G/SPS/GEN/1588  
 
31 October  2017 
(17-5901) Page: 1/2 
Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures  Original: English  
 
 
UPDATE ON OECD ACTIV ITIES OF INTEREST TO  THE SPS COMMITTEE  
COMMUNICATION FROM T HE OECD  
The followi ng communication, received on 30 October  2017, is being circulated at the request of 
the OECD . 
_______________  
 
 
RECENT WORK ON TRADE -RELATED INTERNATIONA L REGULATORY CO -OPERAT ION BY 
THE OECD TRADE COMMI TTEE  
1.  Building on OECD's Council Recommendation on Regulatory Policy and Governance (OECD, 
2012) an d complementing recent work in trade -related IRC undertaken by the OECD Trade 
Committee (notably von Lampe et al., 2016), the OECD Regulatory Policy Committee (see for 
instance OECD, 2013; Basedow and Kauffmann, 2016; Correia de Brito et al., 2016), and jo int 
work by the two Committees (OECD, 2017a), the OECD has finalized an analysis of several 
IRC Case Studies and made it available online (OECD, 2017b).  
2.  The report provides an empirical analysis across 12 different IRC initiatives, covering various 
sectors  (including wine, organic products, seeds, agricultural products subject to pesticides 
regulation, household appliances and vehicles) and focusing o n different IRC mechanisms. 
The analysis is based on a statistical evaluation of data provided by participat ing countries thro ugh 
a structured questionnaire.  
3.  Key message s of the report include:  
 Prior to engaging in co -operative initiatives, trade costs and barriers related to regulatory 
heterogeneity are frequently perceived as very significant. This is particul arly true for trade 
in organic food products and agricultural products subject to pesticide residue regulation. 
Perceptions of the significance of trade costs also differ, however, across reporting 
countries. As a consequence, IRC approaches need to be spe cifically tailored to the sector 
in questio n and the problems traders face;  
 Trade costs are not systematically quantified. Notably in the context of more formalised 
and long -standing co -operation initiative, a quantitative assessment of trade costs is rare ly 
undertaken. Similarly, countries often do not assess the trade facilitating effects of the IRC 
outcomes achieved. While trade facilitating is often just one of several objectives for co -
operation, increasing awareness of the importance of assessing trad e costs in detail and an 
improved availability of tools for such assessment may have contributed to a greater focus 
on quantifying trade costs and the trade facilitating effects  in more recent IRC initiatives;  
 Findings suggest that IRC often can reduce cos ts and burdens for international trade. 
Among the mechanisms examined, mutual equivalence of rules and mutual recognition of 
conformity assessment procedures are reported particularly frequently by participa ting 
countries as cost -reducing;  
 As a specific ca se, the study finds that the OECD Seeds Schemes have distinct and positive 
effects on both volumes and values of traded seed. Accession to one of the schemes is 
shown to increase the acceding country’s seed exports by more than 8% and also raises 
the avera ge unit value of its exports. This positive trade effect is further increased if the 
importing country is a member of the same scheme. Some trade diversion effects are 
identified as well.  G/SPS/GEN/1588  
 
- 2 - 
 
  4.  The report is accessible at  
http://www.oecd.org/officialdocuments/publicdisplaydocumentpdf/?cote=TAD/TC/WP(2016)17/FIN
AL&docLanguage=En . 
References:  
 Basedow, R. a nd C. Kauffmann (2016), "International Trade and Good Regulatory Practices: 
Assessing The Trade Impacts of Regulation", OECD Regulatory Policy Working Papers , No. 4, 
OECD Publishing, Paris, http://d x.doi.org/10.1787/5jlv59hdgtf5 -en. 
 Correia de Brito, A., C. Kauffmann and J. Pelkmans (2016), "The contribution of mutual 
recognition to international regulatory co -operation ", OECD Regulatory Policy Working Papers , 
No. 2, OECD Publishing, Paris, http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/5jm56fqsfxmx -en. 
 OECD (forthcoming), "Trade Costs in Regulatory Co -operation: Findings From Case Studies". 
Publication expected in Q3 2017.  
 OECD (2017a), International Regula tory Co -operation and Trade: Understanding the Trade 
Costs of Regulatory Divergence and the Remedies , OECD Publishing, Paris, 
http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264275942 -en. 
 OECD (2017b). Trade Costs i n Regulatory Co -operation: Findings from Case Studies , OECD 
Publishing,  Paris, 
http://www.oecd.org/officialdocuments/publicdisplaydo cumentpdf/?cote=TAD/TC/WP(2016)17
/FINAL&docLanguage=En . 
 OECD (2013), International Regulatory Co -operation: Addressing Global Challenges , OECD 
Publishing, Paris, http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/978926420 0463-en. 
 OECD (2012), Recommendation of the Council on Regulatory Policy and Governance , 
http://www.oecd.org/governance/regulatory -policy/49990817.pdf . 
 von Lampe, M., K. Deco ninck and V. Bastien (2016), "Trade -Related International Regulatory 
Co-operation: A Theoretical Framework", OECD Trade Policy Papers , No. 195, OECD 
Publishing, Paris, http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/3fbf60b1 -en. 
Contact:  
Martin von Lampe (E -mail: martin.vonlampe@oecd.org ) 
 
 
__________