G/SPS/W/280/Rev.2  
 
6 November 2014  
(14-6489)  Page: 1/47  
Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures    
 
 REVIEW OF THE OPERATION AND IMPLEMENTATION 
OF THE SPS AGREEMENT 
DRAFT REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE1 
Revision 
1  INTRODUCTION 
1.1.  Article 12.7 of the Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures 
("the Agreement") provides that "the Committee sh all 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 First 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 opportunities 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 propos als identified 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 Committee considered the 
revised report of the Review7 for adoption at its October 2014 meeting. The report has been 
further revised based on Members' comments and suggestions at the October 2014 meeting. Members are invited to submit comments on the present revision of the draft report in writing by 
the end of 2014, with a view to its adopti on during the March 2015 regular meeting. 
1.4.  As in the preceding reviews, in the Fourth Review the Committee has considered operation 
and implementation issues related to: 
 Monitoring the use of internationa l standards (Article 3.5 and 12.4); 
 Equivalence (Article 4); 
 Consistency (Article 5.5); 
 Regionalization (Article 6); 
 Transparency (Article 7 and Annex B); 
 Technical assistance and training activities (Article 9); 
                                               
1 This document has been prepared under the Secret ariat's own responsibility and is without prejudice 
to the positions of Members or to their rights or obligations under the WTO. 
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. G/SPS/W/280/Rev.2 
 
- 2 - 
 
   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 geog raphical 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 since the Third 
Review in 2010. Appendix B provides a list of documents submitted by Members since the last 
review of the Agreement relevant to the various issues raised in this report. Appendix C provides 
information about SPS-related dispute settlement activities. 
2  MONITORING THE USE OF INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS (ARTICLES 3.5 AND 12.4) 2.1.  Articles 3.5 and 12.4 of the SPS Agreement 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 revised in November 2004.
8 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 of 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 monitoring international harmonization.9 
2.3.  In October 2010, Members agreed to prioriti ze 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 proc edure for monitoring the use of international 
standards; and (iii) control, inspection and approval procedures (Article 8 and Annex C).10 
2.4.  In June 2011, there was discussion relate d to the lack of adoption of Codex standards 
relating to ractopamine.11 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 posed 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 
the need to ensure that the basic principles and processes of Codex be respected.
12 At the same 
time, other Members, while recognising the importance of science in the development of 
                                               
8 G/SPS/11/Rev.1. 
9 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. 
10 G/SPS/GEN/1086. 
11 G/SPS/GEN/1092 and G/SPS/56. 
12 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. G/SPS/W/280/Rev.2 
 
- 3 - 
 
  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 consider 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.
13 These Members reaffirmed: (i) the need for science-based international 
guidelines, standards and recommendations; (ii) the need to support and strengthen confidence in 
SPS international 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 proposal
14 to revise the monitoring procedure15 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 international 
standards or the absence of existing standa rds, 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 proc edure had been articulated and maintained that 
it was their right to decide under which agenda item they wished to raise such problems. The 
Chairperson encouraged bilateral discu ssions among Members on the subject. 
2.7.  Also in July 2012, Brazil noted the increase in demand for scientific 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.
16 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 under the SPS Agreement, as international standards were critical for ensuring safe food for consumers and facilitating trade. Members also stressed the importance of in ternational standards and emphasized that 
international standard-setting bodies needed  to be inclusive to achieve harmonization.
17 
2.9.  Codex indicated that it did not have a sp ecific 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 
questionnaire for this monitoring process.18 
2.10.  At the October 2012 and March 2013 meetings  of the Committee, the IPPC reported on its 
Implementation Review and Support System (IRSS).19 The IRSS provides a help desk to address 
specific issues identified by members. A summa ry 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 reiter ated their proposal that the SPS Committee's 
monitoring procedure adequately reflect how in ternational standards are used by Members. 
Argentina noted that the topic of monitoring the use of international standards could be addressed in the context of the Fourth Review of the Oper ation and Implementation of the SPS Agreement. 
                                               
13 G/SPS/GEN/1143/Rev.2. 
14 G/SPS/W/268. 
15 G/SPS/11/Rev.1. 
16 G/SPS/GEN/1165 and G/SPS/59. 
17 G/SPS/W/269. 
18 Ibid. 
19 G/SPS/GEN/1204. G/SPS/W/280/Rev.2 
 
- 4 - 
 
  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 Members for the management of SPS issues proposed by Canada.
20 
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.21 The IPPC requested 
contracting parties to complete 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 and 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 international 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 Monitor the Process of International 
Harmonization.22 
 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 implementati on 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), in cluding 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 implementation of Article 4, which was concluded by the adoption of the current version of the equivalence guidelines in July 2004
23 and the agreement that 
equivalence would be a standing agenda item for the regular meetings of the Committee. 
3.2.  In March 2011, Chile reported 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 informatio n regarding the development of guidelines for the 
judgement of equivalence of food control system s by the Codex Committee on Food Import and 
Export Inspection and Certification Systems (CCF ICS). It was proposed that the principle of 
recognition, which provides that other systems co uld 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 national and international levels. The Principles and Guidelines for National Food Control 
Systems were adopted by Codex at its 36
th session in July 2013.24 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, 
and ISPM 1 includes principles on equivalence. 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 
                                               
20 G/SPS/W/279/Rev.1. 
21 G/SPS/GEN/1284. 
22 G/SPS/40, paragraph 2. 
23 G/SPS/19/Rev.2. 
24 CAC/GL 82-2013. G/SPS/W/280/Rev.2 
 
- 5 - 
 
  these measures are negotiated based on agreements at bilateral or multi-lateral levels. The study 
seeks to provide a clearer picture of the importan ce and frequency of the use of this concept and 
recognition of the IPPC's application of the concept. 
3.5.  The OIE has developed guidelines 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 an d in the use of the guidance developed by the 
Committee (G/SPS/19/Rev.2). In particular, Members are encouraged to notify any 
agreement reached 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 (ARTICLE 5.5) 4.1.  Article 5.5 required the Committee to develop guidelines to further the practical 
implementation of that provision. The Committee adopted such guidelines (G/SPS/15) in 
July 2000, and subsequently agreed to review th em as part of the periodic reviews 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 stan ding agenda item regarding Article 5.5, there is 
opportunity for Members to provide information re garding 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 
periodic reviews of the SPS Agreement.25 
5  REGIONALIZATION (ARTICLE 6) 5.1.  Following 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 provided by Members 
through notifications and from information presented during SPS Committee meetings, and to 
revise the guidelines, if necessary, in light of ex perience gained through the implementation of the 
Agreement and the use of the guidelines themse lves. Three reports have been issued by the 
Secretariat: the first one covering the year 2009 through the end of 2011
26; the second one 
covering the year 2012 through the first quarter of 201327; and the third one covering the period 
from 1 June 2013 until 31 March 2014.28 
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. 
5.3.  The IPPC currently has several directly relevant standards: ISPM 4 on requirements for the 
establishment 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-f ree areas for fruit flies; and ISPM 29 on the 
                                               
25 Introduction, G/SPS/15 and paragraph 14, G/SPS/53. 
26 G/SPS/GEN/1134. 
27 G/SPS/GEN/1245. 
28 G/SPS/GEN/1333. G/SPS/W/280/Rev.2 
 
- 6 - 
 
  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 implementa tion 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, resources, capacities or coordination. Governments should be aware that providing in formation regarding pests at the SPS Committee 
meetings or through SPS notifications is not sufficient to meet their obligations under the IPPC or 
the OIE.
29 
5.5.  The OIE Terrestrial Animal Health Code describes the requirements for obtaining disease-free 
status including requirements for surveillance an d monitoring based on the concept of geographic 
zones. During its annual General Sessions the OIE has adopted a number of resolutions 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 of national Veterinary Services.
30 
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 81st 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 spongiform encephalopathy (BSE).
31 
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.32 Two volumes of the 
OIE Scientific and Technical Review were dedicated to the issue of invasive species (G/SPS/GEN/1043).
33 
5.8.  In June 2013 the OIE tabled a document describing the OIE BSE risk assessment process 
that had been in place since 2004.34 OIE also indicated that the latest results of the official disease 
status recognition of OIE members were available for FMD, BSE, contagious bovine pleuropneumonia and, for the first time, also for African Horse sickness.
35  
5.9.  Recommendations: 
 The Committee should maintain regionalization as a standing item of the agenda for its 
regular meetings. 
 Members are encouraged to provide 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). 
 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.  
                                               
29 For more information on the IPPC work, see documents G/SPS/GEN/1321-1344-1345 for 2014; 
G/SPS/GEN/1226-1247-1283 for 2013; G/SPS/GEN/1152-1171-1201 for 2012; G/SPS/GEN/1102-1123 for 2011; and G/SPS/GEN/999-1028-1049 for 2010. 
30 See for more information Annex 1 of document G/SPS/GEN/1096. 
31 The full list of countries and th eir recognised disease status fo r FMD, CBPP, BSE and AHS can be 
found in Annex 1 of document G/SPS/GEN/1255. 
32 G/SPS/GEN/1120. 
33 See for more information on the OIE work documents G/SPS/GEN/1317-1343 for 2014; 
G/SPS/GEN/1231-1255-1277 for 2013; G/SPS/GEN/1141-1164-1198 for 2012; G/SPS/GEN/1073-1096-1120 
for 2011; and G/SPS/GEN/1000-1024-1043 for 2010. 
34 G/SPS/GEN/1256. 
35 G/SPS/GEN/1255. G/SPS/W/280/Rev.2 
 
- 7 - 
 
  6  TRANSPARENCY (ARTICLE 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 formats contained in G/SPS/7/Rev.3.36 
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.) and 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 out 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. Interested 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 latter was the fourth SP S 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 IM S and SPS NSS, as well as sharing of national 
experiences 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 SP S 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 regular 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 parties 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 SPS 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 substantially enhanced information. 
6.7.  Managing information on transparency rema ins, 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 submitted 11,612 regular 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 
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 translat ions of notified measures into one of the official 
                                               
36 http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/sps_e/transparency_toolkit_e.htm . G/SPS/W/280/Rev.2 
 
- 8 - 
 
  languages of the WTO. These are submitted in the form of supplemental notifications. As of mid-
September 2014, two equivalence and 18 supplem ental 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 included 19 developing countries, 
21 LDCs, and one developed country. In addition ,  a  n u m b e r  o f  E U  m e m b e r  S t a t e s  h a v e  n o t  
submitted notifications; however, most SPS measures are notified by the European Union on behalf of all its member States.
37 
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 
48%
51%1%
Developed Developing Least-developed
 
6.11.  Looking at the geographic regions from whic h the notifications 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.38 
                                               
37 See G/SPS/GEN/456 for notification procedures for the European Union and its member States. 
38 The geographical groupings used rely on WTO working definitions as identified in the Integrated 
Database (IDB) for analytical purposes. The same gr oupings are used in the WTO Annual Reports. North 
America (NA) here, as well as in Chart 2, in cludes Canada, Mexico and the United States. G/SPS/W/280/Rev.2 
 
- 9 - 
 
  Chart 2 – Notifications by geographic al region as of 15 September 2014 
 
6.12.  Under the SPS Agreement, Members are requir ed to notify both an Enquiry Point to provide 
answers to all reasonable questions from interest ed Members and a National Notification Authority 
to implement the notification procedures de tailed 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 their 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 each meeting, Members are invited to ra ise 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 po licies 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, establishment 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.
39 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 timely. 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 notifications; (iii) interactions with trading partners; and (iv) access to all measures adopted and proposed by a Memb er. Many Members recognized the importance of transparency 
and supported the proposal, and one Member suggeste d that it was also important to identify 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 ta ke place in 2015. This was an opportunity to 
                                               
39 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/W/280/Rev.2 
 
- 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 and SPS IMS to ols had been approved and would start in 2014. 
6.17.  Chile, the European Union, Morocco and No rway submitted a proposal for actions related to 
the fulfilment of transparency obligations. They pr oposed that actions take two forms: (i) specific 
proposals for modifications in the Recommended Procedures for implementing the Transparency Obligations of the SPS Agreement (Article 7)
40; and (ii) recommendations to the Secretariat on 
revising and modernizing the SPS Information Management System and (SPS IMS) and 
Notification Submission System (SPS NSS).41 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 no tifications, and Chile highlighted the issue of 
compliance with international standards and the need to define criteria for trade facilitating 
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 use 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 carried 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 th e 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 were open to considering alternative approaches on how to move forward with this issue, in particular in prep aration of the October 2015 transparency workshop. 
6.21.  The Secretariat suggested that such a diagno sis 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 aime d 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 Committee 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 id entify specific problems they face in 
implementing the transparency provisions of the Agreement. Assistance should be 
provided to least-developed and developing country 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 Recommended Procedures established by the Committee 
(G/SPS/7/Rev.3), while not creating legal obligations, can facilitate Members' 
implementation of the provisions of the SP S Agreement, the Committee should consider, 
as appropriate: 
o Specific proposals for modifications in the Recommended Procedures for implementing 
                                               
40 G/SPS/7/Rev.3. 
41 G/SPS/W/278, dated 26 May 2014. G/SPS/W/280/Rev.2 
 
- 11 - 
 
  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 ACTIVITIES (ARTICLE 9) 7.1.  Technical assistance is a standing agen da 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 bu ilding 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 period ic updates regarding their SPS-related technical 
assistance activities.
42 
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, benefitting 51 developing countries.
43 
7.4.  Canada provided information on its technical assistance to developing countries in calendar 
year 2013.44 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.
45 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 2013.46 The European Union provided approximately EUR 75 million via 
300 projects all over the world – while preserving  its commitment to provide technical assistance 
to third countries despite the global economic do wnturn. EU assistance took the form of both 
development assistance and aid directed at improv ing opportunities for trade, animal health, plant 
health, and food safety. The European Union contribu ted 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 supplies 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 technical assistance activities.
47 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 blocks for strong an imal health and plant systems. In 2012, the US 
Government had developed a partnership with the Government of Chile to provide SPS training to 
El Salvador. In 2013 and 2014, this partnership expanded to provide training to Guatemala and 
Honduras. 
                                               
42 Contributions made by Members since 2010 are listed in Appendix B, tables C.1 and C.2. 
43 G/SPS/GEN/717/Add.4. 
44 G/SPS/GEN/1342 and G/SPS/GEN/1342/Corr.1. 
45 G/SPS/GEN/1160/Add.2. 
46 G/SPS/GEN/1139/Add.2. 
47 G/SPS/GEN/181/Add.10. G/SPS/W/280/Rev.2 
 
- 12 - 
 
  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 to 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 under 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 ob ligations, dispute settlement, implementation 
problems, specific trade concerns and technical/scientific issues such as risk analysis 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 th eir countries. Progress on the implementation of 
the action plans is then monitored through peri odic reporting and is presented at the ten-day 
follow-up session the subsequent year. The Secretariat also offers an E-Learning Course on the 
SPS Agreement.
48 
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-requis ites and application processes. In 2013, an online 
application form49 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 part icular, 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 Manua l for SPS National Notification Authorities and 
SPS National Enquiry Points to facilitate the implementation of the transparency provisions of the SPS Agreement. 
7.13.  In October 2010 and 2012, the Committee held special workshops on the transparency 
provisions of the SPS Agreement.
50 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 implem entation and benefits of the transparency 
provisions, in particular by sharing experience s 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 public 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 benefi tted from presentations by government officials 
on their national experiences with submitting SP S 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 workshop entitled "SPS Coordination at 
National and Regional Levels". This workshop wa s held in response to a recommendation adopted 
at the October 2009 workshop on the Relationsh ip between the SPS Committee and the Three 
Sisters
51 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 
                                               
48 More information on these training tools an d material is available on the SPS webpage 
(http://www.wto.org/sps ). 
49 This application form is accessible via a web link, which is included in the latest version of 
G/SPS/GEN/997. 
50 Summary reports of the 2010 and 2012 workshops were circulated as G/SPS/R/60 and G/SPS/R/68, 
respectively. 
51 G/SPS/R/57. G/SPS/W/280/Rev.2 
 
- 13 - 
 
  this regard.52 In October 2013, the Secretariat held a workshop entitled "SPS-related Market 
Access Challenges and Opportunities", which brought together officials, selected from among former participants to the Advanced SPS Course, fo r an in-depth session focusing on specific SPS-
related challenges faced by Members in their agricultural exports and how these had been 
addressed.
53 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 Secretariat since 
September 1994.
54 
7.15.  For the period 1994 to 2013, the WTO Secretariat had undertaken a total of 288 technical 
assistance activities on the SPS Agreement, including 84 regional (or sub-regional) and 
127 national seminars. Table 1 provides inform ation 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 - - 2255 22 
Total 127 84 77 288 
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. 
                                               
52 G/SPS/W/251. 
53 A summary report of the workshop  was circulated as G/SPS/R/72. 
54 G/SPS/GEN/521, la test revision.  
55 This category also includes the Advanced SPS Course. G/SPS/W/280/Rev.2 
 
- 14 - 
 
  The Standards and Trade De velopment 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 tec hnical 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 recommendations 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 securi ty and environmental protection in developing 
countries. More specifically, the STDF increase s awareness, mobilizes resources, strengthens 
collaboration and identifies and disseminates good practice to enhance the effectiveness of SPS 
assistance. The STDF also provides support to beneficiaries on issues related to SPS project 
development and finances the development and implementation of projects that promote 
compliance with international SPS requirements.
56 
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 prod uced 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.
57 
7.19.  In 2010, the STDF organized an international 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 selected 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 practical 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.
58 
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 su pported 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 countries
59, helps to: (i) enhance the economic efficiency of SPS resource 
allocation decisions so that scarce resources 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 priv ate sector SPS stakeholders and encourage more 
inclusive decision-making processes. The STDF ai ms to revise and fina lize this tool in 2014.
60 
7.21.  Two publications were issued on the role  and functioning of regional and national SPS 
coordination mechanisms in Africa.61 Conclusions and recommendations, including the 
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 
                                               
56 More information on the STDF and its activities, in cluding 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 activities ( http://www.standardsfacili ty.org/mailchimp_archive ). 
57 See http://www.standardsfacility.org/video-gallery . 
58 See for more information: http://www.standardsfacility.o rg/public-private-partnerships . 
59 Including Belize, Mozambique, Viet Nam and Zambia. In addition, the tool was used in Ethiopia, 
Malawi, Rwanda and Uganda  with support from th e Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa 
(COMESA) and the United States De partment for Agriculture (USDA). 
60 See for more information: http://www.standardsfacility.org/s ps-market-access-prioritization . 
61 See for the publications: http://www.standardsfacili ty.org/stdf-publications . G/SPS/W/280/Rev.2 
 
- 15 - 
 
  private sector, reduces information gaps, promotes synergies in the implementation of SPS 
measures and enhances the effectiveness of 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 enhancing 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 the 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 international 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 im plementation of SPS measures in the context of 
trade facilitation. 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 awarene ss 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 trade 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 Southeast 
Asia and Africa (in collaboration with TradeM ark 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.
62 
7.24.  An independent 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 projects as "significant value added".63 
7.25.  Recommendations: 
 The Committee should maintain technical assistan ce as a standing item of the agenda of 
its regular meetings. 
 Members requiring technical assistance are encour aged to identify their specific needs in a 
clear and detailed manner that will permit these needs to be 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 effe ctiveness 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 developed by the Secretariat to assist Members with the understanding and 
implementation of the SPS Agreement. 
 The Secretariat is requested to keep the Committee informed of its relevant technical 
assistance activities and of the activities of the STDF. 
                                               
62 See for more information: http://www.standardsfacility.org/facilitating-safe-trade . 
63 See for further information: http://www.wto.org/english/news_e/news13_e/sps_29nov13_e.htm . G/SPS/W/280/Rev.2 
 
- 16 - 
 
   The observer organizations are invited to keep the Committee informed of their capacity 
building activities relevant to the SPS Agreement. 
8  SPECIAL AND DIFFERENTIAL TREATMENT (ARTICLE 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 info rmed 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 informat ion regarding 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 report 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.
64 
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, more 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 settlement 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 C
65: 
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-promoting 
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 procedures 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); 
f. The Philippines' complaint against Australia's measures affecting the importation of fresh 
fruit and vegetables (DS270); 
                                               
64 Paragraph 7, G/SPS/33/Rev.1. 
65 Please note that in four disput es, the panels (and the Appellate Body) made findings principally under 
the TBT Agreement. These cases concerned Canada's co mplaint against the European Communities' ban on 
asbestos and products containing as bestos, Canada and Mexico's complain t against the United States' country 
of origin (COOL) labelling requirements, and Indonesia's complaint against the United States' ban on clove cigarettes. G/SPS/W/280/Rev.2 
 
- 17 - 
 
  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 re lating 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 products (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 United 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 importation 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 certain other commodities (due to concerns about African swine fever; panel established, DS475). 
10  IMPLEMENTATION OF THE AGREEMENT – SPECIFIC TRADE CONCERNS 
10.1.  Part of each Committee meeting is devoted to the consideration of specific trade concerns 
raised by Members. 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 fourteenth revision of G/SPS/GEN/204
66, 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  were raised between 1995 and the end of 2013.67 
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 health 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 purposes 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 foot-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. 
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, in formation regarding their experiences in the 
                                               
66 G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.14 was circulated to Members on 4 March 2014. 
67 Information relevant to this se ction, but which precedes the peri od under review, can be found in 
former revisions of do cument G/SPS/GEN/204. G/SPS/W/280/Rev.2 
 
- 18 - 
 
  implementation of Article 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 
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 
Chart 4 – Trade concerns since 2010, by subject 
Animal Health
32%
Food Safety
45%Plant Health
17%Other
6%
 
 G/SPS/W/280/Rev.2 
 
- 19 - 
 
  Chart 5 –Trade concerns since 2010, re lated to animal health and zoonoses 
TSE
24%
FMD
24%
AI
8%OAH
44%
 
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 country 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 wa s maintained 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 2010 by each category of 
Member.
68 
Chart 6 – Participation by WTO  Members (2010-2013) 
353428
405456
121
0 2 04 06 0Members Maintaining the
Measure in QuestionSupporting MembersMembers Raising the IssueNumber of Members
Least-Developed Countries Developing Countries Developed Countries
 
                                               
68 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 comp ared with the overall count of the 78 specific trade 
concerns raised since 2010. G/SPS/W/280/Rev.2 
 
- 20 - 
 
  Chart 7 – Number of new issues raised by Members since 2010 
578818
12
1016
1
02468101214161820Number of Issues
Developed countries Developing countries Least-Developed Countries
 
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 trade concerns raised over 
the 18 years. 62 issues were reported as reso lved between 2010 and 2013, 40 of these in 2013 
alone. 13 trade concerns were reported as partia lly solved during the period under review. In 
these instances, trade may have been allowed for 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 aware of these developments. 
Chart 8 – Solved trade concerns 
196
141
31
050100150200250
No solution reported Solution reported Partial solution reportedNumber of Issues
Status
 G/SPS/W/280/Rev.2 
 
- 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 of this opportunity to identify specific trade 
problems and to seek to find expeditious an d mutually satisfactory resolutions of these 
problems. 
 Members are encouraged to inform the Committee of all specific trade concerns resolved. 
 The Secretariat is requested to continue to provide regularly updated information on the 
specific trade concerns considered by the Committee. 
11  IMPLEMENTATION OF THE AGREEMENT – USE OF AD HOC CONSULTATIONS 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 means of  facilitating the resolution of trade problems.
69 
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 negotiations among Members.70 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 differences among the proposals.71 The document was 
subsequently revised several times to reflect co mments received from Members and discussions at 
informal meetings of the Committee. 
11.3.  At its meeting in October 2012, the Commi ttee established an electronic Working Group 
(e-WG) to make progress between Committee 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 
meeting 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 Committee discussed the sixth revision and few substantive 
concerns were raised by Members. These were ta ken into account in the preparation of a seventh 
revision, which was presented for adoption at th e October 2013 meeting of the Committee. There 
was no consensus to adopt the proposal. Members unable to join the consensus were requested to 
submit constructive suggestions for compromi s e  l a n g u a g e  b y  1 7  D e c e m b e r  2 0 1 3 .  A s  n o  
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, an d provided the requested clarifications 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 object ion by the deadline, and the final decision was 
circulated as G/SPS/61. 
                                               
69 G/SPS/12, paragraph 24; G/SPS/36, paragraphs 87-88; G/SPS/53, paragraphs 116-126. 
70 G/SPS/W/243/Rev.4 and JOB/SPS/1. 
71 G/SPS/W/259. G/SPS/W/280/Rev.2 
 
- 22 - 
 
  11.7.  Recommendations: 
 As foreseen in the Recommended Procedure to Encourage and Facilitate the Resolution of 
Specific SPS issues among Members in Accordance with Article 12.2, the Committee should review its implementation as part of the periodic reviews of the SPS Agreement.
72 
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 participation 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 document
73 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.
74 Also, at its October 2011 meeting, the SPS 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 procedures and/or risk analysis.
75 A preliminary analysis 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. 
13  GOOD REGULATORY PRACTICE 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 Member s 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 
guidelines 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 STANDARDS 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 GLOBALGAP) requirements on pesticides used on bananas destined for sale in European markets.
76 
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 Private Standards".77 At 
its March 2011 meeting, the Committee endorsed five of the six actions put forward by the ad hoc 
working group.78 Despite further revision and discussions, consensus was not reached on 
                                               
72 Paragraph 5.1. in G/SPS/61. 
73 G/SPS/GEN/1115. 
74 G/SPS/R/65. 
75 G/SPS/58. 
76 G/SPS/R/37/Rev.1, paras.16-20. 
77 The March 2011 report of this working group is contained in document G/SPS/W/256. 
78 G/SPS/55. G/SPS/W/280/Rev.2 
 
- 23 - 
 
  Action 6.79 In addition, six other actions were also 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 explan ation of the main differences of opinion. 
14.2.  Since 2011, the Committee's discussions 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 standa rds. The Committee discussed a working definition 
on the basis of draft definitions prepared by the Secretariat based on proposals from Members.
80 
However, as no consensus emerged, China and Ne w Zealand, the only Me mbers having submitted 
new proposals for a definition by a 19 April 2013 deadline, were requested 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 co mments submitted by Members, China and 
New Zealand tabled a revised joint working definition of an SPS-related private standard for discussion at the October 2013 informal meeting of the Committee.
81 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 workin g 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-WG82, 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 Canada at the July 2014 meeting.
83 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. The 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,
84 and presented the proposed working de finition 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-stewa rds, within a timeline to be agreed, so that 
discussions on a working definition could successfully 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 in formation exchange mechanisms between the 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 compatibility and avoid conflict between 
                                               
79 G/SPS/W/261. 
80 G/SPS/W/265, G/SPS/W/265/Rev.1 and G/SPS/W/265/Rev.2. 
81 G/SPS/W/272. 
82 G/SPS/W/276. 
83 G/SPS/GEN/1334 and Rev.1. 
84 G/SPS/GEN/281. G/SPS/W/280/Rev.2 
 
- 24 - 
 
  private and official standards, and drew attentio n to the OIE General Assembly's Resolution on 
Private Standards.85 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 orga nized during the March 2013 and March 2014 TBT 
Committee meetings.
86 
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 preparation of international standards.
87 Belize also noted that 
Action 4 could be enhanced by sensitizing private standard-setting entities to the list of concerns in 
paragraph 24 under Action 6 of document G/SPS/W/256.88 Belize drew Members' attention to its 
recommendations regarding the implementation of Action 4 in document G/SPS/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 were already 
communicating with private standard-setting entities in their territories were encouraged to share their experiences in that regard. The Philippines repo rted on regional and national briefing sessions 
jointly organized by the Department of Agricultur e 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 
development, 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 50
th anniversary, on the role Codex 
standards could play in ensuring the trade of safe food. 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 standards, were available in its six official languages. The IPPC continued to ra ise 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, wa s 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 
private standard-setting bodies, and referred to the OIE resolution guiding OIE's relations with private standard-setting bodies. The collaboratio n of both Codex and 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 o fficial 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 
                                               
85 G/SPS/GEN/1024. 
86 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. 
87 G/SPS/GEN/1261. 
88 G/SPS/GEN/1290. G/SPS/W/280/Rev.2 
 
- 25 - 
 
  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 standards, to the IPPC's CPM, 
the OIE World Assembly of Delegates an d 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 private 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 Committee and th at 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 also 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 governments 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 ap plicability for the implementation of the action. 
On Action 11, Belize encouraged Members liaising with entities involved in private standards to 
share their experience with the Committee as the approaches used could be considered in the implementation of Action 11.
89 Belize supported by several Members, expressed concerns 
regarding 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.90 
14.17.  On other matters related to private standards, Belize registered its concern regarding the 
evolution in food safety certification requirements, as governments were responsible for setting 
SPS measures, with guidance from international standards.91 Belize noted that a country's 
appropriate level of protection should not be set by the private 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 
organizations 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 fl agged the publication of a brochure entitled 
International Standards and Private Standards . IICA reported on the study undertaken on the 
impact of private food standards in the Southern Cone.
92 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 activiti es, based on demand by developing countries and 
involving all concerned non-governmental stakeholders.
93 
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 
public voluntary standards, across 700 different criteria of analysis. The ITC confirmed that the 
terminology of "voluntary standards" and th e 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 proliferat ion of private schemes, ITC confirmed that it had 
                                               
89 G/SPS/GEN/1291. 
90 G/SPS/GEN/1240. 
91 G/SPS/GEN/1374. 
92 G/SPS/GEN/1088. 
93 http://www.unfss.org . G/SPS/W/280/Rev.2 
 
- 26 - 
 
  been consulted by ISEAL and GIZ94 regarding the development of a Sustainability Standards 
Comparison Tool. The tool was being develope d and should be piloted by the end of 2014. 
14.20.  Recommendations: 
 Members and Observer Governments are enco uraged to provide information on any 
relevant studies or analysis which they have  undertaken, or of which they are aware. 
 The Committee should consider a specific problem identified by a Member that arises from 
an SPS-related private standard that affects its exports. 
 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.
95 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 tw o 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 appropriate level of protection (ALOP), submitted in the context of the Fourth 
Review.
96 One Member proposed that the issue of specia l 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 relate d 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 
contained in the US proposal, and a revised programme was circulated for discussion at the July 2014 meeting
97, 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 other comments received 
from Members. The Secretariat invited Members to submit any further comments on the programme and to help identify appropriate spea kers by 25 July 2014. The Secretariat noted that 
in addition to government officials, participatio n was open 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. 
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 practise s concerning SPS-related risk analysis. Delayed 
streaming of the workshop was made possible thro ugh a partnership with IICA. The presentations 
made at the workshop, as well as audio and video clips are available on the WTO website. 
                                               
94 International Social and Environmental Accreditat ion and Labelling Alliance  (ISEAL); and Deutsche 
Gesellschaft für Internationa le Zusammenarbeit (GIZ). 
95 G/SPS/W/275. 
96 G/SPS/GEN/1307. 
97 G/SPS/GEN/1336. G/SPS/W/280/Rev.2 
 
- 27 - 
 
  16  CATALOGUE OF INSTRUMENTS FOR THE MANAGEMENT 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"98, 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 an d 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 Members. 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 2014 meeting, Canada pr esented 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 no w grouped by thematic areas in a progressive 
manner, starting from bilateral contacts up to the use of the WTO dispute settlement mechanism. 
Kenya highlighted that the Catalogue regrouped a ll 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 expresse d 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. 
 
_______________ 
 
  
                                               
98 G/SPS/W/271.  
  G/SPS/W/280/Rev.2  
 
- 28 - APPENDIX A - SUMMARY OF MAJOR SPS COMMITTEE ACTIVITIES, 2010-2014 
Subject Year Type of Activity Related Documents 
Transparency 2010 Implementation of the Transparency Ob ligations 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 ob ligations 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 transparen cy obligations as of 17/02/2012 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/W/280/Rev.2  
 
- 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 2014 – 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 under 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/W/280/Rev.2  
 
- 30 - Subject Year Type of Activity Related Documents 
 2011 Proposed Recommended Procedure for Ad Hoc Consultations or 
Negotiations among Members under the 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/W/280/Rev.2  
 
- 31 - Subject Year Type of Activity Related Documents 
Other 2010 Review of the Operation and Im plementation 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/W/280/Rev.2 
 
- 32 - 
 
  APPENDIX B: LIST OF SPS COMMITTEE DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED BY MEMBERS 2010-
2014 
A. Comments/Proposals regarding Tran sparency (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 
Implementation of the WTO SPS Agreement G/SPS/GEN/1039 
 Morocco Measures Taken by Morocco to Implement 
the Transparency Obligations of the SPS 
Agreement G/SPS/GEN/1047 
B. Comments/Proposals regarding monitori ng 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 Principles 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/W/280/Rev.2 
 
- 33 - 
 
  C.1 Information regarding Members' provisio n 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' tec hnical 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/W/280/Rev.2 
 
- 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 Workshop 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/W/280/Rev.2 
 
- 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/W/280/Rev.2 
 
- 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/W/280/Rev.2 
 
- 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 Monitori ng 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/W/280/Rev.2 
 
- 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 Meat 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/W/280/Rev.2 
 
- 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/W/280/Rev.2 
 
- 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/W/280/Rev.2  
 
- 41 - APPENDIX C - WTO DISPUTES INVOKING THE SPS AGREEMENT  
Since 1 January 1995, violations of the SPS Agreement have been alleged in the following disputes. Those which have been referr ed 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 date. 
 
 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 report (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 frozen 
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/W/280/Rev.2  
 
- 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" requirement 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 notified 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/W/280/Rev.2  
 
- 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 state 
restrictions on movement of Canadian trucks 
carrying live animals and grains. Consultations requested on 
25/09/1998 (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 consultations 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/W/280/Rev.2  
 
- 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 black 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/W/280/Rev.2  
 
- 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 
required. (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/W/280/Rev.2  
 
- 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/W/280/Rev.2  
 
- 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 
composed. 
* Whilst the DSU consultations on this case are pending, the Commi ttee was notified that the specific trade concern itself had been resolved. 
** DS320, 321: Neither of these two requests for consultations clai med violation of the SPS Agreement, however, one of the issu es of concern regarded the EC implementation of 
the rulings in WT/DS26 and WT/DS48; hence, the SPS Agreement was relevant to these disputes. 
__________