WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION   
G/SPS/GEN/1097 
24 June 2011  
 
(11-3117) 
Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures  
  
 
UPDATE ON THE "MENTORING" SYSTEM OF ASSISTANCE RELATING TO  
THE TRANSPARENCY PROVISIONS OF THE SPS AGREEMENT 
 
Note by the Secretariat
1 
 
 
1. As Members may recall, the Secretariat launched a mentoring mechanism in 2008 
(G/SPS/W/217).  Such a mechanism was origina lly proposed by New Zealand (G/SPS/W/214) and 
strongly supported by the SPS Committee during the Workshop on Transparency held in October 2007. 
2. The objective of this mechanism is to assist  developing country Members in implementing 
and benefitting from the transparency provisions of the SPS Agreement.  It involves the development 
of an ad hoc and informal supportive relati onship between individua ls who have similar 
responsibilities as Enquiry Points and/or Notificatio n Authorities.  It does not imply any commitment 
to provide financial or other types of assistance, nor is it meant to replace other forms of technical 
assistance. 
3. The Secretariat has received a total of 19 mentor ing requests and nine mentoring offers.  The 
requests are typically for assistance in submitti ng notifications, managing and following up on 
incoming notifications, and raising awareness at th e national level.  In light of the gap between 
requests and offers, we would encourage inter ested Members to offer assistance as mentors.  
Mentoring entails responding to qu estions, providing advice and sharing experiences with officials 
with similar responsibilities. 
4. The Secretariat is mandated to provide an annual update to the SPS Committee on the 
functioning of the mentoring mechanism, based on mentoring requests and offers received, and on 
responses to a questionnaire by Members participating in the procedure.  The Secretariat circulated a 
questionnaire late in 2010 to those already participa ting in the mechanism to get their feedback on the 
functioning of their mentoring arrangements.  We received nine replies.  The main points that emerged are the following: 
(a) All respondents believe in the usefulness and effectiveness of the mentoring system, 
although the actual success of the mech anism is dependent on the proactive 
participation of both sides in the exercise. 
(b) The mentor-mentee pairs have had differing experiences with respect to the intensity 
of communication, although most have only communicated once every three to six months or less.  Most have maintained communication through em ail, although some 
have met face-to-face in the margins of the SPS Committee or through on-site visits.  
For some others, the process has not really started yet and this has been primarily 
attributed to a lack of mutual participation in the process. 
                                                      
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. G/SPS/GEN/1097 
Page 2  
 
   
(c) Other difficulties encountered included tec hnical problems, such as emails bouncing 
back, as well as internal procedural requirements and staff turnover. 
(d) Lessons learned and recommendations in cluded the need for setting concrete 
objectives and timetables and for Members receiving mentoring to be more proactive 
in identifying their needs. 
(e) Some Members suggested that the Secretariat take a more active role in facilitating 
the mentoring process by formulating a set of guidelines for the process as well following up on the progress of the mentori ng relationship.  Another suggestion was 
for Members involved in mentoring to provi de written accounts of their experiences 
to share in a report provided to the Committee. 
5. We would also like to inform those Members wh ich have expressed an interest in receiving 
mentoring assistance that we will keep them informed of developments.  G/SPS/GEN/1097 
 Page 3 
 
 
  ATTACHMENT 
 
 
Mentoring Pairs from Round I: 
 
Mentee Mentor 
1. Ghana Switzerland  
2. Mozambique Switzerland  
3. Malawi New Zealand  
4. Ukraine New Zealand  
5. Armenia New Zealand  
6. Dominica United States  
7. Saudi Arabia United States  
8. Swaziland United States  
9. Peru Argentina 
10. Costa Rica Colombia 
11. Belize Chile 
 
Participants which responded to the questionnaire sent in 2008:   Argentina, Chile, Costa Rica, 
Dominica, Malawi, New Zealand and Saudi Arabia.   
Mentoring Pairs from Round II: 
  
Mentee Mentor 
12. Kenya EU 
13. Senegal EU 
14. UAE China 
15. Pakistan China 
16. Mauritius Australia 
17. Georgia New Zealand 
18. Djibouti New Zealand 
19. Bangladesh New Zealand 
 
Participants which responded to the questionnaire sent in 2010:   Senegal, Pakistan, Switzerland, 
Mauritius, Malawi, European Union, Colombia, Australia and Argentina. 
 
__________