G/SPS/GEN/1374  
 
23 October 2014  
(14-6150)  Page: 1/2  
Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures  Original: English  
 
ACTIONS REGARDING SPS-RELATED PRIVATE STANDARDS 
COMMUNICATION FROM BELIZE 
The following communication, received on 17 Octobe r 2014, is being circulated at the request of 
the delegation of Belize. 
_______________ 
 
1  ACTIONS 6-12 
1.1.  Belize encourages Members to see the merits that lie in the discussing actions six (6) to 
twelve (12) from document G/SPS/W/256. 
1.2.  Members are reminded that the working group that proposed these actions did not prepare 
the actions in a chronological order; and secondly, at no point was there any additional work 
conducted to determine the specific linkages between the proposed actions. 
1.3.  In previous submissions from Belize, awareness was raised on how some of the actions can 
be linked inclusive of how others could be further enhanced if merged. 
1.4.   Actions 6-12 should not be overlooked given the critical role they would play in helping not 
only in understanding this agenda item better but also in gaining information on some practical 
approaches that could be taken in addressing the impact that SPS-related private standards are 
having on international trade. Belize continues to support the idea of the establishment of a working group that could further work on these proposed actions. 
2  ANY OTHER INFORMATION ON SPS-RELATED PRIVATE STANDARDS 
2.1.  In our document G/SPS/GEN/1240 circulated on 27 March 2013, Belize drew Members' 
attention to the impact of the proliferation of SPS-related private standards. In addition we noted that the requirements applied by these SPS-relate d private standard setting entities go beyond 
those prescribed by governments and the internatio nal standard setting bodies. We reiterated that 
in so doing, they call into question the re levance of both competent authorities and the 
international standard setting bodies particularly as it is their requirements that determine market 
access. 
2.2.  The Food Safety Department in Belize conducted a workshop from 11 to 15 August 2014 on 
good agricultural practices. The objective was to bring in personnel from both the public and private sector to participate in the train-the-trainers activities. It was implemented under the 
current Agricultural Services Project funded by the Inter-American Development Bank and 
conducted in collaboration with a team of expert s from the Joint Institute of Food Security and 
Nutrition of the United States of America. During the five-day workshop, a special session was 
dedicated to the sharing of experiences in market  access and some challenges faced by the private 
sector. 
2.3.  All expressed their concern on the increa sing costs associated with certification; the 
difficulties with different schemes having conflicting requirements, the increasing number of audits 
since each buyer conducts his own verification in addition to the third party certifying entity and the competent authority of the importing country. Many indicated that at this rate, the viability of their business is questionable. G/SPS/GEN/1374 
 
- 2 - 
 
  2.4.  Amidst these discussions, the private sector  also questioned the relevance of the national 
competent authority with responsibility for food safety at their facilities, since, according to them, the certification issued by government played no role whatsoever, in several markets, on whether 
their product was to gain market access. Specific examples were then provided and for the 
purposes of this report the names of the trading partners will not be included; rather only a 
reflection of the critical concerns associated with the certification processes associated with SPS-related private standards. 
2.5.  One company exporting to a particular trading partner indicated that for their product to gain 
access into the next country, they only need to  comply with the buyer's requirements for food 
safety. Another exporter explained that he is audi ted by both the buyers and competent authority. 
The buyer does not specifically request an attestation from the competent authority, however, 
because the importing country's competent authority will not allow the consignment unless the 
commodity is certified by the competent authority of the exporting country, then in addition to certification by the competent authority in th e exporting country, the company also needs to 
comply with certification requirements of buyer. 
2.6.  The third scenario that was shared had to do  with certain commodities which fall solely under 
the jurisdiction of the private sector. The import ing country's competent authority does not require 
any attestation from the competent authority of the exporting country. In those countries, the only 
certification that is recognized is the one issued by the third party certification entities and the buyers.  
2.7.  Belize views this evolution in certification requirements for products, particularly those which 
fall under the category of food safety, with grave concern, since governments are the ones 
responsible for setting SPS measures. Members are encouraged to be guided by the standards set 
by the international standard setting bodies, in this case, given that it has to do with food safety, 
standards set by Codex, where these exist. 
2.8.  It is the responsibility of governments to set sanitary and phytosanitary measures and we do 
not agree that the private sector should be charge d with the responsibility of setting a country's 
appropriate level of protection. Given this, we  believe that the Sanitary and Phytosanitary 
Committee has a vital role to play in addressing the issues related to the impact of SPS-related 
private standards and their impact on international trade and efforts should be taken to advance work on this agenda item. 
 
__________