WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  G/SPS/GEN/898 
2 February 2009 
 (09-0185) 
Committee on Sanitary a nd Phytosanitary Measures  
  
 
WTO SUBMISSION TO THE OPEN-ENDED EXPERT WORKING GROUP  
ON BUILDING NATIONAL PHYTOSANITARY CAPACITY 
 
Note by the Secretariat
1 
 
 
1. A background paper was submitted by the WTO for the Open-Ended Working Group on 
Development of an International Plant Protection Convention Capacity Building Strategy, held in 
Rome on 8-12 December 2008.  The paper was prep ared by the Standards and Trade Development 
Facility. 
2. The paper identifies current flows of phytosanitary technical cooperation, examines how 
phytosanitary needs are evaluated and discusses how these can be mainstreamed into national 
development plans.  The document is circul ated to the SPS Committee for its information. 
 
_______________ 
 
 
 
     
 
    
                                                     
 
1 This document has been prepared under the Secret ariat's own responsibility and is without prejudice 
to the positions of Members or to their rights or obligations under the WTO. G/SPS/GEN/898 
Page 2  
 
  WTO SUBMISSION TO THE OPEN-ENDED EXPERT WORKING GROUP 
ON BUILDING NATIONAL PHYTOSANITARY CAPACITY 
 
I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
1. This background paper has been prepared as a contribution to the Open-Ended Working 
Group on Building National Phytosanitary Capacity.  The paper has the following objectives: 
• to outline the link between the capacity of national phytosanitary services to implement 
International Standards for Phytosanitary Measures (ISPMs) and the participation of 
developing countries in international trade in plant products; 
• to examine how phytosanitary needs ar e evaluated and discuss how these can be 
mainstreamed into national development plans; 
• to identify current flows of phytosanitary t echnical cooperation and identify future trends, 
where possible;  and 
• to examine the role that the Standard s and Trade Development Facility (STDF)
2 could play 
in assisting developing countries in desi gning and implementing national phytosanitary 
strategies. 
 2. Growth in global merchandise trade carries with it the risk of the spread of plant pests and 
diseases – particularly when trade is unregulat ed.  The economic damage from plant pests and 
diseases can be severe for developing countries.  Protecting plant health is a way to sustain 
productivity, secure agricultural revenues and help reduce poverty.  Compliance with phytosanitary 
requirements facilitates access to export markets and builds confidence between trading partners.  In 
general terms, phytosanitary systems play a s upportive role in achievi ng Millennium Development 
Goals related to poverty allevi ation and international trade. 
3. The implementation of the International Pl ant Protection Convention (IPPC) standards 
provides countries with the building blocks for effec tive phytosanitary systems.  The use of ISPMs is 
an indispensable element of the trading system, as recognized by the Agreement on the Application of 
Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS).  Capaci ty to implement IPPC standards is an important  
determinant of participation in international trade in products which carry phytosanitary risk.  
4. Growing regulation of phytosanitary risk s has potentially serious consequences for 
developing countries.  Most developing countries export a diverse portfolio of processed and 
unprocessed primary-based products.  Since the 1980s, horticultural products have been one of the 
fastest growing areas of agricultural exports, much  higher than traditional exports (cotton, coffee, 
cocoa, etc.) from developing countries where expor t growth has slowed.  By their very nature, 
horticultural products are often subject to a high de gree of phytosanitary control.  Trade measures 
applied due to phytosanitary risks may rapidly an d negatively affect developing countries’ trade 
performance in key export sectors.  Against this b ackground, participation by developing countries in 
IPPC is essential for the proper implementation of the SPS Agreement  Efforts to support participation 
in IPPC should be an essential component of broa der efforts to strengthen the capacity of national 
phytosanitary services in developing countries. 
5. As the provision of development cooperati on becomes more aligned with the Paris 
Declaration on Aid Effectiveness so assistance is becoming more demand driven.  A demand-driven 
approach relies on beneficiary countries to identify their own needs.  Thus national phytosanitary 
                                                     
 
2 See section VI below for more information on the STDF.  G/SPS/GEN/898 
 Page 3 
 
 
  services need to ensure that the results of the Phyt osanitary Capacity Evaluation tool are translated 
into priorities at national level through such ve hicles as the Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers 
(PRSP), national Aid for Trade strategies or throug h Enhanced Integrated Framework (EIF) in least 
developed countries.  The results of the PCE tool should be used to elaborate investment programmes 
in phytosanitary systems. 
6. The role of IPPC in mainstreaming phytosanita ry needs is crucial to provide countries with 
guidance on how to integrate their capacity building needs in broader development strategies to obtain 
the political support required.  At international leve l, the IPPC should build the case for phytosanitary 
capacity building outside the boundaries of phytosanitary  fora to help mobilize resources for technical 
assistance in this area.  The STDF can play an im portant role in this regard by arguing for the 
mainstreaming of phytosanitary technical assistan ce through its linkages with initiatives such as the 
EIF and the Aid for Trade.  
7. Estimating past, present and future assistance to st rengthen plant health systems in developing 
countries is difficult.  Data reported to the Orga nization of Economic Co- operation and Development 
(OECD) and  the World Trade Organization (WTO) pr ovides only a partial view of the total number 
of activities which are undertaken.  Capacity building in the plant health area is often bundled into 
more general assistance programmes.  The shortage  of information may cause overlap between donor 
activities, lack of synergies, duplication of effo rt, and sub-optimal use of scarce resources.   
8. In general, two aspects are currently missi ng with regard to strengthening national 
phytosanitary capacity: a strategic view on how to proceed and indicators to measure the impact of 
assistance on higher order objectives such as market access, reduction of production losses and 
poverty alleviation.  The IPPC Open-Ended Wo rking Group on Building National Phytosanitary 
Capacity provides an excellent opportunity to provide both the strategic vision and the indicators of impact.  
II. PHYTOSANITARY COMPLIANCE AND INTERNATIONAL TRADE 
A. P
LANT HEALTH AND TRADE  
9. Global merchandise trade grew annually by 2.7 per cent between 2000-2007.  Over the same 
period, export of agricultural products increased  13 per cent, reaching US$1,128 billion in value - 
approximately 8 per cent of global merchandise trade.   Growing volumes of global trade carries with 
it the risk of entry, establishment and spread of  plant pests, plant diseases, and invasive species – 
particularly where such trade is unregulated.  
10. ISPM N°15 "Guidelines for regulating wood packagi ng material in international trade" is a 
reminder that phytosanitary risks can arise from unforeseen interactions between plant pests and 
diseases and international trade generally, not just in  plant products.  Threats to plant health are 
numerous and diverse including pathogens (viruses, fungi, and bacteria) and pests (insects, weeds, 
etc.).  This makes it challenging to control th e introduction and spread of plant pests.   
11. The economic damage inflicted by plant pests cons titutes a vital threat to the poorest nations.  
In 2004, the infestations of desert locust in th e main agricultural zones of Mauritania caused cereal 
production to drop by 44 per cent.  A recent study on losses due to fruit fly ( Bactocera invadens ) in 
eight West African countries (Burkina Faso, Benin, Côte d'Ivoire, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Mali, and 
Senegal) estimated them at between 30 and 85 per cent of total production.3  Losses of this magnitude 
                                                      
3 Stonehouse, J., Ritchie, M., Paqui, T., Ndiaye, M ., Tchibozo, S., Dabire, R ., Jobe, L., Billah, M. 
(2008) Study on the damages inflicted by fruit flie s on West Africa fruit produc tion and Action Plan for a 
coordinated regional response. G/SPS/GEN/898 
Page 4  
 
  impact on food security, agricultural and household income.  Production losses from plant pests and 
diseases limit the possibilities for trade growth and market access due to phytosanitary controls.   
12. Protecting plant health is a way to sustai n productivity, secure agricultural revenues 
and help reduce poverty.  Compliance with ph ytosanitary requirements facilitates access to 
export markets and builds confidence betwee n trading partners.  In general terms, 
phytosanitary systems play a supportive role in achieving Millennium Development Goals 
related to poverty alleviation and international trade. 
B. IPPC
 AND THE ARCHITECTURE OF GLOBAL TRADE  
13. The WTO Agreement on the Application of San itary and Phytosanitary Measures (the SPS 
Agreement) allows countries to restrict trade when  necessary to ensure food safety, or protect the 
health of animals and plants, subject to certain requirements.  It encourages governments to base 
national SPS measures on international standards, guidelines, and recommendations.  This process is 
often referred to as "harmonization".  The SPS Agreement explicitly identifies the standards 
developed by the IPPC as those relevant to plant health. 
14. The governing body of the IPPC, the Commission on Phytosanitary Measures (CPM), 
approves International Standards for Phytosan itary Measures (ISPMs).  IPPC standards are 
instrumental in the implementation of the principles of the SPS Agreement with regard to plant health.  
For instance, ISPM N°1 "Principles of plant quarantin e as related to international trade", is used as the 
global quarantine standard which sets the basis of phy tosanitary requirements for international trade.  
ISPMs such as ISPM N° 6 "Guidelin es for surveillance", ISPM N° 9 "G uidelines for pest eradication 
programmes" and ISPM N° 14 "The use of integrated measures in a systems approach for pest risk 
management" help plant health authoritie s establish pest control strategies.  
15. ISPM N°2 "Guidelines for Pest Risk Analysis"  (the provision of accurate pest data to the 
importing country in support of market access request s) has become indispensable to facilitate and 
accelerate market access procedures.  It is also a tool for the importing country to protect its agriculture from the introduction and spread of harmful pests.  
16. The work of the IPPC is also of particular importance for recognition of equivalence.  In 
2005, the CPM adopted ISPM N° 24 "Guidelines for th e determination and rec ognition of equivalence 
of phytosanitary measures".  The IPPC has also developed a number of sta ndards relevant to the 
recognition of the pest or disease status of trading partners including ISPM N° 4 "Requirements for the establishment of Pest Free Areas", ISPM N° 8 "Det ermination of pest status in an area";  ISPM 
N° 10 "Requirements for the establishment of pest  free places of production and pest free production 
sites",  ISPM N° 22 "Requirements for the establis hment of areas of low pest prevalence",  ISPM 
N° 26 "Establishment of pest free areas for fruit f lies (Tephritidae)", and ISPM N° 29 "Recognition of 
pest free areas and areas of low pest prevalence". 
17. The implementation of IPPC standards provides countries with the building blocks for 
effective phytosanitary systems.  Application of ISPMs is an indispensable element of the 
trading system, as recognized by the SPS Agreemen t.  Capacity to implement IPPC principles is 
an important determinant of participation in international trade in products which carry phytosanitary risk.  
C. P
LANT HEALTH MEASURES AND GLOBAL TRADE  
18. The SPS Agreement obliges countries to notify new or amended SPS measures, not based on 
international standards, which may have a significant effect on trade.  A total of 9,426 notifications  G/SPS/GEN/898 
 Page 5 
 
 
  had been submitted to the WTO by 31 August 2008.  In 2007 alone, 1,196 notifications were 
circulated.   
Table 1:  "Objectives" of notified SPS measures (June 2007-August 2008) 
 
  Total for June 2007- 
August 2008 Share over 15 month 
period 
Food Safety 670 35.2% 
Animal Health 215 11.3% 
Plant Protection 485 25.4% 
Protect humans from animal 
(Zoonosis) / plant pest or disease 402 21.1% 
Protect territory from other 
damage from pests 134 7.0% 
 
19. Notifications related to plant protection account for a significant proportion of this total.  For 
example, between June 2007 and August 2008, 25 pe r cent of notifications were related to plant 
health (Table 1).  A further 7 per cent of notifica tions covered measures taken to protect the territory 
of the importing country from damage caused by pests.  WTO Members are not required to notify  measures based on an international standard alt hough this is nonetheless recommended.  Twelve per 
cent of all notifications referred to measures based on IPPC standards – or n early half of the total 
notified for plant protection.  This figure is a usef ul proxy for the use of IPPC standards by countries 
in international trade, in particular ISPM N° 15.  
20. The WTO SPS Committee provides a forum for WT O Members to raise issues related to 
implementation of the SPS Agreement including  specific measures of trade concern to WTO 
Members.  Of the 261 specific trade concerns ra ised between 1995 and the end of 2007, 28 per cent 
were related to plant protection measures.   In addition, of the ten disput e settlement panels established 
to examine SPS issues to date, five have been di rectly related to plant protection measures.   
21. From the preceding analysis, it is clear that th ere is a growing inventory of measures taken by 
countries which affect trade in products which carry phytosanitary risk.  Furthermore, the numbers 
above track only those new or amended measures wh ich have been notified.  The actual total of 
measures in force is undoubtedly higher.  In this c ontext of growing phytosanitary regulation, the role 
of IPPC standards in harmonization becomes ever more significant to trade.   
22. Growing regulation of phytosanitary risks in  international trade has potentially serious 
consequences for developing countries.  Most de veloping countries export a diverse portfolio of 
processed and unprocessed primary-based produc ts.  Since the 1980s, horticultural products 
have been one of the fastest growing areas of agr icultural exports, much higher than traditional 
exports (cotton, coffee, cocoa, etc.) from develo ping countries where export growth has slowed.  
By their very nature, horticultural products are often subject to a high degree of phytosanitary 
control.  Thus trade measures applied due to phytosanitary risks may rapidly and negatively affect developing countries’ trade performance in key export sectors. 
III. DEVELOPING COUNTRY PARTICIPATION IN IPPC 
23. Articles 3.4 and 10.4 of the SPS Agreement en courage WTO Members to actively participate 
in the development of international standards, in cluding in the work of the IPPC.  A number of 
developing countries have identified their lack of ef fective participation in standard-setting as one of 
the difficulties they face with implementation of th e SPS Agreement.  Effective participation extends G/SPS/GEN/898 
Page 6  
 
  well beyond physical presence in IPPC meetings.  It requires the expertise to evaluate the effect of 
proposed standards and the capacity to implemen t standards when they are finally adopted.  
24. The WTO's General Council identified participatio n of developing countries in international 
standard setting bodies among the problems relating to implementation of the SPS Agreement which 
required action.  In October 2000, the General C ouncil requested the WTO Director-General to:   
(a) encourage international standard setting orga nizations to ensure the participation of 
WTO Members at different levels of de velopment and from all geographic regions, 
throughout all phases of standard development; 
(b) explore with the relevant international st andard-setting organiza tions and relevant 
intergovernmental organizations financial and technical mechanisms to assist the 
participation of devel oping countries in standard-setting activities; 
(c) coordinate efforts with the relevant inte rnational standard-setting organizations to 
identify SPS-related technical assistance n eeds and how best to address these, taking 
into consideration the importance of bilateral and regional technical assistance in this regard. 
25. WTO is supportive of efforts to facilitate th e participation of developing countries in 
international standards setting bodies.  The crea tion of the IPPC Trust Fund in 2003 was a welcome 
development.  Against this background, it is useful  to consider evaluations of the FAO/WHO Codex 
Trust Fund.  These reports have c oncluded that greater participati on has led to an awakening of 
interest at government level in Codex and its work , even in developing countries that had hitherto 
displayed little or no interest.
4  This in turn has had positive sp in-offs in increased cooperation 
between different agencies involved in food safety issues at the national level.   
26. A general point made by the evaluations is that  impact is maximized if participation in 
meetings is accompanied by training, e.g. on prep aration of comments on draft standards, pre-meeting 
briefings, as well as reinforced coordination and networking opportunities at national and regional 
level.   
27. Participation by developing countries in IPPC  is essential for the proper implementation 
of the SPS Agreement.  Efforts to support part icipation in IPPC should be an essential 
component of broader efforts to strengthen the ca pacity of national phy tosanitary services in 
developing countries. 
IV. MEASURING NATIONAL PHYTOSANITARY CAPACITY 
28. The Phytosanitary Capacity Evaluation tool (PCE) has been applied in more than 60 countries 
world-wide.  Its primary focus is to examine the capacity of National Plant Protection Organizations 
(NPPOs) to implement ISPMs and their right s and responsibilities as outlined in the IPPC. 
29. During CPM II in 2007, a review of the PCE was presented by CABI Africa5.  The report 
noted the positive impact of the PCE on national strategic planning, budge tary allocations, legal 
                                                      
4 Connor R. (2006) "Initiative to explore linkages between increased participation in Codex and 
enhanced international food trade opportunities" and Slorach. S (2007) "Enquiry concerning the FAO/WHO 
Project and Trust Fund for Enhanced Participation in Codex". 
5 Day R., Quinlan M., Ogutu W. (2006) Analysis of the Application of the Phytosanitary Capacity 
Evaluation Tool. Report to the Secretariat of the International Plant Convention.  G/SPS/GEN/898 
 Page 7 
 
 
  frameworks, training, and awareness raising.  Sugges tions were made to further improve the use of 
the results of the PCE and to enhance the tool itself. 
30. A key issue is to ensure that the PCE eval uation is used as a basis on which to mobilize 
support to strengthen national phytosanitary capacity .  This requires mainstreaming phytosanitary 
capacity building needs into national development pl ans.  To achieve this objective requires advocacy 
on the part of the national plant health services and coordination across ministries responsible for 
phytosanitary issues. 
31. The PCE has a confidentiality clause which r estricts the dissemination of results, unless 
waived by the NPPO of the country surveyed.  Discussions held during an STDF workshop on capacity evaluation tools in March 2008 highlighted  the limitations which confidentiality imposes on 
of use of the PCE (and the OIE’s Performance of Ve terinary Services tool) from the perspective of 
furthering coordination of technical cooperation activities.  
32. As the provision of development cooperati on becomes more aligned with the Paris 
Declaration on Aid Effectiveness so assistance  is becoming more demand driven.  A demand-
driven approach relies on beneficiary countries identifying their own needs.  Thus national 
phytosanitary services need to ensure that their n eeds are translated into priorities at national 
level through such vehicles as the Poverty Reduc tion Strategy Papers (PRSP),  national Aid for 
Trade strategies or through EIF in least developed countries. 
V. PHYTOSANITARY CAPACITY BUILDING  
A. G
LOBAL OVERVIEW  
33. Three main sources of information have been used for this background report: 
• the OECD Creditor Reporting System (CRS); 
• the WTO/OECD Trade Capacity Building Database (TCBDB); and 
• information collected by the STDF from re ports to the SPS Committee on technical 
assistance activities and from the regional reviews of Aid for Trade.  
34. The Development Assistance Committee of the OECD maintains statistics and reports on aid 
and other resource flows.  These statistics concer n developing countries and countries in transition 
and related matters, based principa lly on reporting by DAC members.  Data is maintained on the CRS 
and other databases. 
35. Table 2 below shows figures for assistance on pl ant and post-harvest protection and pest 
control between 2002-2006.  Data reported is hist orical information on actual commitments and 
disbursements.  Over the five year period, commi tments and disbursement have averaged US$25.36 
million per year (actual disburseme nts have averaged US$13.37 million). 
Table 2:  Data on commitments and disbursements reported to the OECD Creditor Reporting 
System on plant and post-harvest prot ection and pest control (US$ millions) 
 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 
Plant and post-harvest 
protection and pest control 16.27 20.03 42.7 28.86 18.96 
Livestock/veterinary services 7.98 10.41 8.13 15.36 46.22 G/SPS/GEN/898 
Page 8  
 
  36. The definition used for reporting is narrow and probably does not incl ude all assistance to 
plant health services.  Plant h ealth assistance may also be reporte d under other assistance codes, such 
as biosphere protection, biodiversity, trade policy regulation (SPS), agricultural research, food crop 
production, agricultural extension, education and training, forestry services.  Thus in practice, the 
figures for reporting under this code to the CRS un derestimate total plant health assistance.  Plant 
health assistance is reported elsewhere in the CRS  data sets and disaggregation is impossible.  
37. In the CRS database, a total of 39 activities are reported from nine donors (Belgium, 
Denmark, EC, France, Germany, Netherlands, Port ugal, UK, and US).  Activities reported ranged 
from projects to tackle orange rust in coffee, to co st benefit analysis for plant health measures through 
to the EC's Pesticides Initiative Programme (P iP) (the largest programme in value terms). 
38. Further detail can be added in the category of tr ade policy regulation (SPS) by looking at data 
reported to WTO/OECD Trade Capacity Building Da tabase (TCBDB).  This database uses the same 
data set as the CRS, but contains additional categories, including a category within SPS trade policy regulation covering plant health.  In  this category, an additional 99  activities have been reported over 
the period 2001-2006.  Over the five year period,  disbursement averaged US$3.58 million per year. 
Table 3:  Data reported to the TCBDB on pl ant health regulation training (US$ millions) 
 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 
Plant and post-harvest 
protection and pest control 2.9 8.1 1.3 2.0 3.6 
 
39. In practice, the level of aggregation in reportin g in both the CRS and TCBDB means that it is 
doubtful if accurate figures on plant health  capacity building can be generated.  The total combined 
figure of 138 activities and average figure of US$28.94 million for plant health capacity building 
over the period 2002-2006 underestimates the real total .  For example, neithe r database contains 
information on activities reported by international organizations including the United Nations Food 
and Agriculture Organization (FAO), the Internationa l Institute for Tropical Agriculture (IITA), the 
International Centre of Insect Physiology and Ec ology (ICIPE), the Inter-American Institute for Co-
operation on Agriculture (IICA) and the Regional Inte rnational Organization for Plant Protection and 
Animal Health (OIRSA). 
40. In an effort to elaborate an accurate over view of on-going plant health assistance activities 
and the financial flows involved data was been collected by the STDF from three main sources: submissions made by WTO Members to the SPS Co mmittee, research work in three pilot regions 
(Central America, East Africa, and selected c ountries of the Greater Mekong Delta sub-region) and 
data from other sources. 
B. S
UBMISSIONS MADE BY WTO  MEMBERS TO THE SPS  COMMITTEE  
41. In document G/SPS/GEN/726, information repor ted to the SPS Committee by Australia, the 
European Communities, the United States, and by  the regional organizations IICA and OIRSA was 
compared with data reported to the TCBDB. 
42. Assistance provided by Australia between 2007- 2008 amounted to approximately $US19.5m 
and targeted 36 countries mainly in the Asia-Pacific Region.  Half of the projects (45 projects) funded 
were dedicated specifically to plant protection.   Assistance was channelled mainly through the 
Australian Agency for International Developm ent (AusAID) and the Australian Centre for 
International Agricultural Research  (ACIAR).  Activities included Pest Risk Analysis training, pre- G/SPS/GEN/898 
 Page 9 
 
 
  harvest and post-harvest pest control training, p est detection and diagnosis, Integrated Pest 
Management, etc. 6 
43. The European Communities provides significant assi stance in the SPS area.  Tracking the full 
extent of the assistance provided is di fficult as EC assistance through the 10th European Development 
Fund is based on strategy papers prepared at nationa l and regional level.  Much easier to collect are 
the various projects which contain plant health elem ents offered to different  economic and geographic 
groupings of developing countries.  EC projects included: 
• The Pesticides Initiative Programme (PIP -COLEACP, 2003-08, total value €29.1m); 
• Participation of African Nations in San itary and Phytosanitary Standard Setting 
Organizations (PAN-SPSO, 2008-10, total va lue €3.85m, implemented by AU-IBAR and 
AU-IAPSC); 
• Strengthening Food Safety Systems Through Sanitary and Phytosanitary (SPS) Measures 
(2008-2012, estimated value US$32m); 
• ASEAN-EU Programme for Regional Integra tion Support (APRIS II) (2006-2009, €8.4m);  
and 
• EC-funded Regional Integration Support Progr amme (RISP, 2005-12, total value €30m) for 
COMESA includes a component of capacity building to develop standards and meet 
international SPS requirements. 
44. A total of 420 SPS related technical assistance pr ojects were funded by the United States in 
124 developing countries between 2006-2008 (total value US$22,120,930).7  In addition, the United 
States provides support to key SPS policy objectiv es under the African Global Competitiveness 
Initiative (AGCI) through USAID's regional trade hubs .  Several countries benefit from support to the 
agricultural sector through the Millennium Challe nge Corporation (MCC).  Some of these projects 
include a phytosanitary component.  For instance,  the MCC compact in Mozambique includes a 
project aiming at reducing the spread of Lethal  Yellowing Disease (LYD), improving productivity of 
coconut products, and encouragi ng diversification into other cash-crop production (total value 
US$17.4m). 
45. On the basis of additional informat ion reported by WTO Members to the SPS 
Committee, the total number of activities for plant health rose to 479 over the period 2001-2006.  However, only some 40 per cent of activities were re ported with a value, thus it is not possible to 
estimate the total value of the plant health activities reported. 
C. A
ID FOR TRADE RESEARCH WORK IN THREE PILOT REGIONS (CENTRAL AMERICA , EAST 
AFRICA , AND  THE GREATER MEKONG DELTA SUB-REGION ) 
46. Results of the country surveys undertaken by the STDF in selected countries in the Greater 
Mekong Sub-Region (GMS), East Africa, and Central America as part of the regional reviews of Aid 
for Trade in 2007 and 2008 provide additional data  on both the amount of assistance provided, and 
also the main drivers of that assistance. 
                                                      
 6 G/SPS/GEN/717/Add.1 Techni cal assistance to developing co untries provided  by Australia.  
 7 G/SPS/GEN/181/Add.7. Tec hnical assistance to developing countr ies provided by the United States 
of America. 
 G/SPS/GEN/898 
Page 10  
 
  47. In East Africa, support to national plant hea lth systems in Kenya, Tanzania, and Uganda 
totalled US$8 million over the period 2001-2006 - 22 per cent of total SPS-related assistance 
received.  Uganda was the main beneficiary with  assistance totalling US$7.6 million over the survey 
period.  Potentially a more financially important source of funding was projects run at a regional 
level.  Within this category, Kenya, Tanzania, and Uganda were eligible  for assistance through EC 
projects benefiting ACP countries, African countries , and developing countries more generally which 
totalled US$30.8m.  This figure represented approximately  8 per cent of the total assistance offered at 
a supranational level for SPS capacity building. 
48. In the GMS region, the global response to highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) is 
driving SPS assistance.  Data was obtained for the GMS region for the period 2005-13.  It shows that 
HPAI, and animal health issues more broadly, account for 64 per cent of all assistance programmed 
up to 2013.  In contrast, plant health accounts fo r only 1.2 per cent of the total programmed amount.  
Noteworthy projects include two project in the GMS on building phytosanitary capacity funded by New Zealand (2005-2009, US$1.35m) and Japan (2006-2009, US$896,000).   
49. Regional economic cooperation is also a driving force for SPS capacity building in the GMS 
countries.  Implementation of the GMS Cross-Bord er Transport Agreement, the ASEAN Free Trade 
Agreement (AFTA) and establishment of an ASEAN Economic Community (AEC) are stimulating interest in regional cooperation projects.  This is also reflected in the assistance given in the plant 
health area.  Between 2001-2006, 15 plant hea lth projects (US$9.8 m) involving multiple countries 
from the region were run by regional instituti ons, primarily ASEAN and Asian Development Bank 
(ADB). 
50. In Central America, the Dominican Republic -Central America Free Trade Agreement (DR-
CAFTA) has proven an important driver for technical assistance in the region.  For example, since 2005, the United States has supported collaboration between the United States and its CAFTA-DR 
partners through the CAFTA-DR SPS Capacity Buildi ng Program.  The emphasis is to harmonize 
SPS regulations with the internati onal standard setting bodies (Codex, IPPC, OIE) and increase export 
opportunities for plant, horticultural, and anim al products regionally and internationally. 
51. Activities funded have included training on mitiga tion of pests and diseases related to the 
export of peppers and tomatoes to the United States and biological control of quarantine fruit fly pest.  
Similarly, the Inter-American Development Bank is  leading a regional project to provide assistance 
for small and medium-sized enterprises in Cent ral America on technical requirements for gaining 
market access under DR-CAFTA.  The project incl ude various phytosanitary components such as 
training technicians on Pest Risk Analysis for sel ected products to strengthen national phytosanitary 
surveillance networks. 
52. Another important driver of assistance in Central America is the EU-Central American 
Association Agreement.  Currently, a regional programme is being set up by the European 
Communities to strengthen SPS capacity in the region.  
53. Information generated by STDF work as part  of the Regional Reviews of Aid for Trade 
highlight the important role played by regional cooperation projects in providing assistance in 
the plant health area.  Many of these projects  are related to regional economic integration 
initiatives (e.g. ASEAN, EAC, DR-CAFTA) or gr oupings of developing countries (e.g. ACP)  
D. I
NFORMATION FROM INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS  
54. Neither the CRS or TCBDB database reports  data on support received by developing 
countries from international organizations such as FAO, World Bank, United Nation's Industrial 
Development Organization (UNIDO), United Nati on's Development Programme (UNDP), and   G/SPS/GEN/898 
 Page 11 
 
 
  International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).  In stead, the CRS tracks the funding offered by donors 
to these organizations. 
55. FAO’s Technical Cooperation Programme provides support to countries in the phytosanitary 
area through implementation of projects aiming at  enhancing a country's SPS compliance.  These 
projects include the update of national legislati on in conformity with the provisions of the SPS 
Agreement, reinforcing pest surveillance capacit ies of national authorities, strengthening pest 
management, and control capabilities through traini ng of technicians on pest control techniques, 
improving phytosanitary inspection services, etc.  FAO also provides training to Government officials on the work of the IPPC and on the implementati on of ISPMs.  FAO's Technical Cooperation website 
returns 826 entries for activities related to plant protection implemented since 2005. 
56. Technical assistance for pest control is also  offered through the Joint FAO/IAEA Programme 
of Nuclear Techniques in Food and Agriculture.  Capacity building projects consist mainly in 
assisting developing countries in the implementa tion of national or regional (transboundary) area-
wide integrated pest management programmes agains t major insect pests such as fruit flies and moths 
using a combination of cultural and genetic pest control techniques such as the Sterile Insect 
Technique.  Projects on control of fruit flies are on-going in several countries including Egypt, 
Mauritius, Morocco, Senegal, Seychelles, South Af rica, Tanzania, Israel, and Jordan as well as 
regional projects in Asia and Central America. 
57. In general terms,  aassistance provided by th e World Bank does not target specifically SPS 
measures but includes SPS capacity building as part of  broader development projects.  For instance, 
West Africa Agricultural Productivity Program (WAA PP) Support Project (2007-2011, total value of 
US$51m) is based on a value chain approach for sel ected crops and covers as pects related to pest 
management.  Likewise, the Agriculture Compe titiveness Project for Vietnam (2008-2013, US$75m) 
and the NELSAP Regional Agricultural Trade and Productivity Project in East Africa (2008-2013, US$10m) encompass a component on farming practices which may include pest control. 
58. Although partial, the information compiled on tec hnical assistance trends seem to suggest that 
phytosanitary capacity building is generally provided as part of general support to agriculture or trade 
programmes.  Support provided to national phytosanita ry services often consists in training on policy 
aspects of compliance and increasingly on Pest Risk Analysis as this latter is perceived by countries as the most important constraint to trade.  The ma jor part of assistance provided as part of value chain 
projects consists in training at technical level to  extension officers and farmers on Integrated Pest 
Management and Good Agriculture Practices. 
59. From the preceding analysis it is clear that it is difficult to obtain an accurate view of 
on-going phytosanitary-related technical assistance.  A general problem is that activities are under-reported by donor providers or reported as part of other activities.  This lack of accurate 
information is problematic and may cause overlap between donor activities, lack of synergies, 
duplication of effort and sub-optimal use of sc arce resources.  Agains t this background, the 
development by IPPC of a concept paper and strategy for national phytosanitary capacity 
building will provide a welcome focus to phytosanitary capacity building.  
E. M
EASURING IMPACT OF PHYTOSANITARY TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE  
60. One of the main conclusions of a recent STDF workshop on Good Practice in SPS-related 
Technical Cooperation related to the absence of i ndicators to measure the impact of SPS-related 
projects.  Two suggestions were put forward in this  regard:  (i) the development of a framework to 
assess impacts quickly and relatively easily; and (ii) the development and use of impact indicators. G/SPS/GEN/898 
Page 12  
 
  61. In assessing the impact of phytosanitary technical assistance, it is suggested that indicators be 
used which go beyond the immediate achievement of pr oject objectives, e.g. training provided, etc.  
The IPPC concept paper and strategy for national phytosanitary capacity building should ideally 
include indicators related to the achievement of so-called higher order objectives, e.g. market access 
for a given product, increased revenues of a farming community from reducing production losses, 
impact on poverty alleviation, etc.  
62. Integrating impact indicators into the IPPC  concept paper and strategy for national 
phytosanitary capacity building will assist dono rs and national authorities to track progress 
over time and help mainstream phytosanita ry capacity building needs into broader 
development assistance. 
VI. STANDARDS AND TRADE DEVELOPMENT FACILITY  
A. O
VERVIEW  
63. The STDF is a global programme in capacity building and technical cooperation established 
by the FAO, the World Organisation for Animal H ealth (OIE), the World Bank, the World Health 
Organization (WHO) and the WTO.  Other internatio nal organizations such as the International Trade 
Centre (ITC), OECD, UNIDO, and United Nati ons Conference on Trade and Development 
(UNCTAD),  donors and developing countries also participate. 
64. The STDF has two main aims:  
• to assist developing countries enhance their e xpertise and capacity to analyze and to 
implement international SPS standards, impr oving their human, animal and plant health 
situation, and thus ability to gain and maintain market access;  and  
• to act as a vehicle for coordination among technical cooperation providers, the mobilization 
of funds, the exchange of experience, and th e dissemination of good practice in relation to 
the provision and receipt of SPS-related technical cooperation. 
B. ADVOCACY  
65. The STDF can play an important role in advocac y for phytosanitary capacity building.  This 
role can be fulfilled through the existing linka ges between the STDF and other wide-reaching 
initiatives such as the EIF and Aid for Trade.  The ST DF works actively with th ese initiatives to raise 
the profile of SPS issues within a broader development aid concept.  
66. By organizing events under the umbrella of Aid for Trade such as the regional consultations, 
the STDF brings phytosanitary issues to the atten tion of an audience which may not otherwise be 
aware of the link between plant h ealth and the ongoing efforts to use trade as an instrument for 
poverty eradication.  Evidence brought by the STDF of lost market access and trade opportunities due 
to non-compliance with phytosanitary requirement s provides the missing link between agricultural 
development, trade and poverty.  The importance of assisting developing countries in building the 
capacity of their phytosanitary systems in order to reduce the threats caused by plant pests on 
international trade is also highlighted in STDF cont ributions to Aid for Trade events.  By making the 
case for SPS compliance within a broader dialogu e like Aid for Trade, the STDF assists in the 
mobilization of resources dedicated to the plant health area. 
67. The STDF is also actively working with the EI F to put a greater emphasis on the SPS needs in 
the Diagnostic Trade Integration Study (DTIS) for LDCs.  Most of the DTIS recognize SPS measures 
as one of the major constraints to trade expansion in  agricultural products.  However, little attention is  G/SPS/GEN/898 
 Page 13 
 
 
  given to putting LDC's SPS capacity building needs among the priorities in the action matrices.  The 
STDF can assist in making SPS needs feature more pr ominently in the updated DTIS.  One approach 
to consider could be the devel opment of national SPS strategies a nd prioritized action plans based on 
cost-benefit analysis and informed by the results of capacity evaluation tools where relevant.  This 
allows the mainstreaming of phytosanitary need s in broader developmen t strategies and poverty 
reduction programmes.  
68. A good example of coordination and mainstream ing of phytosanitary capacity building is 
STDF's work on fruit fly in West Africa.  The aim of this work is to provide an opportunity for 
national and regional organizations, donors and other stakeholders to discuss mechanisms to control 
fruit fly and mobilize funds for a multi-year Action Plan to tackle this problem. 
C. COORDINATION ACTIVITIES  
69. Increasing importance is being placed on the STDF fulfilling its promise as a coordination 
mechanism and centre of good practice.  STDF's ini tiatives aim at streamlining technical assistance 
resources by avoiding duplication of efforts and enhancing information sharing between the various 
actors.  In addition, tracking technical assistance flows contributes to a better distribution of resources 
among the three sectors of SPS, i.e. food safety, animal health, and plant protection, and between 
regions and countries. 
70. As part of its co-ordination mandate, the STDF has organized a series of thematic events for 
delegates of the SPS Committee and participants from developing countries.  A workshop on SPS-
related capacity evaluation tools developed by inte rnational organizations took place in Geneva on 31 
March 2008 and an information session on private sta ndards on 26 June 2008.  In collaboration with 
the OECD the STDF held a workshop on good practice in SPS-related technical cooperation in 
October 2008. 
D. STDF  AS A SOURCE OF FUNDING  
71. Developing countries often face difficulties in articulating their needs into "bankable" 
projects.  Through project preparation grants (PPG s), STDF can provide countries with assistance to 
turn good ideas into projects.  For instance, the STDF recently approved a PPG aiming to assist 
member countries of the Inter-African Phytosanitary  Council to draw up a strategy for phytosanitary 
capacity building.  The strategy to be developed will take into account the IPPC's global capacity 
building strategy and will ensure synergies and comp lementarities are found.  One of the objectives of 
the strategy will be to enhance effective participa tion of African NPPOs in the CPM and their ability 
to implement the ISPMs.  
72. Through project grants (PG), the STDF can assist developing countries in the 
enhancement of their national phytosanitary capa city.  STDF funding gives priority to projects 
seeking to address phytosanitary issues in order to  gain or maintain market access.  The STDF 
has funded a total of nine projects worth over US$3.5m and four PPGs in the area of plant 
health. 
 
 
__________