WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  G/SPS/GEN/606 
5 December 2005 
 (05-5782) 
Committee on Sanitary a nd Phytosanitary Measures Original:   Spanish 
  
 
ARTICLE 6 OF THE AGREEMENT ON THE APPLICATION 
OF SANITARY AND PHYTOSANITARY MEASURES 
 
Communication from Argentina
 
 
 
 The following communication, received on 30 November 2005, is being circulated at the 
request of the delegation of Argentina.  
_______________ 
 
 
I. INTRODUCTION 
1. Argentina is grateful for the opportunity to submit this communication, and as suggested by 
the Chairperson of the Committee on Sanitary and Ph ytosanitary Measures, it would like to share with 
the other Members its practical experience with re spect to the recognition of regionalization in the 
areas of both animal and plant health. 
2. In this communication we shall try:  (i) to sy stematize the difficulties that Argentina has had 
to face, as an exporting Member, in requesting recognition of the regionalization schemes it has 
implemented and (ii) to examine the nature of those difficulties and suggest certain corrective measures aimed at overcoming them. 
3. The principle of regionalization was enshrined in the Agreement on the Application of 
Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS Agreement)  for two purposes:  (i) to incite Members to 
improve their sanitary and phytosanitary status;  (ii) to facilitate access to foreign markets for agrifood 
products. 
4. In Argentina's view, this duality should be observed both in the work currently being 
conducted by the SPS Committee and in the work begun by the OIE and the IPPS, as well as in 
bilateral procedures for the recognition of regionalization. 
5. As can be seen in the first review of the operation and implementation of the 
SPS Agreement
1, which pointed to the delays in the recogn ition of regionalization, this issue has been 
the subject of discussion from an early stage.  The f act is, that almost 11 years after the signature of 
the SPS Agreement, the meeting reports and negotia ting documents that have been submitted indicate 
that we are still far from being able to cl aim any substantive progress in this area. 
6. The identification and national recognition of  a region with a differential sanitary and 
phytosanitary status is a process that can involve several years of work and major investments in 
human and financial resources, which are often scarce.  Moreover, once the work has been done, 
considerable resources are needed fo r the maintenance of that status as well as for surveillance and for 
emergency programmes to deal with any outbreaks that  may occur.  All of this investment can have 
                                                      
1 G/SPS/12. G/SPS/GEN/606 
Page 2  
 
its justification in society, which usually feels the effects in terms of domestic trade or the movement of persons, machines, animals, equipment, etc., pr ovided there is a chance for access to markets that 
had hitherto been closed or subject to  complex and often costly restrictions. 
7. In short, Argentina considers that: 
 - Over the past few years, a considerab le number of Members have denounced the 
unnecessary and unjustified delays in rec ognition of implemented regionalization 
schemes; 
  - because of these delays, one of the obj ectives of regionalization (access to foreign 
markets for agricultural products) has been  undermined, causing serious prejudice to 
exporting countries (many of which are developing countries); 
  - as we have tried to demonstrate below, ma ny of these obstructions or delays are due 
to administrative or procedural problems ra ther than any disparities of a scientific or 
sanitary nature (see part II and the Annex with flow chart); 
 
 - consequently, without prejudice to the hi ghly important work being conducted by the 
reference international organi zations, the importance and na ture of this matter are 
such that the SPS Committee should take what ever decisions are needed to make the 
procedures for recognition of regi onalization more predictable. 
 
II. PROBLEMS IDENTIFIED
2 
1. Problems relating to domestic consid erations in the importing country 
8. The constraints in this respect could be due to a number of circumstances: 
 (a) Lack of up-to-date domestic legislation th at is compatible with the new international 
agreements.  There are still many countries whose domestic legislation dates back to 
before 1995 and does not recognize the principle of regionalization; 
  (b) lack of domestic legislation estab lishing the necessary procedures to implement 
and/or recognize regionalization in  a clear and predictable manner; 
  (c) lack of human and financial resources needed to progress with the concrete 
implementation of the principle of regionalization; 
  (d) confused and imprecise definition of the appropriate level of protection (ALOP) 
resulting in application of the "zero risk" approach, although the idea is to adopt the "minimum risk" approach; 
 
 (e) lack of any proper definition of ALOP by the political decision-makers, potentially 
confusing the situation for the technici ans who have to examine the relevant 
documentation and who, suspecting a lack of political will, are liable to prolong the procedure. 
 
                                                     
 
2 The Annex to this Communication contains a flow ch art with the different cr itical points identified by 
Argentina, an exporting Member par excellence.  As ca n be seen, many of these difficulties are essentially 
administrative or procedural.  G/SPS/GEN/606 
 Page 3 
 
 
2. Problems relating to the bilateral relatio nship between the importer and the exporter 
9. This category covers the constraints relating to  concrete cases of requests for recognition of a 
region with differential status between two Members. 
(a) If the pest/disease is not present in the importing country, there may be a lack of 
understanding of its biology which will inev itably give rise to doubts on the part of 
officials concerning the surveillance and m onitoring systems, their efficiency, the 
identification of the pest/disease, the la boratory analyses and their results, the 
possibility of identifying areas w ith differential status, etc. 
(b) This inadequate understanding of the biology of the pest/disease could lead to a lack 
of proper training among officials called upon to analyse the information and make 
policy recommendations to the decision makers as to whether or not to recognize a 
region. 
(c) Constraints deriving from large numbers of requests for recognition addressed to a 
single Member. 
(d) Pressures applied to regulatory bodies.  Cases of producers going to law in their 
country in order to prevent the opening-up of the market to products that could cause 
them economic losses have been proliferating. 
(e) Longer processing time owing to repeated requests for information, long periods 
during which the different services fail to  communicate with each other, repeated 
inspection visits without any decisions being taken, etc. 
(f) Lack of familiarity with and/or confidence in the health services. 
3. Problems relating to international reference standards 
10. In order to reflect the distinctions that exist in the international lega l framework owing to the 
different ways in which the OIE and the IPPC opera te, we shall divide our comments into two parts. 
World Organization for Animal Health  
 
11. In cases of recognition of differential status th at has already been recognized by the OIE, 
delays can derive from: 
(a) Absence of many Members from the meeti ngs and consequent lack of understanding 
of the procedure for approving recognition, as a result of which such approval is often 
refused; 
(b) lack of a fast-track procedure for recognizing and OIE recognition; 
(c) Members which, regardless of OIE recognitio n, decide to go through all of the steps 
as though the matter had never been considered, causing delays that are clearly unwarranted from a technical point of view. 
12. In cases of status that has not been recognized by the OIE: 
(a) Members deciding not to consider the request; G/SPS/GEN/606 
Page 4  
 
(b) lack of recognition causing uncertainty and hence leading to undue delays in the time 
required for recognition. 
International Plant Protection Convention
 
 13. The IPPC is currently discussing the adoption of an  international standard in this area, and is 
developing guidelines for the recognition of free areas and areas of low prevalence.  At the same time, 
discussions are being conducted on the advisability and feasibility of developing a system along the 
same lines as the OIE.  However, a number of de veloping countries – including Argentina – consider 
that such a system, far from facilitating trade, c ould constitute an obstacle because of the particular 
nature and the quantity of plant pests. 
14. Meanwhile, countries are addressing the problem  of regionalization through horizontal 
framework standards based, for example, on ISPM No. 4 (establishment of pest-free areas).  We can 
cite all of the problems identified in paragraph 8 and 9 of this document. 
III. FINAL REMARKS 
15. In the paragraphs above and in the Annex to  this communication, we have attempted to 
provide a non-exhaustive list of the difficulties that the Argentine health services have encountered in 
requesting recognition of regionalization. 
16. To overcome these difficulties, we need to introduce a series of measures to enhance 
predictability in international trade.  These measur es include:  (i) The development of guidelines in 
the SPS Committee for the establishment of clear, pr edictable and precise rules governing procedures 
for the recognition of regionalization;  (ii) the in corporation of these guidelines in the domestic legal 
systems of Members, and thei r proper enforcement;  (iii) the establishment of cooperation 
programmes between Members for cases requiring adapta tion of legislation or training of technicians. 
17. Finally, we note that this issue is of particular importance to the agricultural exporting 
countries, many of which are developing Members.   Consequently, without prejudice to the work 
being done by the reference inte rnational organizations, we would ask the SPS Committee to reach a 
decision that would speed up the recognition of regionalization.  G/SPS/GEN/606 
 Page 5 
 
 
 
 
    ANNEX 
Request for regionalization 
Sending of information  
Evaluation of documentation 
Request for additional information  Bilateral Agreement 
Time:  0 
1st critical point of delay, especially if the 
pest or disease is unknown, or if there is an 
insufficient number of qualified personnel.  
In certain cases, it can take years to obtain 
a reply.  
Evaluation of documentation  2nd critical point of delay:  lack of 
familiarity with procedures and time 
required for the consideration of 
documentation.  
4th critical point of delay:  situation can 
arise, particularly when the pests or 
diseases are unknown and there is no 
specific international legislation.  On-the-spot evaluation  
Inspection report 
Request for additional reports  
Request for modifications  3rd critical point of delay:  sending a mission 
can involve years of discussion and 
submitting requests.  
Additional inspection (possibly)  5th critical point of delay?  G/SPS/GEN/606 
Page 6  
 
     
 
    
 
 
Subsequent authorizations  7th critical point of delay:  impossible to 
know precisely how long this administrative 
step will take, but in certain cases it could 
be years.  
Registration of plants, exporters, 
etc. 8th critical point of delay:  could be 
administrative or shared with other 
administrative units.  
10th critical point of delay:  uncertain 
outcome. Inspection visits, approval and 
certification for market access  
OPENING UP OF 
MARKET???  9th critical point of delay:  this is the 
beginning of a different process which can 
be frustrating and of uncertain outcome.  
5, 10, 15 YEARS???????  Modification of the national 
standard 
Issuing of a new standard 
Public Consultation? 
Result of the consultation 
Drafting of a final standard 
Sanctioning  6th critical point of delay 
 
__________