WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  G/SPS/W/170 
23 February 2005 
 
 (05-0751) 
Committee on Sanitary a nd Phytosanitary Measures Original:   Spanish 
  
 
SECOND REVIEW OF THE OPER ATION AND IMPLEMENTATION 
OF THE SPS AGREEMENT 
 
Communication by Chile
 
 
 
 The following communication, dated 18 February 2005, is being circulated at the request of 
the delegation of Chile . 
 
________________ 
 
 1. Secretariat document G/SPS/GEN/510 provides a fairly good overview of the state of 
implementation of the Agreement over the course of  this period.  Chile wishes to offer a few 
comments on the more specific aspects raised by Members for examination in the review process. 
2. In general terms, Chile re-emphasizes that the text of the SPS Agreement is adequate and that 
improvements in its implementati on can be made through more specific guidelines developed and 
decided on by the Committee, so as to clarify the a pplication of principles that pose interpretation or 
implementation problems. 
I. TRANSPARENCY 
3. Implementation in the area of transparency has gradually improved, particularly as regards the 
increasing number of countries which are notifying th e changes they have made to sanitary and 
phytosanitary measures.  However, there is still ro om for improvement in complying with notification 
deadlines before new measures take effect and in following up on comments. 
4. We agree with China's concerns about the comme nt period, which is usually disregarded, and 
it might be a good idea to establish a 60-day peri od for submitting comments prior to a measure's 
entry into force, counted from the date on wh ich the Secretariat circulates the notification. 
5. To our knowledge, the following are the only exceptions: 
- Cases involving a trade facilitation aspect – as Chile itself previously proposed – which 
should be maintained;  and 
- emergency notifications of provisional meas ures, although this kind of measure is not 
always temporary and is frequently maintained on a permanent basis without any 
notification to that effect. 
6. We concur with the proposal to notify measures that depart from an international standard as 
well of those that are consistent with such a st andard, it being understood that the procedure can be 
significantly improved and can even further the pr ocess of monitoring the use of international 
standards. G/SPS/W/170 
Page 2  
 
 7. We also find it interesting that New Zeala nd should suggest establishing a database and we 
endorse that proposal. 
8. Although it is important to note that the original objective of notifying sanitary and 
phytosanitary measures has been e xpanded to include notification of equivalence and special and 
differential treatment, it is more crucial still for Memb ers to ensure that such instruments are put into 
effect.  Perhaps it would be possible to add something similar under other items such as 
regionalization, concerning the recogn ition of sanitary status among Members. 
II. EQUIVALENCE 
9. We greatly welcome document G/SPS/19/Rev.2 of July 2004, which clarifies the content and 
provides better guidance for the implementation of activities relating to equivalence;  it should also 
give the impetus for more effectiv e application of this principle. 
10. We are concerned that countries are not notifying their progress in matters relating to 
equivalence, whether agreements or measures c onsistent with the decision to add a section on 
transparency in notifications (document G/SPS/ 7/Rev.2/Add.1 of 2002).  Even where such 
agreements do exist, no use has been made of them.  Moreover, although the agenda of each 
Committee meeting provides for the sharing of info rmation on implementation of the principle of 
equivalence, no such information has been given th ere either, even when Members, and especially 
developing countries, are known to engage  in bilateral activity in this fiel d – a state of affairs that runs 
counter to transparency. 
III. REGIONALIZATION 
11. This is a principle which gives as much cause for concern as was it did at the time of the 
previous report on the review of the Agreement.  The same problems persis t as regards undue delays, 
primarily for administrative reasons, in the rec ognition of sanitary status.  Chile has submitted a 
number of documents, including G/SPS/W/129, G/SPS/GEN/381, G/SPS/W/140/Rev.2, G/SPS/W/164, and G/SPS/W/165, in an endeavour to secure agreement in the Committee on the development of operational guidelines aimed at ac hieving better implementation of the principle.  
There is an international standard prepared by the OIE and the IPPC, but administrative procedures 
are evidently slowing down its adoption by Members.   The overriding problem therefore lies in the 
implementation of the existing standard, which is a matter falling within the ambit of this Committee. 
12. In sum, regionalization is a principle that has been extensively analysed and has given rise to 
discussions in the Committee.  Moreover, since numerous countries have submitted documents voicing their concerns and perspectives, there is sufficient material for the Secretariat, at the 
Committee's request, to present draft guidelines desi gned to ensure better implementation of the 
principle. 
13. Turning to the opinions of different countries on the review process, we agree with China's 
concerns over the application of this principle, a nd we fully endorse Mexico's suggestion to develop 
guidelines for regionalization similar to those on equivalence. 
14. It should be recalled that a number of Member s objected to the development of guidelines for 
equivalence when the idea emerged and that work did not begin until the Council for Trade in Goods 
so requested.  It is our understanding that the Co mmittee itself should take the initiative in order to 
fulfil or improve its implementation objectives in the case of principles that pose problems. 
15. As suggested in the section on "Transparency", an initial step might be to include in the 
notification process an item concer ning the request for and the acceptance of recognition of sanitary  G/SPS/W/170 
 Page 3 
 
 
 and phytosanitary status between countries.  This c ould provide factual substantiation of the need to 
develop guidelines in this area, for the sole purpose of detecting any trade barriers that might ensue 
from the above. 
IV. TRADE CONCERNS 
16. A great deal of work on this issue has been  done in Committee meetings.  Chile previously 
highlighted the need to follow up on the matter , which was included in the agenda and in the 
consolidated document circulated by the Secretariat. 
17. The proposals of the United States in this resp ect seem appropriate, the first being to make 
greater use of existing Committee mechanisms such as the good offices of the Chair or the Secretariat, 
and the other is a further step towards the creation, in the Committee, of altern ative mechanisms to the 
formal panel process, inter alia  to avoid having to establish a panel and so reduce costs.  Should 
agreement be reached on this point, appropria te procedural guidelines should be drawn up. 
V. RELATIONSHIP WITH THE INTERNAT IONAL SCIENTIFIC REFERENCE 
ORGANIZATIONS 
18. Although there is smooth coordination via the Secretariat of the SPS Committee and those of 
the international reference organiza tions, it might be possible to consider joining efforts in pursuit of 
common objectives, such as the monitoring of international standards in the case of the 
SPS Committee, either through the little-used st andards monitoring mechanism or through the 
notification process. 
19. In the case of the Codex Alimentarius, for ex ample, there is a procedure for countries to 
notify the application, in part or in full, of the standards developed by that Organization, but this has 
hardly been used.  The procedure is currently be ing revised, and now might perhaps be the time to 
embark on a joint effort. 
VI. MONITORING OF INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS 
20. As noted earlier, a procedure has provisionally been endorsed in the Committee.  This could 
be a very useful mechanism, but it has not been used by Members.  On those occasions when the 
Committee consulted one or other of the internat ional scientific organizations, the response was 
consistently favourable.  It might be advisable to increase coordination in the Members' capitals 
between Members' representatives in the SPS Committ ee and those in the "three sister" organizations, 
in order to foster more effective use of this instrument in the Committee. 
VII. SPECIAL AND DIFFERENTIAL TREATMENT (S&D) 
21. Special and differential treatment is a sour ce of considerable concern for a number of 
Members.  The first step, however, is to clarif y the basic meaning and purpose of S&D, which is 
granted by developed countries to developing or least developed countries, without jeopardizing 
sanitary protection, and countries requiring S&D should  be encouraged to make a formal request to 
that effect.  The incorporation, on Canada's initia tive, of requests and responses regarding special and 
differential treatment in the notification process seems to be a good starting point.  Guidelines 
conducive to better application of this princi ple could perhaps be developed if need be. 
VIII.  UNDUE DELAYS 
22. This is an issue of paramount importance and Chile supports document G/SPS/W/160, in 
which Uruguay expresses concern about the delays in Members' decisions, especially as regards risk G/SPS/W/170 
Page 4  
 
 assessment and the need for clarification or guidelines on the implementation of Article 5, to ensure 
more effective application of its provisions. 
IX. ADMINISTRATION OF THE AGREEMENT 
23. We have reached the stage where substantial progress has been made in developing guidelines 
for principles such as equivalence, consistency and m onitoring of international standards.  It will be 
necessary to continue with the drafting of guidelin es for other principles;  however, it is equally 
important for Members to use these instruments and,  where appropriate, to notify the progress they 
have made. 
__________