bromide as a 
Fumigant for Agricultural Use  G/SPS/GEN/1295  
 Ecuador  Action by Agrocalidad in the Framework of 
Ecuador's Single Window  G/SPS/GEN/1217  
 European 
Union  Healthier Animals and Plants and a Safer 
Agri-Food Chain - A Modernised Legal 
Framework for a more Competitive European 
Union  G/SPS/GEN/1252  
 Indonesia  Encouragement  to Eliminate the Use of Non-
Ecofriendly Methyl Bromide in Phytosanitary 
Treatments  G/SPS/GEN/1271  
 Korea, 
Republic of  SPS-related Government Agency Changes in 
the Republic  of Korea  G/SPS/GEN/1242  
 Mexico  National  Standardization Programme for 
2013 G/SPS/GEN/491/Add.17 
and 
G/SPS/GEN/491/Add.18  
 Paraguay  Processed  Products Certificate  G/SPS/GEN/1264  
2014 Argentina  Phytosanitary Re -Export Authorizations  G/SPS/GEN/1296  
 Armenia  Plant Health Risk Assessment Reports  G/SPS/GEN/1310  
 Brazil  Encouragement  to Eliminate the Use of Non-
Ecofriendly Methyl Bromide in Phytosanitary 
Treatments  G/SPS/GEN/1323  
 Burundi  Creation of the National Committee for the 
Coordination and Monitoring of Sanitary and 
Phytosanitary Measures  G/SPS/GEN/1306  
 Burundi  Informations Concernant le Bureau 
Burundais de Normalisation et Contrôle de la 
Qualité  G/SPS/GEN/1308/Rev.1  
 Mexico  National  Standardization Programme for 
2014 G/SPS/GEN/491/ Add.19  
 Mexico  Phytosanitary Measures to Control and 
Mitigate the Spread of the  Spotted Wing 
Drosophila  G/SPS/GEN/1350  
 Mexico  Phytosanitary Measures to Control and 
Mitigate the Spread of Pierce's Disease  G/SPS/GEN/1351  
 New Zealand  New Zealand Ministry for Primary Industries 
is Changing its Electronic Certification for 
Dairy Products  G/SPS/GEN/1353   
  G/SPS/62  
 
- 41 - APPENDIX C - WTO DISPUTES INVOKIN G THE SPS AGREEMENT  
Since 1 January 1995 , violations of the SPS Agreement have been alleged in the following disputes. Those which have been referred to a panel are highlighted  
in italics . 
 
Please note that in the WTO, the European Union was officially called the European Communities until 30  November 2009. In this table, reference is made to 
"the European Communities" or "the EC" regarding dispute developments that took place before this dat e. 
 
 STC No.  DS Number  Parties and nature of complaint  Request for consultations  Panel/Appellate Body proceedings  
1 STC 2* WT/DS3  US complaint against Korea's inspection 
procedures for fresh fruits . Consultations requested on 
6/04/1995 (WT/DS3/1).  DSU consultations pending  
2 STC 1  WT/DS5  US complaint against Korea's shelf -life 
requirements for frozen processed meats 
and other products . Consultations requested on 
3/05/1995 (WT/DS5/1).  Mutually agreed solution notified on 
20/07/1995 (WT/DS5/5).  
3 STC 8  WT/DS18  Canada's complaint against Australia's 
import restrictions on fresh, chilled or frozen 
salmon.  
Australia - Salmon  Consultations requested on 
5/10/1995 (WT/DS18/1).  Panel established on 10/04/1997.  
 
Appellate Body report ( WT/DS18/AB/R) 
and Panel re port ( WT/DS18/R) adopted on 
6/11/1998.  
 
Suspension of concessions authorized on 
24/12/1998; Request for Arbitration 
3/08/1999 (WT/DS18/13).  
 
Mutually agreed solution notified on 
18/05/2000 (WT/DS18/RW).  
4 STC 1  WT/DS20  Canada's complaint against Korea's 
restrictions on treatment methods for 
bottled water  Consultations requested on 
8/11/1995 (WT/DS20/1).  Mutually agreed solution notified on 
24/04/1996 (WT/DS20/6).  
5 STC 8  WT/DS21  US complaint against Australia's import 
restrictions  on fresh, chilled or fr ozen 
salmon.  
Australia - Salmonids  Consultations requested on 
17/11/1995 (WT/DS21/1).  Mutually agreed solution notified on 
27/10/2000 (WT/DS21/10).   
  G/SPS/62  
 
- 42 -  STC No.  DS Number  Parties and nature of complaint  Request for consultations  Panel/Appellate Body proceedings  
6 N/A WT/DS26  US complaint against EC's prohibition of 
meat from animals treated with growth -
promoting hormones.  
EC – Hormones (US)  Consultations requested on 
26/01/1996 (WT/DS26/1).  Panel established on 20/05/1996.  
 
Appellate Body report ( WT/DS26/AB/R) 
and Panel report ( WT/DS26/R/USA) 
adopted on 13/02/1998.  
 
Suspension of concessions authorized on 
26/07/1999; Request for Arbitration on 
22/12/2008 ( WT/DS26/ARB).  
 
Memorandum of Understanding notified on 
25/09/2009 ( WT/DS26/28 ). 
7 STC 2*  WT/DS41  US complaint against Korea's inspection 
procedures for fresh fruits.  Consultations requested on 
24/05/1996 (WT/DS41/1).  DSU consultations pending  
8 N/A WT/DS48  Canada's complaint against EC prohibition of 
meat from animals treated with growth -
promoting hormones.  
EC – Hormones (Canada)  Consultations requested on 
28/06/1996 (WT/DS48/1).  Panel established on 16/10/1996.  
 
Appellate Body report (WT/DS48/AB/R) 
and Panel report (WT/DS48/R/CAN ) 
adopted on 13/02/1998.  
 
Suspension of concessions authorized on 
26/07/1999; Request for Arbitration on 
22/12/2008 (WT/DS48/ARB).  
 
Memorandum of Understanding notified on 
17/03/2011 (WT/DS48/26).  
9 STC 12  WT/DS76  US complaint against Japan's "varietal 
testing" requirem ent for fresh fruits.  
Japan  – Agricultural Products II  Consultations requested on 
7/04/1997 (WT/DS76/1).  Panel established on 18/11/1997.  
 
Appellate Body report  (WT/DS76/AB/R) 
and Panel report  (WT/DS76/R) adopted  on 
19/03/1999.  
 
Mutually satisfactory solution notif ied on 
23/08/2001 (WT/DS76/12).  
10 N/A WT/DS96  EC complaint against India's quantitative 
restrictions on agricultural and other 
products . Consultations requested on 
18/07/1997 (WT/DS96/1).  Mutually agreed solution notified on 
7/04/1998 (WT/DS96 /8).  
  G/SPS/62  
 
- 43 -  STC No.  DS Number  Parties and nature of complaint  Request for consultations  Panel/Appellate Body proceedings  
11 N/A WT/DS100  EC complaint against US restrictions on 
poultry imports . Consultations requested on 
18/08/1997 (WT/DS100/1).  DSU consultations pending  
12 STC 4*  WT/DS133  Switzerland's complaint against Slovakia's 
BSE-related restrictions on cattle and meat . Consultations requested on 
7/05/1998 (WT/DS133/1).  DSU consultations pending  
13 N/A WT/DS134  India's complaint against EC restrictions on 
rice imports . Consultations requested on 
27/05/1998 (WT/DS134/1).  DSU consultations pending  
14 N/A WT/DS135  Canadian complaint against EC (French) 
measures affecting asbestos.  
EC - Asbestos  Consultations requested on 
28/05/1998 (WT /DS135/1).  Panel established on 25/11/1998.  
 
Appellate Body report (WT/DS/135/AB/R) 
and Panel report (WT/DS/135/R) adopted 
on 5/04/2001. No findings under the SPS 
Agreement.  
15 N/A WT/DS137  Canada's complaint against EC restrictions 
due to pine wood nematodes . Consultations requested on 
17/06/1998 (WT/DS137/1).  DSU consultations pending  
16 N/A WT/DS144  Canada's complaint against US sta te 
restrictions on movement of Canadian trucks 
carrying live animals and grains.  Consultations requested on 
25/09/199 8 (WT/DS144/1).  DSU consultations pending  
17 N/A WT/DS203  US complaint against Mexico's measures 
affecting trade in live swine . Consultations requested on 
10/07/2000 (WT/DS203/1).  DSU consultations pending  
18 STC 77  WT/DS205  Thailand's complaint against Egypt's GMO -
related prohibition on imports of canned 
tuna with soybean oil . Consultations request on 
22/09/2000 (WT/DS205/1).  DSU consult ations pending  
19 STC 92  WT/DS237  Ecuador's complaint against Turkey's import 
requirements for fresh fruit, especially  
bananas.  
Turkey – Fresh Fruit Import Procedures  Consultations requested on 
31/08/2001 (WT/DS237/1).  Panel established on 29/07/2002; 
composition suspended on the same day.  
 
Mutually agreed solution notified on 
22/11/2002 (WT/DS237/4).  
20 STC 100  WT/DS245  US complaint against Japan's restrictions on 
apples due to fire blight.  
Japan - Apples  Consultations requested on 
1/03/2002 (WT/DS245/1).  Panel established on 3/06/2002.  
 
Appellate Body report ( WT/DS245/AB/R) 
and Panel report ( WT/DS245/R) adopted 
on 10/12 /2003.  
 
Mutually agreed solution notified on 
30/08/2005  (WT/DS245/RW).   
  G/SPS/62  
 
- 44 -  STC No.  DS Number  Parties and nature of complaint  Request for consultations  Panel/Appellate Body proceedings  
21 STC 76*  WT/DS256  Hungary's complaint against Turkey's 
restrictions on imports of pet food (BSE)  Consultations requested on 
3/05/2002 (WT/DS256/1).  DSU consultations pending . 
22 STC 74 WT/DS270  Philippine complaint against Australia's 
restrictions on fresh fruits and vegetables, 
including bananas  
Australia - Fresh Fruit and Vegetables  Consultations requested on 
18/10/2002 (WT/DS270/1).  Panel established on 29/08/2003.  
23  STC 74  WT/DS271  Philippine complaint against Australia's 
restrictions on pineapple  Consultations requested on 
18/10/2002 (WT/DS271/1).  DSU consultations pending.  
24 N/A WT/DS279  EC complaint against India's export and 
import policy  Consultations requested on 
23/12/2002 (WT/DS279/1).  DSU consultations pending.  
25 STC 164  WT/DS284  Nicaragua's complaint against Mexico's 
phytosanitary restrictions on bla ck beans  Consultations requested on 
17/03/2003 (WT/DS284/1).  
 Mutually agreed solution notified on 
8/03/2004 (WT/DS284/4 – withdrawal of 
request for consultations).  
26 STC 139  WT/DS287  EC complaint  against Australian quarantine 
regime  
Australia – Quarantine Regime  Consultations requested on 
3/04/2003 (WT/DS287/1).  Panel established on 7/11/2003.  
 
Mutually agreed  solution notified on 
9/03/2007 (WT/DS287/8).  
27 STC 
106/110  WT/DS291  US complaint against EC on GMO approvals.  
EC – Approval and Marketing of Biotech 
Products  Consultations requested on 
13/05/2003 (WT/DS291/1).  Single panel established for disputes 
DS291, DS292 and DS293 on 29/08/2003.  
 
Panel report (WT/DS291/R) was adopted 
on 21/11/2006.  
 
Suspension of concessions authorized on 
15/02/2008; Arbitration requested on 
7/02/2008 (WT/DS291/34).  
28 STC 
106/110  WT/DS292  Canada's complaint against EC on GMO  
approvals.  
EC – Approval and Marketing of Biotech 
Products  Consultations requested on 
13/05/2003 (WT/DS292/1).  Single Panel established to examine 
disputes DS291, DS292 and DS293, on 
29/08/2003.  
 
Panel report (WT/DS292/R) adopted on 
21/11/2006.  
 
Mutually agreed solution notified on 
15/07/2009 (WT/DS292/40).   
  G/SPS/62  
 
- 45 -  STC No.  DS Number  Parties and nature of complaint  Request for consultations  Panel/Appellate Body proceedings  
29 STC 
106/110  WT/DS293  Argentina's complaint against EC on GMO 
approvals.  
EC – Approval and Marketing of Biotech 
Products  Consultations requested on 
14/05/2003 (WT/DS293/1).  Single Panel established to examine 
disputes DS291, DS292 and DS293, on 
29/08/2003.  
 
Panel report (WT/DS293/R) adopted on 
21/11/2006.  
 
Mutually agreed solution notified on 
19/03/2010 (WT/DS293/41).  
30 STC 166  WT/DS297  Hungary's complaint against Croatia's 
restrictions on live animals and meat 
products (TSEs).  Consultations requested on 
9/07/2003 (WT/DS297/1).  Mutually agreed solution notified on 
30/01/2009 (WT/DS297/2).  
31 N/A WT/DS320**  EC complaint against the US continued 
suspension of obligations in the EC -
Hormones dispute.  
US – Continued Suspension of 
Obligations  Consultations requested on 
8/11/2004 (WT/DS320/1).  Panel established on 17/02/2005.  
 
Appellate Body report ( WT/DS320/AB/R) 
and Panel report (WT/DS320/R) adopted 
on 14/11/2008, no further action was 
require d. (See also Memorandum of 
Understanding, DS26).  
32 N/A WT/DS321**  EC complaint against Canada's continued 
suspension of obligations in the EC -
Hormones Dispute.  
Canada – Continued Suspension of 
Obligations  Consultations requested on 
8/11/2004 (WT /DS321/1).  Panel established on 17/02/2005.  
 
Appellate Body report ( WT/DS321/AB/R) 
and Panel report ( WT/DS321/R) adopted 
on 14/11/2008, no further action was 
required . (See also Memorandum of 
Understanding, DS48).   
  G/SPS/62  
 
- 46 -  STC No.  DS Number  Parties and nature of complaint  Request for consultations  Panel/Appellate Body proceedings  
33 STC 217  WT/DS367  New Zealand's complaint against Australia's 
restrictions on apples.  
Australia - Apples  Consultations requested on 
31/08/2007 (WT/DS367/1).  Panel established on 21/01/2008.  
 
Appellate Body report ( WT/DS367/AB/R ) 
and Panel report ( WT/DS367/R ) adopted 
on 17/12/2010.  
 
Reasonable period of time for 
implementation expired on 17/08/2011. 
Implementation notified by respondent on 
02/09/2011.  
 
Agreed procedures (Sequencing 
agreement) notified on 13/09/2011 
(WT/DS367/21).  
34 STC 91 of 
TBT WT/DS384  Canada's complaint against the US country 
of origin labelling requirements.  
United States – Certain Country of 
Origin Labelling (COOL) Requirements  Consultations requested on 
1/12/2008 (WT/DS384/1).  Single panel established with that of 
Mexico (DS386) on 19/11/2009.  
 
Appellate Body report (WT/DS384/AB/R) 
and Panel report (WT/DS384/R) adopted 
on 23/07/2012. No findings under the SPS 
Agreement.  
 
Art. 21.5 Panel Report circulated on 20 
October 2014.  
35 STC 91 of 
TBT WT/DS386  Mexico's complaint against the US country of 
origin labelling requirements.  
United States – Certain Country of 
Origin Labelling (COOL) Requirements  Consultations requested on 
17/12/2008 (WT/DS386/1).  Single panel established with that of 
Canada (DS384) on 19/11/2009.  
 
Appellate Body report (WT/DS386/AB/R) 
and Panel report (WT/DS386/R) adopted 
on 23/07/2012. No findings under the SPS 
Agreement.  
 
Art. 21.5 Panel Report circulated on 20 
October 2014.  
36 STC 242  WT/DS389  US complaint against EC measures affecting 
poultry meat and poultry meat products.  
EC - Poultry  Consultations requested on 
16/01/2009 (WT/DS389/1).  Panel established on 19/11/2009; 
composition pending.   
  G/SPS/62  
 
- 47 -  STC No.  DS Number  Parties and nature of complaint  Request for consultations  Panel/Appellate Body proceedings  
37 STC 247  WT/DS391  Canada's complaint against Korea's 
measures affecting the importation of bovine 
meat and meat products  
Korea – Bovine Products  Consultations requested on 
9/04/2009 (WT/DS391/1).  Panel established on 31/08/2009: Panel 
proceedings suspended on 4/07/2011.  
 
Mutually agreed solution notified on 
19/06/2012 (WT/DS391/9).  
 
Panel report (WT/DS391/R) circulated to 
Members on 3/07/2012, reporting on the 
solution reached by parties.  
38 STC 257  WT/DS392  China's complaint against US measures 
affecting imports of poultry.  
US — Poultry  Consultations requested on 
17/04/2009 (WT/DS392/1).  Panel established on 31/07/2009.  
 
Panel report (WT/DS392/R) adopted on 
25/10/2010, no further action required . 
39 STC 257 
of TBT WT/DS406  Indonesia's complaint about US ban on clove 
cigarettes.  
US - Measures Affecting the Production 
and Sale of Clove Cigarettes  Consultations requested on 
7/04/2010 (WT/DS406/1).  Panel established on 20/07/2010.  
 
Appellate Body report (WT/DS406/AB/R) 
and Panel report (WT/DS406/R) adopted 
on 24/04/2012. No findings under the SPS 
Agreement.  
40 STC 185  WT/DS430  US complaint against India's import 
restrictions on agricultural products.  
India — Agricultural Products  Consultations requested on 
6/03/2012 (WT/DS430/1).  Panel established on 25/06/2012.  
 
Panel composed on 18/02/2013; Panel 
report circulated on 14/10/2014.  
41 STC 318  WT/DS447  Argentina's complaint against US restrictions 
on beef and other meat products.  
US - Animals  Consultations requested on 
30/08/2012  (WT/DS447/1 and 
WT/DS447/1/Corr.1) . Panel established on 28/01/2013.  
 
Panel composed on 08/08/2013; Panel 
proceedings on -going.  
42 STC 336  WT/DS448  Argentina's complaint against US measures 
affecting the importation of fresh lemons.  Consultations requested on 
3/09/2012  (WT/DS448/1 and 
WT/DS448/1/Corr.1) . DSU consultations pending.  
43 STC 338  WT/DS475  EU's complaint against Russian measures 
affecting  the importation of live pigs pork, 
pork products and certain other commodities 
because of African Swine Fever (ASF).  Consultations requested on 
8/04/2014 (WT/DS475/1) . Panel established on 22/07/2014; Panel 
compos ed. 
* Whilst the DSU consultations on thi s case are pending, the Committee was notified that the specific trade concern itself had been resolved.  
** DS320, 321: Neither of these two requests for consultations claimed violation of the SPS Agreement, however, one of the is sues of concern regarded t he EC implementation of 
the rulings in WT/DS26 and WT/DS48; hence, the SPS Agreement was relevant to these disputes.  
__________