WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  G/SPS/GEN/887/Rev.1 
6 February 2009 
 (09-0568) 
Committee on Sanitary a nd Phytosanitary Measures  
  
 
REVIEW OF THE OPERATION AND IMPLEMENTATION 
OF THE SPS AGREEMENT 
 
BACKGROUND DOCUMENT 
 
Note by the Secretariat
1 
 
Revision  
  I. INTRODUCTION 
1. Article 12.7 of the Agreement on the Applica tion of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures 
("the Agreement") provides that "the Committee shal l 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 
2. At the Fourth Session of the Ministerial Conf erence, Ministers instructed the Committee to 
review the operation and implementation of the Ag reement at least once every four years.  The 
Second Review of the Agreement was completed in July 2005.3  At its October 2008 meeting, the 
Committee adopted a procedure and timetable to undertake the Third Review of the Agreement.4  This 
revision of the background document includ es written comments received from Members by 
28 November 2008, in accordance with the agre ed timetable.  The revision also updates the 
background document with information through to the end of 2008.  
3. In both the First and Second Reviews, the Committee discussions focused on implementation 
and operation issues related to: 
• Consistency (Article 5.5); 
• Equivalence (Article 4); 
• Transparency (Article 7 and Annex B); 
• Monitoring the use of international standards (Article 3.5 and 12.4); 
• Technical assistance and training activities (Article 9); 
• Special and differential treatment (Article 10); 
• Regionalization (Article 6); 
                                                      
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/W/228. G/SPS/GEN/887/Rev.1 
Page 2  
 
  • Monitoring Implementation of the Agreemen t (Articles 12.1 and 12.2) – Specific trade 
concerns; 
• Cooperation with Codex Alimenta rius, World Organization for Animal Health (OIE), and 
the International Plant Protection C onvention (IPPC) (Article 12.3);  and 
• Dispute settlement activities (Article 11). 
4. Although the main focus and discussions were on the issues listed above, in the Second 
Review, the Committee also put for c onsideration some additional issues: 
• Clarification of definitions of terms; 
• Clarification of the relationship between  certain Articles of the SPS Agreement; 
• Undue delays; 
• Good regulatory practice;  and 
• Control, Inspection and Approval Pr ocedures (Article 8 and Annex C). 
5. Appendix A of this document provides a summary  of Committee activities since the Second 
Review in 2005.  Appendix B provides informati on about SPS-related dispute settlement activities.  
Appendix C provides a list of documents submitted by Members since the Second Review of the 
Agreement relevant to the various issu es raised in this Background Paper. 
II. CONSISTENCY (ARTICLE 5.5) 
6. Efforts and deliberations by the Committee to develop guidelines for consistency began 
during the Committee's first meeting in March 199 5 and progressed through informal and formal 
meetings.  During these discussions, Members raised conceptual issues related to the links between 
appropriate level of protection, measures and risk assessment. 
7. In the Second Review of the Agreement in  2005 ("the 2005 Review"), the Committee noted 
that it should undertake another review of the ope ration of the guidelines to further the practical 
implementation of Article 5.5 whenever Members id entified the need, and in any case not later than 
December 2008.  Members were encouraged to provi de information regarding their experiences in the 
implementation of Article 5.5 and in the use of the guidelines (G/SPS/15). 
8. To date no Member has suggested a need to  modify these guidelines.  Although there is no 
standing agenda item regarding Article 5.5, there is opportunity for Members to provide information 
regarding their experiences in this regard under the Agenda Item "Activities of Members".  No 
Member has provided any such information since June 2005. 
9. Some Members have suggested, however, that the Committee should solicit information from 
Members in order to determine the extent to whic h these guidelines, as well as others adopted by the 
Committee, are actually being implemented by Members. 
III. EQUIVALENCE (ARTICLE 4) 
10. In the 2005 Review, the Committee encouraged Members to provide information regarding 
their experiences in the implementation of Article 4 and in the use of the guidance developed by the 
Committee (G/SPS/19/Rev.2).  In particular, Member s were encouraged to notify any agreements 
reached on the recognition of equivalence.  Finally,  the relevant international organizations were 
invited to keep the Committee info rmed of any work they undertook with regard to the recognition of 
equivalence.  G/SPS/GEN/887/Rev.1 
 Page 3 
 
 
  11. Equivalence is a standing agenda item for regul ar meetings of the Committee.  At each 
meeting, Members are invited to report on their ex periences regarding equivalence, and the relevant 
international organizations are invited to provide information.  The following Members provided 
information under this agenda item:  Brazil a nd Chile (June 2005), Egypt (March 2006) and the 
United States (June 2007).  On 9 August 2007, Panama submitte d the first notification on a 
recognition of equivalence (G/SPS/N/EQV/PAN/1).  A second notification of  the recognition of 
equivalence of SPS measures was submitted to th e Committee in 2008 by the Dominican Republic 
(G/SPS/N/EQV/DOM/1). 
12. The Secretariat noted that Members' officials often made reference informally to various 
equivalence agreements with trading partners, but  these had not been notified to the SPS Committee.  
Some Members agreed that equivalence agreements did exist, and that the guidance developed by the 
Committee was being used.  They suggested that one reason Members did not notify these agreements 
was to avoid other exporters benefiting from the arrangements.  Furthermore, in many cases the 
notion of equivalence was applied withou t any formal recognition of equivalence per se , or without 
calling the bilateral arrangements "equivalence".  They  agreed, however, that it would be useful for 
Members to provide information regard ing their experiences in this area. 
13. The international standard-setting organizations have developed guidance in this area, and the 
Codex, IPPC and/or OIE have provided informa tion on equivalence issues at each meeting of the 
Committee since June 2005.  The Codex Alimentari us Commission has adopted Principles for the 
development of equivalence agreem ents regarding food import and export inspection and certification 
systems, and Guidelines on the judgement  of equivalence of such systems.5  The OIE has developed 
guidelines for reaching a judgement of the equivalence of sanitary measures.6  At the October 2008 
meeting of the Committee, the OIE elaborated on a new approach whereby two ad hoc groups were 
analyzing various chapters in the terrestrial and aqua tic animal health codes, and noted that it would 
keep the Committee informed of th e work of those ad hoc groups.  The IPPC adopted in 2005 a 
standard with guidelines for determination and r ecognition of equivalence of phytosanitary measures 
(ISPM 24).  In addition, ISPM 1, which also incl udes principles on equivalence, was revised in 2006.7 
IV. TRANSPARENCY (ARTICLE 7 AND ANNEX B) 
14. In the 2005 Review, the Committee:  (i) encourag ed Members to ensure full implementation 
of the transparency provisions of the SPS Agreemen t;  (ii) asked that developing country Members 
clearly identify specific problems faced in im plementing the transparency provisions of the 
Agreement;  and (iii) asked that assistance be pr ovided to least-developed and developing country 
Members in order to enable them to fully implemen t the transparency provisions and to make use of 
the benefits associated with transparency.  R ecognizing that the recommended procedures established 
by the Committee (G/SPS/7/Rev.2), while not crea ting legal obligations, co uld facilitate Members' 
implementation of the provisions of the SPS Agreem ent, the Committee agreed to consider whether 
further recommendations could be beneficial. 
15. The Secretariat organized a Workshop on Transp arency in October 2007.  This was the third 
SPS workshop on transparency organized by the WTO Secretariat, the first two having been held in 
1999 and 2003.  Various funding arrangements made  it possible for a large number of developing 
country and LDC participants to attend.  The objectives of the workshop were to enhance the 
implementation of transparency obligations and to identify best practices for drawing benefits from a 
transparent system. 
                                                      
5 http://www.Codexalimentarius.net/download/standards/10047/CXG_053e.pdf  
6 http://www.oie.int/eng/normes/en_mcode-2004.htm  
7https://www.ippc.int/servlet/Bin aryDownloaderServlet/124047_200 7_ISPMs_book_Engl.doc?filenam
e=1187683730555_ISPMs_1to29_2007_En_with_convention.doc&refID=124047  G/SPS/GEN/887/Rev.1 
Page 4  
 
  16. The main recommendations from the Workshop involved the following six issues:  revision of 
the Recommended Transparency Procedures containe d in G/SPS/7/Rev.2;  training and dissemination 
on the SPS Information Management System ( SPS IMS) as well as other sources of SPS-related 
information;  regular updates on the level of implem entation of transparency provisions;  explanatory 
documents on timeframes related to transparency obligations and on benefits  of the SPS Agreement;  
establishment of a mentoring mechanism betwee n officials responsible for implementing the 
transparency provisions in different Members;  a nd development of a practical procedural manual.  
Significant progress has been made with respect to all six recommendations. 
17. On 30 May 2008, the Committee adopted revised  recommended procedures for transparency 
(G/SPS/7/Rev.3).  The new procedures, inter alia , clarify the definition of the comment period, 
encourage the notification of measures conforming to  international standards, and provide links for 
access to full texts of regulations and their transla tions.  The new transparency procedures, including 
the use of the new notification formats,  took effect  on 1 December 2008. 
18. To facilitate Members' management of the la rge volume of SPS-related information, the 
Secretariat regularly produces summary documents containing relevant SP S-related information, 
including monthly summaries of notifications
8 received by the Secretariat and an annual listing of all 
SPS documents.9  Links to these documents can be found on the SPS web page. 
19. The Secretariat has also  developed the new SPS Information Management System (SPS 
IMS), the public version of which was launc hed and presented on 15 October 2007 during the 
Transparency Workshop.10  The system includes the most recent information on SPS notifications as 
well as Committee documents, specific trade concerns  and Members' National Enquiry Points and 
Notifications Authorities.  It facilitates the condu ct of searches accordi ng to specific needs and 
interests (product codes, geographic groups, etc. an d also the preparation of reports and summaries 
which can be shared with interested stakeholders .  The website of the SPSIMS is constantly updated 
with the latest contact details on Members' Enqui ry Points and National Notification Authorities. 
20. The WTO Secretariat has provided demonstration sessions on the SPS IMS during the SPS 
Committee meetings and during its technical assistan ce programmes.  It has also responded to ad hoc 
requests from Members and other interested parties for assistance. 
21. With respect to the recommendation on regular  updates on the level of implementation of 
transparency provisions, the Secretariat has begun to  provide annual updates.  In October 2007, the 
Secretariat circulated a first background note (G /SPS/GEN/804) providing an overview regarding the 
level of implementation of the transparency provis ions of the SPS Agreement.  An updated version of 
this note was circulated as G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 in  October 2008.  The development of the SPS 
IMS facilitates the compilation and analysis of data related to the implementation of the transparency 
provisions.  Furthermore, Members' implementa tion of the new recommendations on transparency 
should result in substantially enhanced information. 
22. Managing information on transparency remain s, however, challenging for many developing 
country Members who struggle with implementing basi c obligations with respect to the transparency 
provisions of the SPS Agreement.  Many developing  country Members have flagged their need for 
assistance and support to resolve their individual tr ansparency difficulties, for example with the 
process of sending notifications to the WTO.  Othe r difficulties faced by developing country Members 
relate to the operation of their SPS National Notifi cation Authority and their National Enquiry Point. 
                                                      
8 For example, see documents G/SPS/GEN/820, 827, 84 0, 842, 850, 867, 869, 873, and 886 for 2008 
notification summaries. 
9 G/SPS/GEN/897 for 2008. 
10 http://spsims.wto.org/   G/SPS/GEN/887/Rev.1 
 Page 5 
 
 
  23. In October 2007, New Zealand proposed that  these concerns be addressed through the 
establishment of an informal mentoring mechanism f acilitated by the Secretariat.  The proposal from 
New Zealand became one of the Committee' s recommendations from the 2007 Workshop on 
Transparency.  As a follow up, the Secretariat deve loped a procedure for a mentoring mechanism  to 
assist officials responsible for transparency in developing country Members, and a number of 
Members have already been "matched" to pr ovide and receive guidance when requested.11 
24. In addition, New Zealand work ed with the Secretariat, along with contributions from 
Australia and a number of other Members,  to develop a procedural manual for the operation of 
Enquiry Points and National Notification Authoritie s.  This Transparency Manual reflects the new 
transparency procedures and will replace the 2002 handbook on "How to Apply the Transparency 
Provisions of the SPS Agreement".12 
25. As of 31 December 2008, Members have subm itted 6,648 regular notifications and 1,086 
emergency notifications (plus re lated addenda and corrigenda).  The Committee has also adopted a 
special format and recommended procedures for the no tification of determination of the recognition of 
equivalence of sanitary or phytosanitary measures, now included in the new transparency procedures.  
Furthermore, the Secretariat has established a mech anism for Members to inform each other of the 
availability of translations of notified measures into  one of the official languages of the WTO.  These 
are submitted in the form of supplemental notifi cations.  As of 31 Decem ber 2008, two equivalence 
and 12 supplemental notifications have been circulated. 
26. Out of the 153 WTO Members, 100 (70 per cent) have to date submitted at least one 
notification to the WTO.  Excluding EC member States,  44 developing countries of which 23 are 
Least Developed countries ("LDCs"), have  not yet submitted any notification. 
27. As can be seen in Figure 1, the share of notifications submitted by developed country 
Members reaches 55 per cent while the share of those submitted by developing country Members 
(excluding LDCs) is 44 per cent.13  A very small share comes from LDCs.  Still, there has been a 
steady increase in notifications from developing country Members over the years. 
Figure 1 
 
                                                      
11 G/SPS/W/217. 
12 The Manual will be made available to Members in early 2009. 
13 The categories of level of development rely on WTO working definitions as identified in the 
Integrated Database (IDB ) for analytical purposes. Development Status of Notifying Members 
as of 31 December 2008
55.20%  44.44%  0.37%
Developed Developing Least DevelopedG/SPS/GEN/887/Rev.1 
Page 6  
 
  28. Looking at the geographic regions from which the notifications originate, Figure 2 shows that 
the majority of notifications come from North Amer ica, followed by Asia, and then South and Central 
America and the Caribbean.
14 
Figure 2  
 Notifications by Geographical Region
EuropeAsia
AfricaMiddle East
CISSA, CA and 
the CaribbeanNA
05001000150020002500300035004000
 
29. Under the SPS Agreement, Members are required to  notify both an Enquiry Point to provide 
answers to all reasonable questions from interested  Members and a National Notification Authority to 
implement the notification procedures detailed in the Agreement.  Among the 153 WTO Members,  
134 Members have, as of January 2009, designated a "N otification Authority".  Those which have not 
yet done so include  12 LDCs and seven developing  country Members.  As of October 2008, of the 
153 WTO Members,  143 have provided the WTO with the contact information of their Enquiry Point.  Those which have not yet done so include nine LDCs and one developing country.
15 
30. The Secretariat regularly updates documents c ontaining the contact information of National 
Enquiry Points and of National Notification Author ities.  In addition, regularly updated lists are 
available from the SPS IMS and from the SPS  gateway on the WTO web page. 
31. In 2005, the Committee agreed to extend the Pr ocedure to Enhance the Transparency of 
Special and Differential Treatment adopted in October 200416, and Members were invited to share 
with the Committee their experiences under this pr ocedure.  See Section VII for more details. 
V. MONITORING THE USE OF INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS (ARTICLES 3.5 
AND 12.4) 
32. In the 2005 Review, the Committee noted that it should continue to monitor the use of 
international standards at each of its regular meetings. 
                                                      
14 The geographical groupings used rely on WTO working definitions as identified in the Integrated 
Database (IDB) for analytical purposes.  The same groupings are used in the WTO Annual Reports. 
15 The most recent Enquiry Point contact information is contained in G/SPS/ENQ/24 , and the most 
recent National Notification Authority co ntact information is contained in G/SPS/NNA/14 . 
16 G/SPS/33 and G/SPS/33/Add.1.  G/SPS/GEN/887/Rev.1 
 Page 7 
 
 
  33. The monitoring of the use of international st andards is a standing item on the agenda of 
regular Committee meetings, and in accordance with  the agreed procedure (G/SPS/11/Rev.1), the 
Committee has produced annual reports relating to  the process of monitoring international 
harmonization.17 
34. In 2006, the Committee reviewed the operati on of the provisional procedure based on a 
document prepared by the Secretariat (G/SPS/ W/200).  The Committee decided to extend the 
provisional procedure indefinitely.  The Committee al so decided that it will review the operation of 
the provisional procedure as an integral part of its periodic Review of the Operation and Implementation of the Agreement under Article 12.7, with a view to deciding whether to continue 
with the same procedure, amend it or develop a nother one.  The Committee furthermore encouraged 
Members to make use of this procedure to address  their concerns regarding specific international 
standards or the need for such st andards.  The decision of the Committee was subsequently circulated 
as G/SPS/40. 
35. This Review thus provides the opportunity fo r the Committee to examine the monitoring 
procedure.  In 2008, the Committee agreed to cons ider the monitoring procedure in light of the 
information gained from notifications under the new notification procedure and the implementation of 
the IPPC mechanism.  Members were also encour aged to provide inform ation on obstacles they 
encountered when exporting, not just on national measures applied to imports. 
36. The standard-setting bodies have promptly addressed the concerns raised by Members 
through this procedure in their respective compet ent bodies and regularly reported on their actions to 
the SPS Committee.  The procedure has not been u sed extensively by Members.  To enhance the 
participation of developing country Members in standard-setting meetings and activities, training 
programmes and regional technical c onsultations on standards and th eir implementation, the Codex, 
IPPC and OIE have established trust funds.  The OI E also continues to provide financial support for 
the participation of Chief Veterinary Officers of its member countries in OIE standard-setting 
activities. 
37. Chile has noted that if Members follow the new Transparency Recommendations and notify 
also when they impose measures based  on the international standards, this could provide useful data 
to more effectively monitor the use of internationa l standards.  The Committee may wish to revise the 
monitoring procedure in light of this development. 
VI. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE (ARTICLE 9) 
38. In the 2005 Review, the Committee encouraged  Members requiring technical assistance to 
identify their specific need s in a clear and detailed manner to permit those needs to be effectively 
addressed.  The Committee also encouraged Memb ers providing technical assistance to keep it 
informed of specific programmes of assistance.  Members were encouraged to report on the 
effectiveness of the technical assistance received,  and, on the basis of that information, and 
information on the experiences of Members in the provision of technical assistance, the Committee 
would consider identifying best practices in the area of SPS-related technical assistance.  The 
Committee invited Members to share information on their experiences regarding the use of the tools 
developed by the Secretariat to assist Members w ith the understanding and implementation of the SPS 
Agreement.  Finally, the Committee requested the S ecretariat to keep it informed of its relevant 
technical assistance activities and of the activities of the Standards and Trade Development Facility 
(STDF), and invited observer organi zations to report on their capacity building activities relevant to 
the SPS Agreement. 
                                                     
 
17 G/SPS/37, G/SPS/42 & Corr./1, G/SPS/45 , G/SPS/49 for the period 2005-2008. G/SPS/GEN/887/Rev.1 
Page 8  
 
  39. Technical assistance is a standing agenda item.  At each regular meeting, Members and 
Observers are invited to identify any specific techni cal assistance needs which they may have, and/or 
to report on any SPS-related capacity building activities in which they are involved.  The WTO Secretariat, as well as observer organizations, report on their assistance activities. 
40. WTO's technical assistance activities in the SPS ar ea contribute towards the strengthening of 
the capacities of developing country Members in meeting standards for market access of food and 
other agricultural commodities.  The activities 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 fa miliarity with the Agreement and advancement in 
its implementation are taken into consideration to meet and res pond to individual country/regional 
needs.  The programmes of national/regional ac tivities include presentations on the transparency 
obligations, dispute settlement, implementati on problems, specific trade concerns and 
technical/scientific issues such as risk analysis and equivalence, as well as the work undertaken by the 
three standard-setting organizations referenced  in the SPS Agreement (Codex, OIE and IPPC). 
41. The Secretariat has developed a number of tools to assist Members with the understanding 
and implementation of the Agreement.  In pa rticular, 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 handbook on the application of the transp arency provisions of the Agreement, which will 
soon be replaced by a Procedural Manual reflecti ng recent changes in the recommended procedures.  
A CD-ROM explaining and discussing in detail the provisions of the Agreement, and dealing in 
particular with implementation, transparency, speci al and differential treatment and dispute settlement 
issues, has been produced by the Secretariat.  Th e CD-ROM includes text, video and audio material 
and is complemented by multiple-choice tests to enab le users to monitor their individual progress.  In 
order to meet Members requests for a more advanced  training activity on the implementation of the 
SPS Agreement, a three-week Specialized Course on SPS has been developed.  The Secretariat also 
offers a distance-learning course on the SPS Agreement. 
42. In the context of the discussions on special and differential treatment a nd actions to address 
the underlying concerns of developing country Memb ers, in October 2006 the Secretariat prepared a 
preliminary analysis of SPS-related technical assistance (G/SPS/GEN/726), with a view to addressing issues regarding the effectiveness of assistance pr ovided.  The Committee agreed to continue to 
consider the issue, and to explore the possibility of identifying best practic es in the area of SPS-
related technical assistance. 
43. The Secretariat has compiled document G/SPS/GE N/521/Rev.3, which contains an updated 
overview of all SPS-related technical assistance ac tivities provided by the WTO Secretariat from 
September 1994 through December 2007.   
44. For the period 1994 to 2008, the WTO Secretariat has undertaken a total of 172 technical 
assistance activities on the SPS Agreement, including 65 regional (or sub-regional) and 72 national 
workshops.  Table 1 provides information about the number of (sub)regiona l and national activities 
per year since the last review of the operation and implementation of the SPS Agreement in 2005.  
Table 2 shows the overall number of activities per region since 1994.  G/SPS/GEN/887/Rev.1 
 Page 9 
 
 
  Table 1:  Number of SPS Technical Assistance Activities 
Type of Activity 
Year National 
Seminar (Sub)Regional 
Workshop Other Total 
2005 4 7 2 13 
2006 9 3 3 15 
2007 7 4 2 13 
2008 12 2 3 17 
Total 32 16 10 58 
 
 
Table 2:  SPS Technical Assistance Activities per Region (1994-2008) 
 
Type of activity 
Region National 
Seminar (Sub)Regional 
Workshop Other Total 
Africa 20 21 7 48 
Arab and Middle East Countries 12 6 2 20 
Asia and the Pacific 16 11 14 41 
Central and Eastern Europe and 
Central Asia 6 5 - 11 
Europe 1 3 6 10 
Latin America and the Caribbean 17 19 5 41 
North America -  1 1 
Total 72 65 35 172 
 
45. The STDF was established in September 2002 fo llowing the commitment made by the Heads 
of the WHO, the FAO, the WTO, the OIE and the World Bank at the Doha Ministerial Conference to 
explore new technical and financial mechanisms to promote the efficient use of resources in SPS-
related activities.  The STDF has two main aims: 
to assist developing countries enhance their expe rtise and capacity to analyze and to implement 
international sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) st andards, improve their human, animal and plant 
health situation, and thus their ability to gain and maintain market access;  and to act as a vehicle for 
coordination among technical assistance providers rela ting to the mobilization of funds, the exchange 
of experience and the dissemination of good practice in relation to the provision and receipt of SPS-
related technical assistance.  Secretariat documen ts give regular overviews and updates of STDF 
activities, including funding offered for projects a nd project preparation grants in developing 
countries.18 
 
46. As part of its co-ordination function, the STDF has organised a number of events that provide 
information and assistance to all Members.  Hence the STDF organized, jointly with the World Bank 
                                                      
18 G/SPS/GEN/595, 648, 718, 748, 774, 847, 865 and 877. G/SPS/GEN/887/Rev.1 
Page 10  
 
  and UNIDO, a session on laboratory projects in Nove mber 2007.  In March 2008, the STDF held a 
Workshop on Capacity Evaluation Tools used in the SPS area.
19 
47. Likewise, the STDF organized an information session on private standards in June 2008.  The 
information session focussed on developments in th e area of private standards since the June 2007 
information session, and drew conclusions w ith regard to SPS-related technical assistance.20  Finally, 
the STDF organized a Special Workshop on Good Pr actice in SPS-related technical cooperation in 
October 2008, in collaboration with the OECD.  More than 200 delegates participated in the 
workshop, some with assistance from the WTO Global Trust Fund or the STDF.  The workshop 
presented the results of research on good practice in  SPS-related projects identified by Members as 
having been successful, and considered how to apply the Paris Principles on Aid Effectiveness in this 
area.21 
48. In the margins of the second meeting of th e SPS Committee in 2009, the STDF will organize 
a workshop to consider cost-benefit analysis relate d to SPS technical assistance.  Work undertaken by 
the OIE regarding costs of prevention versus er adication, as well as work by the World Bank and 
others looking at the economic costs and benefits  of SPS  technical assistance, will be presented. 
49. Since the 2005 Review, the international sta ndards setting bodies have consistently provided 
updates about their technical assistance activities.  All three organizations have developed training 
programmes, including conferences, seminars a nd workshops, to enhance national capacities on WTO 
matters.  The OIE reported in 2008 that the Perform ance, Vision and Strategy (PVS) tool related to 
animal health had been conducted in many countries to  identify their needs and priorities, in order to 
solve existing problems.  In addition, the OIE s upported the participation of developing country 
Members in the elaboration of standards by ensuri ng that experts from every region participated in 
developing the draft text of a scientific standard.  The Codex and the IPPC have trust funds which 
sponsor the participation of officials from developi ng country Members and economies in transition to 
participate in their meetings.  The programme is  aimed at enhancing tho se officials' level of 
participation in the elaboration of Codex standards.   In addition to information from the OIE, IPPC 
and the Codex, other observers organizations, including FAO, the World Bank, OIRSA, IICA, 
UNIDO and UNCTAD, provide regular updates concerning their provision of technical assistance. 
VII. SPECIAL AND DIFFERENTIAL TREATMENT (ARTICLE 10) 
50. In the 2005 Review, the Committee agreed to cont inue to consider specific, concrete actions 
to address the problems faced by least-devel oped and developing country Members in the 
implementation of the SPS Agreement and in making u se of the benefits of the Agreement.  Members 
were encouraged to provide information regarding the special and differential treatment or technical 
assistance they have provided in response to specifi c needs identified by Members in accordance with 
the procedure adopted by the Committee (G/SPS/33). 
51. Special and differential treatment is a standing agenda item.  In 2005, Members were invited 
to share with the Committee their experience under th e new procedure to enhance the transparency of 
special and differential treatment adopted in October 2004.22  With respect to the proposals referred to 
the SPS Committee by the General Council, the Co mmittee adopted, in June 2005, a report to the 
General Council on these proposals.23  The report expresses the Committee's commitment to continue 
to examine the proposals before it, and any revisi on of these proposals, with the aim of developing 
                                                      
19 G/SPS/GEN/826. 
20 G/SPS/R/50. 
21 G/SPS/GEN/875. 
22 G/SPS/33. 
23 G/SPS/35.  G/SPS/GEN/887/Rev.1 
 Page 11 
 
 
  specific recommendations for a decision.  The report also identifies elements for discussion on further 
work to assist the Committee to address the concerns underlying the proposals as identified by 
Members, with a view to fulfilling the Doha De velopment Mandate.  Discussion of these elements 
commenced at the Committee meeting of October 2005. 
52. In March 2006, a Special Workshop was held to  further identify ways to address the problems 
faced by developing country Members in implemen ting the SPS Agreement.  Discussions at this 
Workshop focussed on the effectiveness of technical  assistance and suggested the need for further 
work to improve the implementation of the transp arency provisions (G/SPS/R/41).  Both of these 
issues have been further addressed by the Committee as noted in Sections  IV and VI, above.  In 2007, 
Egypt proposed some amendments to the proce dures for S&D transparency, some of which were 
adopted by the Committee as revisions to the gene ral recommended procedures for transparency.  
Egypt's proposals are contained in JOB(07)/104 and the revised Transparency Recommendations are 
in G/SPS/7/Rev.3. 
53. In February 2006, the Committee agreed to furt her extend the procedure for transparency of 
special and differential treatment or technical assi stance provided in response to specific needs of 
developing country Members (G/SPS/33/Add.1), but to date there has been no indication that 
Members are using this procedure.  In its 2008 me etings, the Committee has considered proposals for 
the revision of the procedure to enhance the transp arency of special and differential treatment based 
on a document prepared by the Secretariat, and s ubsequently circulated as G/SPS/W/224/Rev.1.  This 
proposal was revised in January 2009 to incorpor ate further comments and suggestions made by 
Members at the informal meeting on Special a nd Differential Treatment in October 2008, and 
thereafter.24  The revision also includes a proposal for a format for counter notifications, as requested 
by Members.  However, to date, the Committee has not  reached a decision in this regard and, in the 
meantime, G/SPS/33 remains valid. 
54. During 2006, the Committee also continued its ex amination of the implementation of the SPS 
Agreement and the concerns of developing country Members.  The proposals referred to the SPS 
Committee by the General Council were on the agenda  of each meeting of the Committee.  Although 
there were substantive discussions of some revisions informally suggested by the African Group at the 
February, March and October meetings, the Committee was not able to reach a decision on any of the specific proposals as presented.
25 
55. However, with a view to fulfilling the D oha Development Mandate, several Members 
suggested approaches to advance the work of th e Committee to address the proposals as identified by 
Members including seeking clarification of the concer ns underlying the proposals.  In June 2006, the 
United States introduced a paper containing a comp ilation of ideas related to technical assistance and 
special and differential treatment26, taking into account information provided by developing country 
Members at the Workshop on the Implementation of the Agreement, held in March 2006.27 
56. At an informal meeting on Special and Di fferential Treatment held in February and 
March 2007, the Committee discussed the five proposal s on special and differential treatment referred 
to it in August 2004.  In particular:  (i) the G/SPS/ 33 procedure and its extens ion until 2008;  (ii) the 
G/SPS/35 report;  (iii) the Committee's discussion of the Africa Group's revisions to its proposal on Article 9.2;  (iv) the adoption by the General Council of the proposal from a number of small and 
vulnerable economies;  and (v) Members' submission s on technical assistance and the paper from the 
                                                     
 
24 G/SPS/W/224/Rev.2. 
25 G/SPS/41. 
26 G/SPS/W/198. 
27 G/SPS/R/41. G/SPS/GEN/887/Rev.1 
Page 12  
 
  United States on Special and Differential Treatment  (G/SPS/W/198).  A revised proposal regarding 
Article 10.1 was presented to the Committee in June 2007 and discussed at its October meeting.
28 
57. The Decision on Implementation taken at the D oha Ministerial Conference in 2001 included 
inter alia  a clarification on Article 10.2.29  It specifies that where the appropriate level of protection 
allows scope for the phased introduction of SPS measures, the "longer time-frame for compliance" 
referred to in Article 10.2 shall normally mean at least 6 months.  Where the phased introduction of a 
new measure is not possible, but a Member iden tifies specific problems, the Member applying the 
new measure shall enter into consultations, upon request, to try to find a mutually satisfactory 
solution.  The Decision also indicates that in th e context of paragraph 2 of Annex B of the SPS 
Agreement, a period of 6 months shall normally be provided between the publication of a measure 
and its entry into force. 
58. The Committee on Trade and Development Speci al Session (CTD-SS) has before it two 
proposals under consideration whic h are related to the SPS Agreem ent:  one proposal relating to 
Article 10.2 tabled by India and another proposal re lating to Article 10.3 tabled by the African Group 
and a group of developing country Members.  The sp ecific proposals and the last language considered 
under each article in February 2008 has been circ ulated to all participants.  With respect to 
Article 10.2, the proponents were of the view th at the current interpretation of the phrase "longer 
time-frame for compliance" found in paragraph 3.1 of the Doha Decision on Implementation-Related 
Issues and Concerns was not sufficient for operationaliz ing this Article.  With respect to Article 10.3 
relating to the granting of time-limited exceptions  by the SPS Committee from obligations under the 
Agreement, the proponents claim that their focus is on ensuring predictability of the process to request 
such an exception, while other Members are con cerned that the proposal would prejudge the outcome 
of such requests and amount to automatic granting of waivers.  The objective of the CTD SS is to 
come up with specific recommendations on all outstanding proposals.  Some Members have recommended that all the SPS-related propo sals be discussed in the SPS Committee. 
VIII.  REGIONALIZATION (ARTICLE 6) 
59. In the 2005 Review, the Committee decided to  develop a proposal for a decision on the 
effective application of Article 6, taking as the point of departure the various proposals submitted by 
Members and discussions in the Committee.  Member s were encouraged to provide information on 
their experiences in the implementation of Article 6,  and observer organizations were 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 ("regionalization"). 
60. Regionalization is a standing agenda item.  At each regular meeting of the Committee, 
Members are invited to provide information regardin g their experience with the recognition of pest- or 
disease-free areas and areas of low pest or disease pr evalence.  Observer organizations regularly 
provide information to the Committee regarding re levant advances in their work on this issue. 
61. In 2008, the Committee adopted guidelines on the implementation of Article 6 of the SPS 
Agreement, to facilitate the recognition of pest- and disease-free areas or areas of low pest or disease 
prevalence (G/SPS/48).  The guidelines identify the type of information normally needed for the 
recognition of regionalization, as well as typical ad ministrative steps in the recognition process.  The 
Committee agreed to monitor the implementation of Ar ticle 6, on the basis of information provided by 
Members. 
                                                     
 
28 JOB(07)/99 
29 WT/MIN(01)/17, paragraph 3.1.  G/SPS/GEN/887/Rev.1 
 Page 13 
 
 
  62. Both the IPPC and the OIE have provided guidan ce for countries seeking to establish, or to be 
recognized for, pest- or disease-free status.  The I PPC currently has two relevant standards, one 
(ISPM 4) on requirements for the establishment of pest-free areas and another (ISPM 10) for the establishment of pest-free places of production and pr oduction sites.  In addition IPPC has a number 
of supporting standards including guidelines for su rveillance and a standard under development on 
low pest prevalence.  In March 2007, the IPPC adopt ed the International Standard for Phytosanitary 
Measures (ISPM) 29:  "Recognition of Pest-Free Areas and Areas of Low Pest Prevalence". 
63. The OIE Terrestrial Animal Health Code describes the requirements for obtaining disease-
free status including requirements for surveillance and monitoring based on the concept of geographic 
zones.  At its 76
th General Session in May 2008, the OIE adopt ed a number of resolutions related to 
recognition of disease-free areas.  These are contai ned in the annexes to document G/SPS/GEN/853.  
The International Committee has approved a list of c ountries or zones that had applied for official 
OIE recognition of their sanitary status concerning four diseases:  BSE, FMD, contagious bovine pleuropneumonia (CBPP), and rinderpest.  In additio n, new resolutions on procedures for the official 
recognition and maintenance of country /zone status were also adopted. 
IX. IMPLEMENTATION OF THE AGREEMENT – SPECIFIC TRADE CONCERNS 
64. In the 2005 Review, the Committee encouraged Me mbers to make use of the opportunity to 
identify specific trade problems and to seek to fi nd mutually satisfactory resolutions of those 
problems.  Members were encouraged to inform  the Committee of all specific trade concerns 
resolved, and the Secretariat was re quested to continue to provide regularly updated information on 
the specific trade concerns c onsidered by the Committee. 
65. 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.
30  The excerpts below are from the ninth re vision of GEN/204 to be issued in 
February 2009, and include all i ssues which have been raised at SPS Committee meetings to the end 
of 2008. 
66. Altogether, 277 specific trade concerns were raised between 1995 and the end of 2008.  
Figure 1 shows the number of new concerns raised each year;  16 new concerns were raised in 2008.  
Figure 2a categorizes the trade concerns raised over the fourteen years into food safety, animal or 
plant health issues.  It is important to keep in mi nd, however, that some issues may relate to more than 
one of these categories.  Concerns relating to z oonoses, for example, may concern measures taken 
with both animal health and food safety objectives.  For the purposes of these graphs, a single 
objective has been designated as th e principle concern, however all relevant keywords have been 
assigned for purposes of electronic searches of the data on specific trade concerns.  Overall, 28 per cent of trade concerns relate to food safety concerns , 27 per cent relate to plant health, and 4 per cent 
concern other issues such as certification requirements or translation.  Forty-one per cent of concerns 
raised relate to animal health and zoonoses.  The animal health and zoonoses category is further 
divided into foot-and-mouth disease (FMD), transm issible spongiform encephalopathy (TSEs), Avian 
Influenza (AI) and other animal health concer ns (OAH).  Figure 2b shows that TSEs account for 35 
per cent of animal health concerns, while issues related to foot-and-mouth disease account for 23 per 
cent.  The remaining 42 per cent relate to other animal health concerns and avian influenza. 
                                                     
 
30 G/SPS/GEN/204 and Revisions 1 through 9. G/SPS/GEN/887/Rev.1 
Page 14  
 
  FIGURE 1 – NUMBER OF NEW ISSUES RAISED 
 
2112423
13
1029 29
2131
1016 1642
051015202530354045
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
YearNumber of Issues
 
 
FIGURE 2A – TRADE CONCERNS BY SUBJECT 
 
Animal Health
41%
Food Safety
28%Plant Health
27%Other
4%
Animal Health
Food Safety
Plant Health
Other
 
 
  G/SPS/GEN/887/Rev.1 
 Page 15 
 
 
  FIGURE 2B – TRADE CONCERNS RELATED TO ANIMAL HEALTH & ZOONOSES  
 
TSE
35%
FMD
23%AI
10%OAH
32%
TSE
FMD
AI
OAH
 
67. Developing country Members are participating actively under this agenda item in the SPS 
Committee meetings.  Figure 3a indicates that over the fourteen years, developing country Members 
have raised 135 trade concerns (on many occasions more than one Member has raised, supported or 
maintained an issue) compared to 188 raised by de veloped country Members and three raised by least-
developed country Members.31  A developing country Member has supported another Member raising 
an issue in 183 cases, compared to 128 for deve loped country Members and one for least-developed 
country Members.  In 173 cases, the measure at issue was maintained by a developed country Member, and in 135 cases it was maintained by a developing country Member.  No trade concerns regarding measures maintained by least-developed country Members have been raised.  Figure 3b 
shows the number of new issues raised each year by each category of Member. 
FIGURE 3A – PARTICIPATION BY WTO MEMBERS (1995-2008) 
 
18313
188
173128
135135
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200Members Maintaining the
Measure in QuestionSupporting MembersMembers Raising the IssueNumber of Members
Developed Countries Developing Countries Least-Developed Countries
 
                                                      
31 The European Communities was counted as one Member.  Similarly, when one Member spoke on 
behalf of ASEAN, it was counted as one Member only. G/SPS/GEN/887/Rev.1 
Page 16  
 
  FIGURE 3B – NUMBER OF NEW ISSUES RAISED BY MEMBERS 
 
4101719
8
529
19
1316
710
621
69
119
15
211
5519
13
1015
5
2
05101520253035
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008Number of Issues
Developed countries Developing countries Least-Developed Countries 
 
68. Figure 4 indicates that 76 trade concerns have been reported resolved out of the 277 trade 
concerns raised over the fourteen years.  Two issu es were reported resolved in 2008.  Nineteen trade 
concerns have been reported partially solved.  In  these instances, trade ma y have been allowed for 
selected products or by some of the importing Memb ers maintaining the measure in question.  No 
solutions have been reported for the remaining 182 trade concerns.  It is also likely that other concerns 
have been resolved without the Committee being made aware of these developments. 
FIGURE 4 – SOLVED TRADE CONCERNS 
 
182
76
19
020406080100120140160180200
No solution reported Solution reported Partial solution reported
  G/SPS/GEN/887/Rev.1 
 Page 17 
 
 
  X. PRIVATE VOLUNTARY STANDARDS 
69. Since the 2005 Review of the SPS Agreement, there has been wide discussion in the 
Committee on the issue of private voluntary stan dards ("private standards").  The discussions 
considered the impact of commercial and private st andards on market access;  the effect of private 
standards on development and whether it is appropr iate for the Committee to have a discussion on 
related legal aspects, as some Members do not cons ider this to be within the mandate of the 
Committee.  There has been no formal determina tion within the WTO on whether privates standards 
fall under the jurisdiction of the SPS Agreement. 
70. The issue of private standards was first rai sed at the June 2005 meeting of the Committee.32  
At that meeting, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines raised a concern regarding the operation of a 
EurepGAP scheme in relation to trade in banan as with supermarkets in the United Kingdom.  The 
requirement was with respect to the use of certain pesticides.  Other Members also expressed concerns 
with the effects of private standards on their tr ade.  An information session was subsequently 
organized in the margins of the October 2006 meeting with representatives of EurepGAP and 
UNCTAD.33  The Committee also decided to include the issue of private and commercial standards as 
part of the agenda of its February 2007 meeting.  A background note by the Secretariat described the 
different types of private standards, as well as su mmarized the types of concerns that had been 
identified by Members.34 
71. In 2008, the Committee conti nued to discuss the effects of commercial and private SPS –
related standards on trade, and the appropriate role of the SPS Committee.  At its June meeting, an 
informal information session was held with repr esentatives of entities involved in the development 
and certification of private standards, as well with or ganizations who have undertaken related studies.  
Members were invited to propose possible actions  by the SPS Committee in response to a series of 
questions.   
72. In October 2008, the Committee agreed to th e actions proposed in document G/SPS/W/230,  
with the following changes:  (1) to request that th e Secretariat prepare a format for the information 
solicited for purposes of undertaking a comparative st udy;  (2) that there will be no limitation on the 
number of products a Member may identify as affected  by private standards;  and (3) that although 
Members should make every effort to provide as comp lete information as possible with regard to each 
product identified, a lack of complete informati on should not necessarily prevent consideration of the 
product within the comparative study.  As a follow up , in December 2008, the Secretariat circulated a 
questionnaire on SPS-related private standards (G/ SPSW/232).  Members were invited to send their 
responses to the questionnaire by 16 February 2009. 
73. Members agreed to continue to work within a sm all group on an informal and flexible basis, 
with a commitment to keep the Committee as a w hole fully and continuously informed.  A list of 
documents and other information on private stan dards, including all the documents on private 
standards circulated in the SPS Committee, and a lis t of research and researchers on private standards, 
have been made available by the Secretariat .35 
                                                      
32 G/SPS/R/37/Rev.1, paras.16-20. 
33 G/SPS/R/43, paras. 40-42. 
34 G/SPS/GEN/746. 
35 G/SPS/GEN/865 and G/SPS/GEN/891. G/SPS/GEN/887/Rev.1 
Page 18  
 
  XI. IMPLEMENTATION OF THE AGREEMENT – USE OF AD HOC 
CONSULTATIONS 
74. In the 2005 Review, Members were encouraged to make use of the possibility for ad hoc 
consultations, including through the Good Offices of the Chairperson of the SPS Committee, to 
facilitate the resolution of specific trade concerns. 
75. Article 12.2 states that the Committee "shall enc ourage and facilitate ad hoc consultations or 
negotiations among Members on specific sanitary or ph ytosanitary issues".  To date, this has been 
done through:  (1) Members raising specific trade co ncerns at regular meetings of the SPS Committee;  
(2) discussions by the Committee of specific i ssues such as implementation of ISPM 15;  
private/commercial standards;  and (3) provision in the Committee's Workin g Procedures for the use 
of the Good Offices of the Chairperson. 
76. Document G/SPS/GEN/781 gives a broad overview of different ways in which the SPS 
Committee has facilitated ad hoc consultations am ong Members.  Most commonly, Members have 
raised specific trade concerns at meetings of th e Committee, and sought bilateral resolutions.  During 
the Second Review, there had been proposals to impr ove and increase the use of the mechanism, such 
as providing more time for this purpose at Committee meetings, establishing specific procedures, 
disseminating information about the resolution of concerns raised in the past and facilitating 
participation of developi ng and least developed country Members.   Rules and procedures for using the 
"Good Offices" of the Chair had also been proposed.  This confidential procedure had been used on 
three occasions.  In addition, accord ing to Article 5.8, Members could request an explanation of the 
reasons  for a measure which did not conform to  an international standard or for which an 
international standard does not exist.  This provi sion has been invoked by several Members over the 
years, and some had suggested developing a proce dure for its use, however no specific procedure has 
been proposed. 
77. The United States and Argentina each submitte d proposals on guidelines for the use of the 
Chairperson's Good Offices.  They offered to subm it a joint proposal for consideration at the meeting 
of the Committee in February 2009. 
XII. COOPERATION WITH THE CODEX, OIE AND IPPC 
78. In the 2005 Review, the Committee noted that the relationship between the Committee and 
the Codex, OIE and IPPC should be clarified with a view to facilitating the implementation of the SPS 
Agreement while avoiding duplication of activities.  The Committee also invited Members to provide 
information regarding their experiences in that  regard and to submit specific suggestions for 
consideration by the Committee. 
79. The Committee is required to monitor the process of international harmonization and 
coordinate efforts with these bodies (Article 3.5), and to develop a procedure to monitor the use of 
international standards, guidelines and recommenda tions (Article 12.4).  The Committee adopted a 
provisional monitoring procedure in July 1997, wh ich has been subsequently extended and revised 
(G/SPS/11/Rev.1) (see Section V above).  In addition,  on the basis of an in itiative from a Member, the 
Committee may, through appropriate channels, invite  the relevant international organizations to 
examine specific matters with respect to a particular standard, guideline or recommendation 
(Article 12.6).  In practice, this has been done  through a letter from the Chairperson of the SPS 
Committee drawing the attention of the Codex, OIE and IPPC to relevant issues that have been 
identified in the annual report on the monitoring of the use of international standards. 
80. Representatives from each of these organizati ons attend the SPS Committee meetings and 
representatives from the WTO Secretariat attend the m eetings of these international organizations as  G/SPS/GEN/887/Rev.1 
 Page 19 
 
 
  observers.  Cooperation between the SPS Committ ee and the international standard-setting 
organizations is enhanced by coordinating meeti ng schedules to facilitate Member participation in 
regularly scheduled meetings.  Several of the ac tivities of the international standard-setting bodies 
have been discussed in previous Sections of this Background Document.  The STDF provides an 
additional forum for coordination among its partne r organizations, including the WTO, IPPC, OIE 
and Codex. 
81. In the context of the recommendation arising from 2005 Review, New Zealand tabled a 
proposal to clarify the relationship between th e SPS Committee and the Codex, IPPC and OIE, 
including a number of questions to be put to the Three Sisters.36  Japan proposed, in light of the 
various cross-sectoral issues under consideration such as regionalization or private standards, that the 
Committee organize a workshop on the standard-se tting procedures of the Codex, OIE and IPPC.37  A 
special Workshop has been scheduled for October 2009 to examine the work of  the Three Sisters and 
how to enhance the relationship between them and the SPS Committee.  A draft programme for the 
workshop will be issued shortly by the Secretariat, as requested, for consideration by Members at the 
February meeting of the Committee. 
XIII.  DISPUTE SETTLEMENT 
82. Article 11 of the SPS Agreement indicates that  the Dispute Settlement Understanding will 
apply to SPS disputes and provides for the consulta tion of experts when a dispute involves scientific 
or technical issues.  As of December 2008, over 388 disputes had formally been raised under the WTO's dispute settlement system.  Of these, 35 alle ged violation of the SPS Agreement, although in 
seven cases this was not the main fo cus of the dispute.  Ten panels have been established to examine 
eleven complaints:  one panel to examine the Unite d States' and Canada's complaints regarding the 
EC ban on meat treated with growth-promoting ho rmones;  two panels to examine complaints by 
Canada and the United States against Australia's re strictions on imports of fresh, chilled or frozen 
salmon;  one at the request of the United States to  examine Japan's requirement that each variety of 
certain fruits be tested with regard to the effica cy of fumigation treatment;  one regarding Japan's 
restrictions on apples due to fire blight requested  by the United States;  one panel to examine the 
Philippines complaints against Australia's quarantine procedures;  one panel to examine complaints by 
the European Communities against Australia's qua rantine procedures;  one panel to examine 
complaints by the United States, Canada and Ar gentina concerning EC measures affecting the 
approval and marketing of biotech products;  one panel regarding the complaint of the European 
Communities against the United States and Canada  on their continued suspension of obligations 
relating to the EC-Hormones dispute;  and one pa nel to examine New Zealand's complaint against 
Australia's restrictions on apples.  These cases are further detailed in Appendix B. 
                                                     
 
36 G/SPS/W/206. 
37 G/SPS/W/226.  
  G/SPS/GEN/887/Rev.1 
Page 20 APPENDIX A 
Summary of major SPS Committee activities, 2005-2008 
 
Subject Year Type of Activity Related Documents 
Consistency    
Equivalence    
2006 Questionnaire on the Operation of SPS Enquiry Points 
and National Notification Authorities - Revision G/SPS/W/103/Rev.2 
2007 Compilation of Proposals regarding the Revision of the 
"Recommended Procedures for Implementing the 
Transparency Obligations of the SPS Agreement" 
(Art. 7) G/SPS/W/215, Rev.1 & Rev.2 
2007 Analysis of Replies to the Questionnaire on the 
Operation of the Enquiry Points and National 
Notification Authorities G/SPS/GEN/751 
2007 Overview regardint the Level of the Implementation of 
the transparency provisions of the SPS Agreement G/SPS/GEN/804 
2008 Proposal for a "Mentoring" System of Assistance 
relating to the Transparency Provisions of the SPS 
Agreement  G/SPS/W/217 
2008 Recommended Notification Procedures G/SPS/7/Rev.3 
2008 Workshop on Transparency - October 2007 G/SPS/R/47 Transparency 
2008 Overview regarding the Level of the Implementation of 
the Transparency Provisions of the SPS Agreement  G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 
2005 Procedure to Monitor the Process of International 
Harmonization – Seventh Annual Report  G/SPS/37 
2006 Review of the Provisional Procedure to Monitor the 
Process of International Harmonization  G/SPS/W/200 Monitoring International 
Standards 
2006 Decision to Modify and Extend the Provisional 
Procedure to Monitor the Process of International Harmonization  G/SPS/40  
   G/SPS/GEN/887/Rev.1
 Page 21Subject Year Type of Activity Related Documents 
2006 Procedure to Monitor the Process of International 
Harmonization – Eighth Annual Report  G/SPS/42 &Corr.1 
2007 Procedure to Monitor the Process of International 
Harmonization – 9th Annual Report  G/SPS/45  
2008 Procedure to Monitor the Process of International 
Harmonization – Tenth annual report  G/SPS/49 
2005 Update on the Operation of the Standards and Trade 
Development Facility  (STDF) G/SPS/GEN/595 
2005 Review of Standards related Issues identified in the 
Integrated Framework Diagnostic Trade Integration 
Studies  G/SPS/GEN/545 
2006 Update on the Operation of the STDF  G/SPS/GEN/718 
2006 Overview of SPS-related Technical Assistance reported 
to the WTO/OECD Trade Capacity Building Database  G/SPS/GEN/726 
2006 Workshop on the Implementation of the SPS 
Agreement -March 2006 G/SPS/R/41 
2006 SPS Technical Assistance and Training Activities  G/SPS/GEN/521/Rev.1 
2007 Idem  G/SPS/GEN/521/Rev.2 
2007 SPS Technical Assistance Activities in 2007  G/SPS/GEN/797 
2007 Update on the Operation of the STDF G/SPS/GEN/774 
2007 Background Document from the STDF for the Global 
Review of Aid for Trade G/SPS/GEN/812 
2008 SPS Technical Assistance and Training Activities  G/SPS/GEN/521/Rev.3 
2008 Workshop on SPS-related Capac ity Evaluation Tools G/SPS/R/48 
2008 Mobilizing Aid for Trade for SPS-related Technical 
Cooperation – Conclusions from Pilot Activities of the STDF G/SPS/GEN/864 Technical Assistance 
2008 Report on Workshop on Good Practice in SPS-related 
Technical Assistance  G/SPS/R/52  
  G/SPS/GEN/887/Rev.1 
Page 22 Subject Year Type of Activity Related Documents 
2005 Report on Proposals for Special and Differential 
Treatment G/SPS/35 
2005 Proposals and Progress on Special and Differential 
Treatment  G/SPS/GEN/543 
2006 Decision to Extend the Procedures to Enhance 
Transparency of S&D in Favour of Developing Country Members G/SPS/W/184 
2005 Special and Differential Treatment – Report by the 
Chairman to the General Council G/SPS/39 
2006 Idem G/SPS/41 
2007 Idem G/SPS/44 
2007 Idem G/SPS/46 
2008 Proposed Revision of the Procedure to Enhance 
Transparency of S&D in Favour of Developing 
Country Members (G/SPS/33)  G/SPS/W/224 Special and Differential 
Treatment 
2008 Idem - Revision G/SPS/W/224/Rev.1  
2006 Compendium of Documents regarding Article 6  G/SPS/GEN/636 & Corr.1 and 
Rev.1 and Rev.1/Corr.1 
2006 Issues in the Application of Article 6 of the SPS 
Agreement – Background Document  G/SPS/GEN/640 & Rev.1 
2006 Summary of the Special Meeting on Article 6  G/SPS/R/38 & Corr.1 Regionalization 
2008 Guidelines to Further the Practical Implementation of 
Article 6 of the SPS Agreement  G/SPS/48 
2005 Specific Trade Concerns G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.5 and 
Addenda 
2006 Idem  G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.6 and 
Addenda 
2007 Idem  G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.7 and 
Addenda 
2007 Ad hoc Consultations and Resolution of Trade 
Concerns  G/SPS/GEN/781 Implementation of the 
Agreement-Specific Trade Concerns  
2008 Specific Trade Concerns  G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.8 and 
Addenda  
   G/SPS/GEN/887/Rev.1
 Page 23Subject Year Type of Activity Related Documents 
2005 Review of the Operation and Implementation of the 
SPS Agreement  G/SPS/36 
2006 SPS Agreement – Designation of a Regional Body – 
Communication from Antigua, Barbuda, Barbados, Cuba, Dominica, Fiji, Grenada, Jamaica, Mauritius, Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands, St. Kitts and Nevis, St. Vincent and the Grenadines - Revision WT/COMTD/SE/W/16/Rev.1 and 
Rev.2 
2006 Committee on Trade and Development in dedicated 
Session – Report to the General Council on Measures 
to Assist Small Economies in Meeting their Obligations under the Agreements on SPS Measures, TBT and TRIPS WT/COMTD/SE/5 
2007 Private Standards and the SPS Agreement  G/SPS/GEN/746 
2007 Joint UNCTAD/WTO Informal Information Session on 
Private Standards Job(07)/89/Rev.1 
2007 Relationship with Codex,  IPPC and OIE G/SPS/GEN/775  
2008 Private Standards – Identifying Practical Actions for 
the SPS Committee – Summary of Responses  G/SPS/W/230 
2008 Report of the STDF Information Session on Private 
Standards G/SPS/R/50 
2008 Proposed Procedure for Third Review G/SPS/W/228 
2008 Report to the Council for Trade in Goods on China's 
Transitional Review G/SPS/50 
2008 Questionnaire on SPS-related Private Standards G/SPS/W/232 Other 
2008 Research and Researchers on Private Standards G/SPS/GEN/891  
  G/SPS/GEN/887/Rev.1 
Page 24 APPENDIX B 
WTO Disputes Invoking the SPS Agreement 
 Since 1 January 1995, violations of the SPS Agreement have been alleged in the following invocations of the formal dispute sett lement provisions of the 
WTO. Those which have been referred to a panel are highlighted.  
 
 DS Number Parties and nature of complaint Panel Report / Appellate 
Body Report circulation Comments 
1 WT/DS3 US complaint against Korea's inspection procedures 
for fresh fruits  Mutually satisfactory solution notified in 
July 2001 (G/SPS/GEN/265) 
2 WT/DS41 US complaint against Korea's inspection procedures 
for fresh fruits  Mutually satisfactory solution notified in 
July 2001 (G/SPS/GEN/265) 
 
3 WT/DS5 US complaint against Korea's shelf-life requirements 
for frozen processed meats and other products  Mutually agreed solution notified in July 1995. 
4 WT/DS18 Canada's complaint against Australia's import 
restrictions on fresh, chilled or frozen salmon 
Australia - Salmon WT/DS18/R (1998) 
WT/DS18/AB/R (1998) 
WT/DS18/RW (2000) Mutually agreed solution notified in May 2000. 
5 WT/DS21 US complaint against Australia's import restrictions 
on fresh, chilled or frozen salmon 
Australia - Salmonids  Mutually agreed settlement notified in November 
2000. 
6 WT/DS20 Canada's complaint ag ainst Korea's restrictions on 
treatment methods for bottled water  Mutually agreed solution notified in April 1996. 
7 WT/DS26 US complaint against EC's prohibition of meat from 
animals treated with growth-promoting hormones 
EC – Hormones (US) WT/DS26/R/USA (1997) 
WT/DS26/AB/R (1998) 
WT/DS26/ARB (1999) Suspension of concessions authorized on 
26 July 1999. 
8 WT/DS48 Canada's complaint against EC's prohibition of meat 
from animals treated with growth-promoting 
hormones 
EC – Hormones (Canada) WT/DS48/R/CAN (1997) 
WT/DS48/AB/R (1998) 
WT/DS48/ARB (1999) Same panel handled both complaints.  See above. 
9 WT/DS76 US complaint against Japan's "varietal testing" 
requirement for fresh fruits 
Japan – Agricultural Products II WT/DS76/R (1998) 
WT/DS76/AB/R (1999) Mutually agreed solution notified in 
September 2001. 
10 WT/DS96 EC complaint against India's quantitative restrictions 
on agricultural and other products  Mutually agreed solution notified in April 1998. 
11 WT/DS100 EC complaint against US restrictions on poultry 
imports  Consultations requested on 18 August 1997; 
pending.  
   G/SPS/GEN/887/Rev.1
 Page 25 DS Number Parties and nature of complaint Panel Report / Appellate 
Body Report circulation Comments 
12 WT/DS133 Swiss complaint against Slovakia's BSE-related 
restrictions on cattle and meat  Consultations requested on 11 May 1998; 
pending. 
13 WT/DS134 India's complaint against EC restrictions on rice 
imports  Consultations requested on 25 May 1998; 
pending. 
14 WT/DS135 Canada's complaint against EC (French) measures 
affecting asbestos 
EC - Asbestos WT/DS/135/R (2000) 
WT/DS/135/AB/R (2001) SPS Agreement not invoked in the reports. 
15 WT/DS137 Canada's complaint against EC restrictions due to 
pine wood nematodes  Consultations requested on 17 June 1998; 
pending. 
16 WT/DS144 Canada's complaint against US state restrictions on 
movement of Canadian trucks carrying live animals and grains  Consultations requested on 25 September 1998;  
pending. 
17 WT/DS203 US complaint against Mexico on measures affecting 
trade in live swine  Consultations requested on 10 July 2000; 
pending. 
18 WT/DS205 Thai complaint against Egypt's GMO-related 
prohibition on imports of canned tuna with soybean oil  Consultations requested on 22 September 2000; 
pending. 
19 WT/DS237 Ecuador's complaint against Turkey's import 
requirements for fresh fruit, especially bananas Turkey – Fresh Fruit Import Procedures   Mutually agreed solution notified in November 
2002. 
20 WT/DS245 US complaint against Japan's restrictions on apples 
due to fire blight 
Japan - Apples WT/DS245/R (2003) 
WT/DS245/AB/R (2003) 
WT/DS245/RW (2005) Mutually agreed solution notified on 
2 September 2005 
21 WT/DS256 Hungarian complaint against Turkey's restrictions on 
imports of pet food (BSE)  Consultations requested on 3 May 2002;  
pending. 
22 WT/DS270 Philippine complaint against Australia's restrictions 
on fresh fruits and vegetables, including bananas 
Australia - Fresh Fruit and Vegetables  Panel established August 2003 
23  WT/DS271 Philippine complaint ag ainst Australia's restrictions 
on pineapple  Consultations requested on 18 October 2002; 
pending. 
24 WT/DS279 EC complaint against India's Export and Import 
Policy  Consultations requested on 23 December 2002; 
pending. 
25 WT/DS284 Nicaragua complaint against Mexico's phytosanitary 
restrictions on black beans  Mutually agreed solution notified in March 2004. 
26 WT/DS287 EC complaint against Australian quarantine regime 
Australia – Quarantine Regime  Panel established November 2003. Mutually 
agreed solution notified in March 2007  
  G/SPS/GEN/887/Rev.1 
Page 26  DS Number Parties and nature of complaint Panel Report / Appellate 
Body Report circulation Comments 
27 WT/DS291 US complaint against EC on GMO approvals 
EC – Approval and Marketing of Biotech 
Products WT/DS291/R (2006) Panel report adopted on 21 November 2006. 
Arbritration requested on the level of suspension 
of concessions (Art. 22.6) on 7 February 2008; 
suspended on 15 February 2008 
28 WT/DS292 Canadian complaint against EC on GMO approvals 
EC – Approval and Marketing of Biotech 
Products WT/DS292/R (2006) Panel report adopted on 21 November 2006 
29 WT/DS293 Argentina complaint against EC on GMO approvals 
EC – Approval and Marketing of Biotech 
Products WT/DS293/R (2006) Panel report adopted on 21 November 2006 
30 WT/DS297 Hungary's complaint agai nst Croatia's restrictions on 
live animals and meat products (TSEs).  Consultations requested on 9 July 2003; pending. 
31 WT/DS320 EC complaint against the US on its Continued 
Suspension of Obligations in the EC-Hormones 
Dispute* 
US – Continued Suspension of Obligations in the 
EC – Hormones Dispute WT/DS320/R 
 
WT/DS320/AB/R 
 Panel report circulated on 31 March 2008. Panel 
report appealed on 29 May 2008. Appellate 
Body report issued on 16 October 2008.   
32 WT/DS321 EC complaint against Canada on its Continued 
Suspension of Obligations in the EC-Hormones 
Dispute* 
Canada– Continued Suspension of Obligations in 
the EC – Hormones Dispute  WT/DS321/R 
 
WT/DS321/AB/R 
 Panel report circulated on 31 March 2008. Panel 
report appealed on 29 May 2008. Appellate 
Body report issued on 16 October 2008.  
33 WT/DS367 New Zealand complaint against Australia's 
restrictions on apples  Panel established on 21 January 2008 
34 WT/DS384/1 Canada complaint against the US and certain country 
of origin labelling requirements 
United States – Certain Country of Origin 
Labelling (COOL) Requirements  Request for consultations by Canada on 
4 December 2008 
35 WT/DS386/1 Mexico complaint against the US and certain 
country of origin labelling requirements 
United States – Certain Country of Origin 
Labelling (COOL) Requirements   Request for consultations by Mexico on 
22 December 2008 
* Neither of these two requests for consultations claim violation of the SPS Agreement, however, one of the issues of concern r egards the EC 
implementation of the rulings in WT/DS26 and WT/DS48 above, hence it is probable that  the implementation of the SPS Agreement w ill be relevant to 
these disputes G/SPS/GEN/887/Rev.1 
Page 27 
 
  
  APPENDIX C 
 
List of SPS Committee documents submitted by Members 2005-2008 
 
 A. Information on Member's experien ces related to Equivalence (Article 4 ) 
 
Year Member Title/Subject Symbol 
2005 Brazil Technical Committee on the 
health and hygiene of fishery products of Argentina, Brazil, Chile and Uruguay – Equivalence of inspection systems G/SPS/GEN/586 
2007 Panama Determination of the recognition 
of equivalence  G/SPS/N/EQV/PAN/1 
2008 Dominican Republic Determination of the recognition 
of equivalence G/SPS/N/EQV/DOM/1
 
 B. Comments/proposals regarding Tr ansparency (Article 7 and Annex B ) 
 
Year Member Title/Subject Symbol 
2005 Kazakhstan Transparency G/SPS/GEN/544 
Australia Second Review of the SPS 
Agreement – Review of the implementation of transparency 
provisions G/SPS/W/197 
Bulgaria Transparency G/SPS/GEN/737 
European 
Communities Transparency G/SPS/GEN/737 
Romania Transparency G/SPS/GEN/737 
United States Second Review of the SPS 
Agreement – Review of the implementation of transparency 
provisions G/SPS/W/197 2006 
New Zealand Idem   
China Proposal on the amendment of 
"the recommended procedures for 
implementing the transparency obligations of the SPS Agreement (Article 7)" G/SPS/W/212 
2007 European 
Communities The EC NNA/EP for the SPS 
Agreement:  experience acquired 
in the operational procedures and 
recent experience – Reflection note G/SPS/GEN/803 G/SPS/GEN/887/Rev.1 
Page 28  
 
  Year Member Title/Subject Symbol 
Argentina Proposals regarding the revision 
of recommended procedures regarding transparency G/SPS/W/220 
2008 Chile Chile's position on the 
implementation of the principle of 
transparency in 2008 G/SPS/W/221 
 
 C. Comments/proposals regarding monito ring the use of international standards 
 (Article 3.5 and 12.4 ) 
Year Member Title/Subject Symbol 
Brazil Brazilian approval of the new 
revised text of the IPPC 1997 G/SPS/GEN/600 
China Monitoring the use of 
international standards:  ISPM 15 G/SPS/GEN/551 
Ecuador Establishment of the National 
Codex Alimentarius Committee G/SPS/GEN/591 
European 
Communities Implementation of ISPM 15 from 
1 March 2005:  new requirements 
for the import of wood packaging 
material and dunnage for a better protection against the introduction of pests or diseases in the European Union G/SPS/GEN/556 
Kingdom of Bahrain Adoption of international Codex 
standards G/SPS/GEN/537 2005 
Mauritius Implementation of international 
standards G/SPS/GEN/547 
Argentina ISPM 15 G/SPS/GEN/653 
Brazil Brazilian approval of the new 
revised text of the IPPC 1997 G/SPS/GEN/696 
Japan Implementation of ISPM No. 15 
as of April 2007 G/SPS/GEN/739 
New Zealand Relationship between the SPS 
Committee and the standard-
setting bodies G/SPS/W/206 2006 
Sri Lanka Procedure to monitor the process 
of international harmonization G/SPS/W/187 
2008 Japan Relationship between the SPS 
Committee and Codex, OIE and IPPC G/SPS/W/226 
 
 D.1 Information regarding Member's provision of technical assistance and training 
 activities (Article 9)  
 
Year Member Title/Subject Symbol 
2005 New Zealand Technical assistance provided to 
developing country Members by New Zealand since 1 January 1995 – Revision  G/SPS/GEN/352/Rev.1  G/SPS/GEN/887/Rev.1 
 Page 29 
 
 
  Year Member Title/Subject Symbol 
 United States Technical assistance to developing 
country Members provided by the United States – Addendum/Revision G/SPS/GEN/181/Add.5 
and Rev.1 
2006 Australia Technical assistance to developing 
country Members G/SPS/GEN/717 
Canada Technical assistance to developing 
country Members  G/SPS/GEN/728 
2006 European 
Communities Technical assistance in the SPS 
field provided by the EC G/SPS/GEN/669 
Australia Technical assistance to developing 
country Members G/SPS/GEN/717/Add.1
Canada Technical assistance to developing 
country Members G/SPS/GEN/765 
European 
Communities EC Technical assistance in the 
SPS Sector G/SPS/GEN/839 
New Zealand Technical assistance for operating 
the SPS Notification Authority and SPS Enquiry Point G/SPS/W/214 
Norway SPS technical assistance G/SPS/GEN/879 2007 
United States Technical assistance to developing 
country Members provided by the 
United States G/SPS/GEN/181/Add.6
2008 United States Technical assistance to developing 
country Members provided by the 
United States G/SPS/GEN/181/Add.7
 
 D.2 Information regarding Member's technical assistance and training needs 
 (Article 9)  
 
Year Member Title/Subject Symbol 
2005 Peru Technical assistance within the 
framework of the WTO Agreement on the Application of SPS Measures G/SPS/GEN/579 
Central African 
Republic Technical assistance G/SPS/GEN/644 
2006 Tanzania Technical assistance related to 
fisheries sector -  Experience from 
the United Republic of Tanzania G/SPS/GEN/687 
Costa Rica Technical assistance – Responses 
to the questionnaire G/SPS/GEN/295/Add.29/
Rev.1 
Guatemala Technical assistance – Responses 
to the questionnaire G/SPS/GEN/295/Add.22/
Rev.1 2007 
Rwanda Technical assistance – Responses 
to the questionnaire G/SPS/GEN/295/Add.37 
2008 Belize Technical Assistance G/SPS/GEN/885 
 G/SPS/GEN/887/Rev.1 
Page 30  
 
   E. Comments/proposals regarding special  and differential treatment (Article 10)
 
 
Year Member Title/Subject Symbol 
2006 United States Special and di fferential treatment G/SPS/W/198 
Egypt Statement to the informal meeting JOB(07)/25 
Egypt Proposed revision of G/SPS/33 JOB(07)/104 2007 
Egypt Suggested language by Egypt for 
Article 10.1 of the SPS Agreement JOB(07)/99 
 
 F.1 Comments/proposals regarding Regionalization (Article 6)  
 
Year Member Title/Subject Symbol 
Argentina Article 6 of the Agreement on the 
Application of SPS Measures G/SPS/GEN/606 
Australia Monitoring of international 
harmonization:  regionalization G/SPS/W/172 
Brazil Improving the application of 
Article 6 of the SPS Agreement G/SPS/W/177 
Brazil Recognition of the state of Acre 
and the municipalities of Boca Do Acre and Guajará in the state of 
Amazonas, Northern region of 
Brazil, as Foot-and-Mouth Disease – Free zones where vaccinations is practiced G/SPS/GEN/601 
Canada Implementation of Article 6 of the 
SPS Agreement  G/SPS/GEN/613 
Chile Proposal by Chile to further the 
discussion concerning the implementation of Article 6 on 
regionalization G/SPS/W/171 
Colombia Procedures for recognition of pest- 
or disease- free areas or areas of low pest or disease prevalence under Article 6 of the SPS Agreement G/SPS/GEN/611 
European 
Communities Clarification of Article 6 of the 
SPS Agreement G/SPS/GEN/588 
Japan Implementation of Article 6 
(Regionalization) of the Agreement 
on the Application of SPS 
Measures G/SPS/GEN/605 2005 
Peru Regionalization G/SPS/GEN/607  G/SPS/GEN/887/Rev.1 
 Page 31 
 
 
  Year Member Title/Subject Symbol 
Argentina Comments on G/SPS/GEN/640 – 
Article 6 G/SPS/W/189 
Brazil Implementation of Art. 6 of the 
SPS Agreement G/SPS/W/185 
Brazil Comments on G/SPS/GEN/640 – 
Article 6 G/SPS/W/189 2006 
Colombia Comments on G/SPS/GEN/640 – 
Article 6 G/SPS/W/189 
Ecuador Comments on G/SPS/GEN/640 – 
Article 6 G/SPS/W/189 
Ecuador Regionalization G/SPS/GEN/623 
Egypt Article 6 – Procedures for 
recognition of pest- or disease-free areas or areas of low pest or disease prevalence G/SPS/W/193 
Egypt Implementation of Art. 6 – 
Experience in establishing and Maintaining "Pest-Free Areas" G/SPS/GEN/630 
European 
Communities Application of Art. 6 of the SPS 
Agreement G/SPS/GEN/632 
European 
Communities Comments on G/SPS/GEN/640 – 
Article 6 G/SPS/W/190 
Grenada Article 6 of the SPS Agreement G/SPS/W/194 
Japan Issues in the application of Art. 6 
of the SPS Agreement G/SPS/W/192 
Korea Article 6 of the SPS Agreement G/SPS/W/195 
Mexico Regionalization G/SPS/GEN/622 
New Zealand Comments on 
G/SPS/GEN/640/Rev.1 – Article 6 G/SPS/GEN/725 
New Zealand Procedures for recognition of pest- 
or disease-free area or areas of low pest prevalence under Art. 6 – 
Comparison of standards developed 
by the ISSBs G/SPS/GEN/698 and 
Rev.1 
Paraguay Comments on G/SPS/GEN/640 – 
Article 6 G/SPS/W/189 
Chinese Taipei Comments on G/SPS/GEN/640 – 
Article 6 G/SPS/W/205 
United States Comments on G/SPS/GEN/640 – 
Article 6 G/SPS/W/199 
United States Additional comments on Art. 6 of 
the SPS Agreement – Adaptation to regional conditions G/SPS/GEN/631 2006 
Uruguay Comments on G/SPS/GEN/640 – 
Article 6 G/SPS/W/189 
Chile Chile's position on regionalization 
guidelines for 2008 G/SPS/W/222 
2008 New Zealand Guidelines to further the practical 
implementation of Art. 6 of the 
SPS Agreement G/SPS/W/218 
 G/SPS/GEN/887/Rev.1 
Page 32  
 
   F.2 Information regarding Member's experience related to Regionalization 
 (Article 6)  
 
Year Member Title/Subject Symbol 
Brazil Pest free area of Minas Gerais 
state – Micosphaerella fijiensis  G/SPS/GEN/561 
Brazil Pest free area of Ceará state – 
Anastrepha grandis  G/SPS/GEN/562 
Brazil Foot and mouth disease free zone 
– Brazilian experience on 
regionalization G/SPS/GEN/584 
Brazil Newcastle disease – Brazilian 
experience in certifying disease 
free flocks G/SPS/GEN/608 
Brazil Classical swine fever – Brazilian 
experience in regionalization G/SPS/GEN/609 
Canada Update on developments in 
Canada regarding Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) G/SPS/GEN/585 
Chile Notification of recognition of 
pest- and disease-free zones - 
Regionalization G/SPS/W/181 
Colombia  Avian influenza G/SPS/GEN/602 
Nicaragua Status of the national classical 
swine fever eradication 
programme in Nicaragua G/SPS/GEN/575 
Nicaragua Nicaragua initiates brucellosis – 
and tuberculosis - free 
certification for farms G/SPS/GEN/576 2005 
Peru Current FMD Status G/SPS/GEN/558  
Argentina Grains, fruits etc. – FMD G/SPS/GEN/654 
Australia Exercise Eleusis – Avian 
influenza simulation G/SPS/GEN/619 
Australia Issues in the application of Art. 6 
of the SPS Agreement G/SPS/W/191 
Australia Issues in the application of Art. 6 
of the SPS Agreement - Addendum G/SPS/W/191 and 
Add.1 
Brazil Pest free area of Minas Ceará state 
– Micosphaerella fijiensis  G/SPS/GEN/562/Add.1
Brazil Area of Rio Grande do Norte 
State free of Anastrepha grandis  G/SPS/GEN/642 
Brazil Pest-free area of Bahia state – 
Mycosphaerella fijiensis  G/SPS/GEN/697 
Canada Update on developments 
regarding BSE G/SPS/GEN/635 
Chile Situation regarding BSE G/SPS/GEN/633 2006 
Chile Experience in the application of 
the principle of regionalization G/SPS/GEN/610  G/SPS/GEN/887/Rev.1 
 Page 33 
 
 
  Year Member Title/Subject Symbol 
Colombia Experiences in regionalization:  
FMD G/SPS/GEN/612 
Colombia Avian influenza H9N2 G/SPS/GEN/621 
Egypt Experience in establishing and 
maintaining "Pest-Free Areas" G/SPS/GEN/630 
Mexico Regionalization - Information for 
the recognition of fruit fly-free areas G/SPS/GEN/440/Rev.1 
Nigeria Current SPS measures regarding 
the avian influenza situation G/SPS/GEN/637 
Peru Recognition of Southern Peru as a 
foot-and-mouth disease-free zone where vaccination is not practised G/SPS/GEN/578 2006 
Turkey Avian Influenza G/SPS/GEN/620 and 
Rev. 1 
Brazil Pest free area of Ceará state – 
Anastrepha grandis  G/SPS/GEN/562/Add.2
Panama Pest-free area of classical swine 
fever G/SPS/GEN/783 
Panama Certification and/or declaration of 
an area free of Mediterranean fruit 
fly in the Azuero peninsula G/SPS/GEN/752 2007 
Philippines Avian Influenza and FMD status 
as of 1 March 2007 G/SPS/GEN/771 
Argentina Foot and mouth disease situation G/SPS/GEN/868 
Belize Classical swine fever and FMD-
free status G/SPS/GEN/861 
Canada Update on an outbreak of highly 
pathogenic avian influenza 
(H7N3) in the province of Saskatchewan G/SPS/GEN/866 
Chile Recognition of pest- and disease-
free areas G/SPS/GEN/862 
Haiti Sanitary information – BSE G/SPS/GEN/846 
Mexico Report on the classification of 
Mexico by the OIE regarding BSEG/SPS/GEN/858 
Peru Areas found to be free of Stenoma 
catenifer (Lepidoptera-
oecophoridae) on the basis of survey work on this pest conducted in Peruvian coastal 
areas where avocado ( Persea 
Americana)  is produced G/SPS/GEN/815 2008 
Switzerland BSE G/SPS/GEN/844 
 G/SPS/GEN/887/Rev.1 
Page 34  
 
   G. Comments/proposals regarding Monito ring Implementation of the Agreement 
 (Articles 12.1 and 12.2)—Specific trade concerns  
 
Year Member Title/Subject Symbol 
Costa Rica Panama – Imports of products of 
animal origin G/SPS/GEN/582 
Sri Lanka Trade difficulties encountered in 
the export of Sri Lankan cinnamon 
to the European Communities G/SPS/GEN/597 2005 
Uruguay Undue delays G/SPS/W/169 
Argentina Review of concerns raised by 
Members pending their resolution G/SPS/GEN/693 
Colombia Proposal for preventing undue 
delays in the entry of animals, 
plants and their products G/SPS/W/201 
Colombia EC Regulation 258/97 on Novel 
Foods G/SPS/GEN/735 
Ecuador EC Regulation 258/97 on Novel 
Foods G/SPS/GEN/714 
European 
Communities Questions and answers on the EC 
control measures for avian influenza G/SPS/GEN/641 
European 
Communities Reply of the EC to the 
communication from Peru concerning Regulation 258/97 on Novel Foods G/SPS/GEN/699 
Peru Regulation 258/97 Of The 
European Parliament And Of The 
Council Concerning Novel Foods G/SPS/GEN/681 
Peru EC Regulation 258/97 on Novel 
Foods G/SPS/GEN/713 
Peru EC Regulation 258/97 on Novel 
Foods G/SPS/GEN/733 2006 
Uganda Fish exports from Lake Victoria G/SPS/GEN/685 
New Zealand Australia – Measures affecting the 
importation of apples from New 
Zealand – Request for consultations G/SPS/GEN/796 
2007 Thailand Undue delays in relation to 
Article 5 (risk assessment) and interim measures G/SPS/GEN/769 
Argentina Good offices of the Chairperson G/SPS/W/219 
Peru EC Regulation 258/97 on Novel 
Foods G/SPS/GEN/884 2008 
United States Article 12.2 – Consultations G/SPS/W/227 
  G/SPS/GEN/887/Rev.1 
 Page 35 
 
 
   H. Review of the Agreement  
 
Year Member Title/Subject Symbol 
2005 Costa Rica Second review of the operation and 
implementation of the SPS Agreement – Prioritization of 
issues for the future work 
programmes of the SPS Committee . G/SPS/W/180 
2005 New Zealand Second review of the operation and 
implementation of the SPS Agreement – Work programme G/SPS/W/179 
Brazil Second Review of the SPS 
Agreement – Prioritization of issues for the future work 
programme of the SPS Committee G/SPS/W/182 
Canada Second Review of the SPS 
Agreement – Clarification of the 
terms "measures" and "regulations" as contained in the SPS Agreement G/SPS/W/186 
Chile Second Review of the SPS 
Agreement – Undue delays G/SPS/W/202 
Chile Second Review of the SPS 
Agreement – Harmonization, relationship with int. organizations and int. standards G/SPS/W/203 
Chile Second review of the SPS – 
Proposed differences or 
clarifications procedure G/SPS/W/204 
Colombia Second Review of the SPS 
Agreement  – Priority topics to be 
taken into account in the future work of the Committee G/SPS/W/188 
Costa Rica Second Review of the SPS 
Agreement – Discussion proposal for the more effective implementation of the a d hoc  
consultations mechanism within 
the framework of Art. 12.2  G/SPS/W/183 2006 
New Zealand Second Review of the SPS 
Agreement – Review of the implementation of transparency provisions G/SPS/W/197 
2007 Canada Second review of the SPS 
Agreement – Transparency 
enhancement proposal G/SPS/GEN/778 
 G/SPS/GEN/887/Rev.1 
Page 36  
 
   I. China Transitional Review
 
 
Year Member Title/Subject Symbol 
European 
Communities Transitional Review Mechanism 
under paragraph 18 of the Protocol of Accession of the  People's 
Republic of China – Comments for 
China G/SPS/W/178 
2005 United States Transitional Review Mechanism 
pursuant to paragraph 18 of the Protocol of Accession of the People's Republic of China – Questions from the United States G/SPS/GEN/594 
European 
Communities Transitional Review Mechanism 
pursuant to paragraph 18 of the 
Protocol of Accession of the 
People's Republic of China – Questions from the European Communities G/SPS/W/208 
2006 
United States Transitional Review Mechanism 
pursuant to paragraph 18 of the Protocol of Accession of the 
People's Republic of China – 
Questions from the United States G/SPS/W/207 
European 
Communities Transitional Review Mechanism 
pursuant to paragraph 18 of the Protocol of Accession of the People's Republic of China – Questions from the European 
Communities G/SPS/W/216 
2007 
United States Transitional Review Mechanism 
pursuant to paragraph 18 of the 
Protocol of Accession of the People's Republic of China – Questions from the United States  G/SPS/W/213 
European 
Communities Transitional Review Mechanism 
pursuant to paragraph 18 of the 
Protocol of Accession of the People's Republic of China – Questions from the European Communities G/SPS/W/231 
2008 
United States Transitional Review Mechanism 
pursuant to paragraph 18 of the 
Protocol of Accession of the People's Republic of China – Questions from the United States G/SPS/W/229 
  G/SPS/GEN/887/Rev.1 
 Page 37 
 
 
   J. Private Standards  
 
Year Member Title/Subject Symbol 
Ecuador Private and commercial standards G/SPS/GEN/792 
St. Vincent and the 
Grenadines Private industry standards G/SPS/GEN/766 
2007 United Kingdom Private voluntary standards within 
the WTO multilateral framework G/SPS/GEN/802 
Uruguay Terms of reference for the working 
group on private standards G/SPS/W/225 
2008 
Uruguay Private standards G/SPS/GEN/843 
 
 K. Implementation of the SPS Agreement  
 
Year Member Title/Subject Symbol 
Bangladesh Implementation of the SPS 
Agreement – Information for the workshop on 31 March 2006 G/SPS/GEN/676 
Benin Idem   G/SPS/GEN/670 
Burkina Faso Idem  G/SPS/GEN/662 
Burundi Idem  G/SPS/GEN/674 
Cameroon Idem  G/SPS/GEN/671 
Congo  Idem  G/SPS/GEN/659 
Costa Rica Idem  G/SPS/GEN/679 
Chad  Idem  G/SPS/GEN/667 
Colombia Idem  G/SPS/GEN/652 
The Gambia Idem  G/SPS/GEN/664 
Guatemala Idem  G/SPS/GEN/682 
Haiti Idem  G/SPS/GEN/677 
Honduras Idem  G/SPS/GEN/683 
Jamaica Idem  G/SPS/GEN/645 
Kenya Idem  G/SPS/GEN/660 
Madagascar Idem  G/SPS/GEN/672 
Mauritania Idem  G/SPS/GEN/684 
Mauritius Idem  G/SPS/GEN/657 
Cuba Idem  G/SPS/GEN/655 
Mongolia Idem  G/SPS/GEN/675 
Nepal Idem  G/SPS/GEN/656 
Niger Idem  G/SPS/GEN/678 
Dominican Republic Idem  G/SPS/GEN/691 
Egypt Idem  G/SPS/GEN/647 
Egypt Idem  G/SPS/GEN/649 
Egypt Idem  G/SPS/GEN/651 
Nigeria Idem  G/SPS/GEN/686 
Pakistan  Idem  G/SPS/GEN/661 
Pakistan Idem  G/SPS/GEN/692 
South Africa Idem  G/SPS/GEN/690 2006  
Togo Idem  G/SPS/GEN/665 G/SPS/GEN/887/Rev.1 
Page 38  
 
  Year Member Title/Subject Symbol 
Trinidad and Tobago Idem  G/SPS/GEN/680 
Peru Idem  G/SPS/GEN/668 
Uganda Idem  G/SPS/GEN/673 2006 
Zimbabwe Idem  G/SPS/GEN/663 
 
 L. Other  
 
Year Member Title/Subject Symbol 
Costa Rica Phytosanitary  certificate G/SPS/GEN/604 
Cuba Measures implemented in the field of 
veterinary medicine G/SPS/GEN/538 
Dominican Republic Current domestic measures to 
facilitate the implementation of the WTO Agreement on the Application 
of SPS Measures G/SPS/GEN/587 
European 
Communities Traceability of food, feed, food-
producing animals, and any other 
substance intended to be, or expected to be, incorporated into a food or feed imported into the Community for placing on the market G/SPS/GEN/539 
2005 
European 
Communities Questions and answers on the 
procedure to obtain import tolerances 
and the inclusion of active substances 
for plant protection uses in the European Communities list G/SPS/GEN/557 
Colombia Centre for Phytosanitary Excellence – 
CEF – A Colombian cooperation initiative pursuant to Art. 5 of the SPS Agreement G/SPS/GEN/702 
Colombia Risk analysis G/SPS/GEN/734 
Colombia Strengthening of Colombia's system 
of sanitary and phytosanitary measures G/SPS/GEN/736 
Cuba Measures implemented in the field of 
veterinary medicine G/SPS/GEN/615 
European 
Communities Public consultation on the impact 
assessment of Regulation 258/97 on 
novel foods and food ingredients G/SPS/GEN/700 
European 
Communities Call for early comments on a 
Commission report on animal by-products not intended for human consumption G/SPS/GEN/719 2006 
European 
Communities Adaptation of the common veterinary 
entry document to the trade control and export system (TRACES) G/SPS/GEN/742 
Paraguay Ban on the registration and 
importation of high-risk insecticides G/SPS/GEN/688 
Paraguay Health status report G/SPS/GEN/689 
Paraguay Phytosanitary status report G/SPS/GEN/711 2006 
Paraguay Health status report G/SPS/GEN/712  G/SPS/GEN/887/Rev.1 
 Page 39 
 
 
  Year Member Title/Subject Symbol 
Argentina MRLs for pesticides – Impact on 
exports from developing country Members G/SPS/W/211 & 
Corr.1 (in English only) 
Bolivia Slaughter of imported breeding cattle G/SPS/GEN/768 
Costa Rica Clean stock program for Dracaena 
spp. intended for export to the US 
market G/SPS/GEN/784 
European 
Communities Call for comments on a Commission 
consultation on the review of Reg. (EC) 1774/2002 laying down health rules concerning animal by-products 
not intended for human consumption G/SPS/GEN/773 
European 
Communities Certification regime applicable for 
imports into the EC of bovine animals and of certain products of animal origin with regard to provisions related to certain transmissible spongiform encephalopathies G/SPS/GEN/799 
2007 
Chinese Taipei Veterinary and phytosanitary 
certificates G/SPS/GEN/744 & 
Corr.1 
Chile Bilateral agreements G/SPS/GEN/863 
Ecuador MRL for pineapple G/SPS/GEN/841/R
ev.1 
European Communities Rules related to the export of meat-
and-bone meal to third countries in 
order to ensure the prevention and 
control of certain transmissible spongiform encephalopathies (TSES) G/SPS/GEN/889 
Paraguay Information from Members G/SPS/GEN/876 
Paraguay Communication to the SPS 
Committee G/SPS/GEN/852 
Singapore Optical watermark on export 
certificates G/SPS/GEN/859 
Venezuela Comprehensive agricultural health 
system G/SPS/GEN/854 2008 
Zambia Information on various SPS matters G/SPS/GEN/836 
 
__________