WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  G/SPS/55 
6 April 2011 
 (11-1722) 
Committee on Sanitary a nd Phytosanitary Measures  
  
 
ACTIONS REGARDING SPS-RELA TED PRIVATE STANDARDS 
 
Decision of the Committee
 
  INTRODUCTION 
 
1. The SPS Committee has been discussing the issu e of SPS-related private standards since 
June 2005, when Saint Vincent and the Grenadin es raised a specific tr ade concern regarding 
EurepGAP (now called GLOBALGAP) requirements for bananas destined for sale in the United 
Kingdom.
1  Since then, private standards have been  discussed regularly at SPS Committee meetings. 
2. The SPS Committee decided in October 2008 to  request an ad hoc working group to 
undertake a three-step study, and present a report pr oposing concrete actions for consideration by the 
Committee at the end of this process.2   
3. The ad hoc working group on SPS-related private standards completed its work on identifying 
"Possible Actions for the SPS Committee Regardi ng SPS-Related Private Standards", and presented 
its report to the SPS Committee.  The report of  the working group is contained in document 
G/SPS/W/256.     
4. At its meeting of 30-31 March 2011, the Comm ittee adopted five of the six actions put 
forward by the working group for endorsement.  The five actions are listed below.  Endorsement of 
these actions is without prejudice to the views of Me mbers regarding the scope of the SPS Agreement.  
********* 
Action 1 :  The SPS Committee should develop a working definition of SPS-related private 
standards and limit any discussions to these. 
5. It is apparent from the discussions in the WT O and from the literature on this issue that 
private standards are already playing and will con tinue to play an increasingly important role in 
international trade and pose new challenges as well as opportunities for producers and exporters.  
They cover safety, quality, labour, social and envi ronmental issues and can affect a wide range of 
products. 
6. Given its mandate, the SPS Committee should fo cus any discussions solely on SPS-related 
private standards, most of which are currently in  the area of food safety.  However, some Members 
have expressed concerns that the discussions have covered issues beyond SPS-related private 
standards.  One of the reasons for this is that many private standards include food safety as well as 
other requirements, making it more difficult to si ngle out the SPS-related re quirements and determine 
                                                      
1 G/SPS/GEN/766;  specific trade concern no. 219. 
2 See paras. 4-7 of G/SPS/W/230 and paras. 122-137 of G/SPS/R/53. G/SPS/55 
Page 2  
 
  whether any trade effects can be attributed dir ectly to these.  At the same time, producers and 
exporters do not necessarily focus on the distinc tion between SPS versus TBT measures or public 
versus private standards, but rather on whether they  are able to fulfill all the requirements imposed by 
the importers. 
7. Given its mandate, the SPS Committee would limit any discussions to: 
  Requirements which are established and/or  adopted by non-governmental entities to 
fulfill one of the four objectives stated in Annex A, paragraph 1 of the SPS Agreement and 
which may affect international trade.  These four objectives are: 
(a) to protect animal or plant life or health within the territory of the Member from risks 
arising from the entry, establishment or sp read of pests, diseases, disease-carrying 
organisms or disease-causing organisms; 
(b) to protect human or animal life or health  within the territory of the Member from 
risks arising from additives, contaminants, toxins or disease-causing organisms in foods, beverages or feedstuffs; 
(c) to protect human life or health within the territory of the Member from risks arising 
from diseases carried by animals, plants or  products thereof, or from the entry, 
establishment or spread of pests;  and 
(d) to prevent or limit other damage within th e territory of the Member from the entry, 
establishment or spread of pests. 
Action 2:
  The SPS Committee should regularly info rm the Codex, OIE and IPPC regarding 
relevant developments in its consideration of SPS -related private standards, and should invite 
these organizations to likewise regularly inform the SPS Committee of relevant developments in 
their respective bodies. 
8. One of the concerns raised regarding SPS-rela ted private standards has been that they 
sometimes deviate from the standards established by the international standard-setting bodies (ISSBs) 
referenced in the SPS Agreement, which are the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), the World 
Organization for Animal Health (OIE), and the Inte rnational Plant Protection Convention (IPPC).  For 
example, in the area of food safety, some retail schemes have been identified as having maximum residue limits (MRLs) which are more restrictive th an those set by Codex.  In the area of animal 
health, examples of private standards with more trade-restricting BSE
3 requirements than those of the 
OIE have been provided. 
9. Given the interlinkages between SPS-related priv ate standards and the standards developed by 
Codex, OIE and IPPC, these bodies would benefit from regular information exchanges on this topic.  
In addition, the Secretariats of the four organizati ons should inform each other regarding their work in 
this area, keeping in mind that th e scope of work on private standa rds in the international standard-
setting bodies may not be the same as that of the SPS Committee.  Such updates by the ISSBs could 
be presented under: "Information on Relevant Activities – Information from Observer Organizations".  
                                                      
3 Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy.  G/SPS/55 
 Page 3 
 
 
  Action 3 :  The SPS Committee invites the Secretariat to inform the Committee on developments 
in other WTO fora which could be of relevan ce for its discussions on SPS-related private 
standards. 
10. Private standards play an increasingly important role in international trade and may become a 
subject of discussion in various formal or informal WTO fora.  While such discussions are likely to go 
beyond SPS issues, there could also be linkages.  Fo r example, a private standard could contain both 
TBT as well as SPS-related requirements or its envi ronmental requirements could cover SPS aspects.  
Also, horizontal concepts such as tr ansparency could be considered.  In this context, it would be 
beneficial for the SPS Committee to keep abreast  of relevant developments in the WTO. 
Action 4 :  Members are encouraged to communicat e with entities involved in SPS-related 
private standards in their territories to sensiti ze them to the issues raised in the SPS Committee 
and underline the importance of international standards established by the Codex, OIE and IPPC. 
11. The SPS Committee has been discussing the issu e of SPS-related private standards since 
2005.  While Members are by now quite familiar w ith each other's concerns and positions on this 
issue, it is not clear to what extent entities involved in the development, application, certification, etc 
of SPS-related private standards are aware of the SPS Committee's discussions.  The information 
sessions with the participation of representatives of such entities were useful in bringing to their 
attention some of the concerns raised in th e SPS Committee as well as in updating the Committee on 
latest developments. 
12. Given the multitude and diverse nature of en tities involved in private SPS standards such as 
retail firms, producers, certifiers and NGOs, Member governments may be best placed to 
communicate with such entities as necessary.  Su ch communication could be achieved through 
meetings or other means and enc ourage harmonization, mutual recognition of standards by private 
standard holders, cost reduction in the areas of comp liance and certification, and further transparency 
and consultation mechanisms.  It would also help  Members build an understanding of the extent and 
functions of SPS-related private standards.  One limi tation that has been identified is that for some 
developing countries, such meetings might enco mpass only producers and exporters facing private 
SPS standards in their export markets and not those setting and applying such standards. 
Action 5
:  The SPS Committee should explore the possibility of working with the Codex, OIE 
and IPPC to support the development and/or  dissemination of informative materials 
underlining the importance of international SPS standards. 
13. The responses to the Secretariat's questionnaire re vealed that many producers and traders are 
not aware of the differences between public and SPS-relate d private standards.  In an effort to provide 
further clarity on this issue and promote the use of international standards, the SPS Committee could 
explore the possibility of working with the Codex,  OIE and IPPC to support the development and/or 
dissemination of informative materials. Such materials would underline the merits of science-based 
international standards, which, when adopted by  Member governments and private schemes, serve to 
facilitate trade while ensuring safety.  They  would build on already existing materials. 
14. A better global understanding could contribute to th e further incorporation of these standards 
in public and private requirements and may also improve the ability of producers and exporters to 
negotiate with those setting private sta ndards on the content of these standards. 
__________