WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  G/SPS/GEN/568 
17 June 2005 
 
 (05-2574) 
Committee on Sanitary a nd Phytosanitary Measures Original:   English 
  
 
  
REGIONALIZATION 
 
Communication from the International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC)
 
 
 
 The following communication, dated 13 June 2005,  is being circulated at the request of the 
IPPC.  
 It reproduces an excerpt from the Report of  the Seventh Commission on Phytosanitary 
Measures (ICPM) recording the discussion and decisi ons taken on regionalizati on, and the report of 
the open-ended Working Group on Regionalization to  the Seventh ICPM (circulated as Appendix XII 
of the Report). 
_______________ 
 G/SPS/GEN/568 
Page 2  
 
 REPORT  
 
 
  
 
 
Seventh Interim 
Commission on Phytosanitary Measures
 
 
 
(excerpts) 
   
 
    
 
    
 
     
 Food and Agriculture Organization of the United NationsRome, Italy, 
4-7 April  
2005   G/SPS/GEN/568 
 Page 3 
 
 
 ICPM-7 (2005) / REPORT 
 
 
7.4  Regionalization 
 82. The Secretariat introduced the paper on regionalization
21 and emphasized that the issue had 
been the subject of discussion at the WTO-SPS Committ ee.  The issue had been brought up in relation 
to Article 6 of the SPS-Agreement and had been  an agenda item of the SPS Committee at every 
meeting since the twenty-sixth session in April 2 003.  It was noted that the annex to the paper 
contained information concerning the relevant articles of the IPPC a nd the relevant standards.  As 
agreed in the SPTA, the Secretariat had invite d representatives from the World Organization for 
Animal Health (OIE) and SPS Secretariats to the meeting.  The OIE had provided a paper on application of the concepts of zoning and compartmentalization in OIE standards.
22  
 83. The WTO representative introduced a document
23 outlining discussions on regionalization in 
the SPS Committee.  The major issues discussed at  the SPS Committee in relation to Article 6 
included:  
• procedures and standards for the recognition of pest free areas and areas of low pest 
prevalence including the elevated costs of establishing and maintaining these; 
• the international recognition of pest free areas and areas of low pest prevalence for 
specific pests; 
• the timeliness and lengthy administrative pro cedures for bilateral recognition of pest free 
areas and areas of low pest prevalence. 
 
84. It was noted that the SPS Committee had not reached a consensus on the way forward in 
addressing issues of regionalization.  While some SPS Committee member s wished to adopt 
administrative guidelines that included timeframes, ot hers had indicated that it should be the mandate 
of relevant international sta ndard-setting bodies to address these issues.  Furthermore the WTO 
representative emphasized that the appropriate divi sion of labour between the standard-setting bodies 
on issues of regionalization should be defined.  He acknowledged the efforts made by the ICPM on 
the issue of regionalization, including work on the draft ISPM on areas of low pest prevalence. 
 85. Some members expressed their concern on regulating the timeframe on administrative 
procedures for bilateral recognition as this would create new obligations for members of the WTO-
SPS and the IPPC.  86. An open-ended working group was convened.  Its report is attached as Appendix XII. 
 
87. The ICPM: 
 1. Endorsed  the report of the working group. 
2. Decided  that a concept standard "Guidelines for th e recognition of the establishment of pest 
free areas and area of low pest prevalence" be urge ntly developed.  The I SPM would provide general 
guidance on the recognition process but would not pr ovide timelines.  The specification for the ISPM 
would be considered by the Standards Committee at its next session. 
3. Welcomed  the offer of the representative of Brazil and New Zealand to draft the specification 
for the standard. 
                                                     
 
21 ICPM 2005/8 
22 ICPM 2005/INF11 
23 ICPM 2005/CRP15 G/SPS/GEN/568 
Page 4  
 
 4. Recognized  the need for further pest specific standa rds for pest free areas and areas of low 
pest prevalence. 
5. Decided  that a feasibility study be undertaken on the international recognition of pest free 
areas, which would take into account legal, techni cal and economical factors and assess feasibility and 
sustainability of such system.  A proposal for th e composition of a working group and its terms of 
reference would be prepared by the Focus Group at its meeting in June/July 2005 for submission, 
through the SPTA [the informal working group on stra tegic planning and technical assistance], to the 
next session of the ICPM. 
6. Requested  that the Secretary of the IPPC provide the report of the open-ended working group 
on regionalization of ICMP-7 and the decision to the SPS Secretariat and SPS Committee in order to 
inform the SPS Committee of the IPPC activities in relation to regionalization at its next session.  G/SPS/GEN/568 
 Page 5 
 
 
 ICPM-7 (2005) / REPORT       APPENDIX XII 
 
 
REPORT OF THE OPEN-ENDED WORKING GROUP 
ON REGIONALIZATION 
(6 April 2005) 
 
1. The working group recognized that trad e facilitation was a major objective for the 
establishment of pest free areas and areas of low p est prevalence.  The establishment and maintenance 
of such areas was resource intensive and therefor e early recognition of such areas by trade partners 
was of major importance. 
 2. The working group was informed by the re presentative of the WTO of the discussions on the 
issue of regionalization in the SPS Committee.  It ag reed that overlap in activ ities of the IPPC and the 
SPS Committee should be avoided, and that activities of  the IPPC would be without prejudice to work 
in the SPS Committee. 
 3. The working group considered the requirements for further general guidance on regionalization taking into account the existing ISPMs that covered the subject.  It concluded that a 
concept standard "Guidelines for the recognition of the establishment of pest free areas and areas of 
low pest prevalence" was urgently required.  Th is standard would provide  general guidance on the 
recognition process but would not provide timelines.  The representatives of Brazil and New Zealand 
volunteered to draft specifications for the guideline for consideration by the Standards Committee at 
its next session.   4. Concerning pest-specific standards for pest fre e areas and areas of low pest prevalence, the 
working group agreed there was a need for additiona l standards covering these subjects.  It was noted 
that work was underway in relation to pest free areas and areas of low pest prevalence through the 
Technical Panel on Fruit Flies.  The working group also noted that timelines based on technical considerations may be an integral part of such specific standards.  5.  Additional topics for specific standards for pest free areas and areas of low pest prevalence 
should be submitted through the normal topics and priorities procedure.  
 6. Concerning Article VII.2h of the Convention that " Contracting parties shall, as conditions 
change, and as new facts become available, en sure that phytosanitary measures are promptly 
modified or removed if found to be unnecessary ", which is directly related to undue delay and 
timelines for action, the working group concluded that this sub-article could not be clarified further in 
relation to regionalization until the concept st andard "Guidelines for the recognition of the 
establishment of pest free areas and areas of low pest prevalence" was concluded.  7. Concerning an international system for the r ecognition of pest free areas, the working group 
recognized the potential benefits of such a system , particularly for developing countries.  Some 
Members expressed concern about the complexity of such a system and the potential impact on 
Secretariat resources.  It was recognized that a system  could only be considered if it were limited to a 
small number of pests and when specific standard s for these pests were developed.  The working 
group recommended that a feasibility study be undert aken.  In the study, legal, technical and 
economical factors should be taken into account to assess feasibility and sustainability.  The working 
group recommended that the composition of the working group and its terms of reference be 
developed by the Focus Group at its meeting in June/July 2005 for s ubmission, through the SPTA [the 
informal working group on strategic planning and t echnical assistance], to the next session of the 
ICPM.  G/SPS/GEN/568 
Page 6  
 
 Draft decision for the ICPM 
 
1. Endorsed  the report of the working group. 
2. Decided  that a concept standard "Guidelines for th e recognition of the establishment of pest 
free areas and areas of low pest prevalence" be urgently developed.  This ISPM would provide 
general guidance on the recognition pr ocess but would not provide timelines.  The specification of the 
ISPM be considered by the Standards Committee at its next session. 
3. Welcomed  the offer of the representatives of Brazil and New Zealand to draft the specification 
for the standard. 
4. Recognized  the need for further pest specific standa rds for pest free areas and areas of low 
pest prevalence. 
5. Decided  that that a feasibility study be undertaken  on the international recognition of pest free 
areas, which would take into account legal, techni cal and economical factors and assess feasibility and 
sustainability of such system.  A proposal for th e composition of a working group and its terms of 
reference would be prepared by the Focus Group at its meeting in June/July 2005 for submission, 
through the SPTA, to the next session of the ICPM. 
6. Requested  that the Secretary of the IPPC provides the report of the open-ended working group 
on regionalization of ICMP-7 and this decision to the SPS Secretariat and SPS Committee to inform 
the SPS Committee of the IPPC activities in relation to regionalization at its next session.   
__________