WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  G/SPS/35 
7 July 2005 
 (05-2994) 
Committee on Sanitary a nd Phytosanitary Measures  
  
 
 
REPORT ON PROPOSALS FOR SPECIAL AND DIFFERENTIAL TREATMENT 
 
Adopted by the Committee on 30 June 2005
 
 
 
I. INTRODUCTION 
A. BACKGROUND  
1. On 1 August 2004, the General C ouncil adopted the following decision with respect to special 
and differential treatment: 
"... the General Council reaffirms that provi sions for special and differential (S&D) 
treatment are an integral part of the WTO Agreements.  The Council recalls Ministers' decision in Doha to review all S&D treatment provisions with a view to strengthening them and making them more precise, effective and operational.  The 
Council recognizes the progress that has been made so far ... 
The Council also instructs all WTO bodies to which proposals in Category II have 
been referred to expeditiously complete  the consideration of these proposals and 
report to the General Council, with clear recommendations for a decision, as soon as possible and no later than July 2005.  In doing so these bodies will ensure that, as far 
as possible, their meetings do not overlap so as to enable full and effective participation of developing countries in these discussions."
 1 
Furthermore, in the Doha Development Round Declaration, Ministers agreed: 
"... that all special and differential treatment provisions shall be reviewed with a view to 
strengthening them, and making them more pr ecise, effective and operational.  In this 
connection, we endorse the work programme on special and differential treatment set out in 
the Decision on Implementation-Related Issues and Concerns."2 
                                                      
1 WT/L/579. 
2 WT/MIN(01)/DEC/1, para. 44.  Paragraph 12.1  of the Decision on Implementation-Related Issues 
and Concerns.(WT/MIN(01) /17) reads as follows: 
12. Cross-cutting Issues 
 12.1 The Committee on Trade and Development is instructed:  
 (i) to identify those special and differential treatment provisions that are already mandatory in 
nature and those that are non-binding in character, to consider the legal and practical implications for 
developed and developing Members of co nverting special and differential tr eatment measures into mandatory 
provisions, to identify those that Members consider should be made mandatory, and to report to the General Council with clear recommendations  for a decision by July 2002; 
(ii) to examine additional ways in which special and differential treatment provisions can be 
made more effective, to consider ways, including improv ed information flows, in wh ich developing countries, in G/SPS/35 
Page 2  
 
2. Among the 38 proposals in Category II, five were referred to the SPS Committee.  These 
proposals concern specifically the provisions of Articl es 9 and 10 of the SPS Agreement.  The text of 
these articles and of the five proposals are reproduced below for ease of reference. 
3. These proposals have previously been considered in various formal and informal meetings of 
the General Council, the Committee on Trad e and Development, and the SPS Committee.
 3  This draft 
report is based on the discussions of these proposals a nd of special and differential treatment in the 
formal and informal meetings of the SPS Committe e, as well as during informal consultations held on 
28 January, 15 and 18 February, 18 and 24 May 2005.  It also includes comments on the background document prepared by the Secretariat (G/SPS/GEN/543).   
B. 
CONSIDERATIONS IN PREPARING THIS REPORT  
4. In the context of the discussions of the pr oposals in the SPS Committee and in other WTO 
bodies, many Members have indicated that they are o pposed to any formal modification of the text of 
the SPS Agreement at this time, wh ereas other Members have indicated that they would agree to 
consider such modification if this were deemed ne cessary.  A broad consensus exists to actively seek  
alternative, concrete avenues to fulfil the mandate before undertaking specific changes in the text of 
the SPS Agreement.  One major concern is that m odification of Articles 9 and 10 could result in 
changes to the balance of rights and obligations est ablished by the SPS Agreement, and could lead to 
changes in the text of other provisions.  Ma ny Members consider any such changes to be 
unacceptable, unnecessary to address the underlying con cerns of developing country Members, and in 
particular least-developed country Members. 
5. Members have stressed that it is not the intention of any of the proposals to impinge on the 
right of any Member to implement scientifically  justified SPS measures necessary to ensure that 
products moving in international trade do not present unacceptable risks to human, animal or plant life 
or health, or to the territory of a Member.  Trade in products considered to be unsafe or sub-standard 
would have deleterious effects on consumer de mand, reflect poorly on the exporting Member's 
reputation, and unnecessarily call regulatory competencies into question.  At the same time, Members 
recognize that developing country Members, and in  particular least-developed country Members, face 
specific difficulties in meeting the sanitary and phyto sanitary requirements of many of their trading 
partners, and need targeted technical assistance.  Import requirements that differ from those based on 
the relevant international standards, while not  necessarily inconsistent with the SPS Agreement4, can 
pose considerable difficulties to developing countries.   
6. The SPS Agreement is relatively new, and some Members are still in the process of adjusting 
to and developing more effectiv e implementation of the expanded new disciplines established by the 
Agreement.  For developing country Members, mo st of the provisions of the Agreement became 
applicable only as of January 1997;  for the least-d eveloped country Members, the date of application 
was January 2000.  Recent studies have shown that  the level of knowledge  and understanding of the 
                                                                                                                                                                     
particular the least-developed countries, may be assisted to make best use of special and differential treatment 
provisions, and to report to the General Council with clear recommendations for a decision by July 2002;  and  
(iii) to consider, in the context of the work programme adopted at the Fourth Session of the 
Ministerial Conference, how special and differential treatment may be incorporated into the architecture of 
WTO rules. 
The work of the Committee on Trade and Development in this regard shall take fully into consideration 
previous work undertaken as noted in WT/COMTD/W/77/Rev.1.  It will also be without prejudice to work in 
respect of implementation of WTO Agreements in the General Council and in other Councils and Committees. 
3 See relevant sections of reports of meetings of the SPS Committee (G/SPS /R/Series), as well as 
G/SPS/23, G/SPS/24, G/SPS/27  and Corr.1, G/SPS/30.  
4 See, inter alia , Article 3.3  G/SPS/35 
 Page 3 
 
 
Agreement remains relatively low, and that academ ic and institutional responses are also nascent.5  A 
number of WTO Members have not as yet fulfilled obligations relating to the identification of a 
national notification authority and of an SPS e nquiry point, and many have not submitted any 
notifications of new or revised SPS measures.6   
7. At the same time, it is apparent from the studies undertaken by the World Bank7 and others 
that SPS measures and the application of the SPS Agreement are of increasing importance to the 
movement of goods in agricultural trade.  This importance is expected to  increase, for all WTO 
Members.  Members have recognized that devel oping country Members, and in particular least-
developed country Members, face specific difficulties in effectively implementing provisions of the 
SPS Agreement, including the transp arency provisions. Members have  indicated their commitment to 
assist in addressing the specific difficulties and to  ensure improved capacities and efficiencies. 
8. This report describes some underlying concer ns and common objectives as identified by 
Members in the Committee's discussions.  Devel opments which have occurred since the proposals 
were submitted in 2002, and which address, in part , these concerns or objectives are also described.  
The report also describes constraints faced by the Committee in the development of precise, effective 
and operational recommendations on the five proposals referred to it by the General Council.  The 
report identifies initial elements that could be examined by the SPS Committee with a view to 
providing more precise, effective and operational m eans to address, at least in part, identified 
concerns.   
II. RELEVANT SPS PROVISIONS 
 
Article 9 
 
Technical Assistance  
 
1. Members agree to facilitate the provision of te chnical assistance to other Members, especially 
developing country Members, either bilaterally or through the appropriate international organizations.  
Such assistance may be, inter alia , in the areas of processing technol ogies, research and infrastructure, 
including in the establishment of national regulatory bodies, and may take the fo rm of advice, credits, 
donations and grants, including for the purpose of seek ing technical expertise, training and equipment to 
allow such countries to adjust to, and comply with , sanitary or phytosanitary measures necessary to 
achieve the appropriate level of sanitary or phy tosanitary protection in their export markets.  
 
 
 
                                                      
5 "Food Safety and Agricultural Health Standards:  Challenges and Opportunities for Developing 
Country Exports", World Bank Report No. 31207, 10 January 2005. 
6 G/SPS/W/173/Rev.2, paragraphs 26 and 27.  
7 Idem . G/SPS/35 
Page 4  
 
 
2. Where  substantial  investments  are required  in order  for an exporting  developing  country  
Member  to fulfil  the sanitary  or phytosanitary  requirements of an importing Member, the latter shall 
consider providing such technical assistance as w ill permit the developing country Member to maintain 
and expand its market access opportunities for the product involved. 
 
 
Article 10 
 
Special and Differential Treatment  
 
1. In the preparation and applica tion of sanitary or phytosanitary  measures, Members shall take 
account of the special needs of developing country Me mbers, and in particular of the least-developed 
country Members.    
2. Where the appropriate level of sanitary or phy tosanitary protection allo ws scope for the phased 
introduction of new sanitary or phytosanitary meas ures, longer time-frames fo r compliance should be 
accorded on products of interest to  developing country Members so as to maintain opportunities for their 
exports.  
3. With a view to ensuring that developing country Members are able  to comply with the 
provisions of this Agreement, the Committee is en abled to grant to such countries, upon request, 
specified, time-limited exceptions in whole or in part from obligations under this Agreement, taking into account their financial, tr ade and development needs. 
 4. Members should encourage and facilitate th e active participation of developing country 
Members in the relevant in ternational organizations. 
 
 
III. TEXTS OF THE PROPOSALS  
A. PROPOSALS RELATING TO ARTICLE 9.2 
9. To make this mandatory provision effective a nd operational it is proposed that the clause 
"shall consider providing" be change d to "shall provide".  It is further proposed to add the following 
sentence to the provision: 
"If an exporting developing country Me mber identifies specific problems of 
inadequate technology and infrastructure in  fulfilling the sanitary or phytosanitary 
requirements of an importing developed count ry Member, the latter shall provide the 
former with relevant tec hnology and technical facilities  on preferential and non-
commercial terms, preferably free of cost, k eeping in view the development, financial 
and trade needs of the exporting developing country."8 
10. The phrase "substantial investments" in Article 9. 2 shall be construed relative to resources of 
concerned government departments in developing an d least-developed country Members and to their 
development needs.  Any changes that would require  additional resources to existing levels of current 
expenditure or their restructuring, or additional tr aining or staffing, shall be construed to amount to 
"substantial investments".9 
                                                      
8 TN/CTD/W/2. 
9 TN/CTD/W/3/Rev.2.  G/SPS/35 
 Page 5 
 
 
11. Where the importing Member does not actually provide such technical assistance, that 
Member shall withdraw the me asures immediately and unconditionally; or the importing Member 
shall compensate the exporting developing country Me mbers for loss resulting directly or indirectly 
from the measures.10 
12. It is understood that technical assistance sha ll be fully funded technical assistance and shall 
not entail financial obligations on the part of the exporting developing and least-developed country 
Members.11 
13. It is agreed that the WTO shall recommend th at impact assessments shall be conducted to 
determine the likely effect on the trade of developing and least-developed country Members for any proposed standards before adoption, and if the im pact would be adverse, the standards would not 
become applicable until it is established that de veloping and least-developed country Members that 
would be affected have acquired the capac ity to beneficially comply with them.
12 
B. PROPOSALS RELATING TO ARTICLE 10.1 
14. For effective operationalization of Article 10.1, it is suggested that the following addition be 
made to the existing provision: 
"If an exporting developing country Member identifies specific problems in 
complying with a sanitary or phytosan itary measures of an importing developed 
country Member, the latter shall upon request en ter into consultations with a view to 
finding a mutually satisfactory solution. 
 In this regard, such special needs shall include: securing and enhancing 
current levels of exports from developi ng and least developed country members, 
maintain their market shares in their export markets, as well as developing their 
technological and infrastructural capabilities.  While notifying a measure, Members shall, inter-alia , indicate the following:  (i)  systems and/or equivalent systems that 
could be used to comply with such a measure;  (ii)  the names of the developing and least-developed country Members that coul d be affected by the applied measure."
13 
15. The requirement to "take account of the special needs of developing country Members, and in 
particular least developed country Members" in Article 10.1 shall be understood to mean that 
Members shall either withdraw measures that adve rsely affect any developing and least-developed 
country Members or which they find difficult to comply with, or shall provide the technical and financial resources necessary for the developing and least-developed country Members to comply 
with the measures.
14 
16. The requirement shall be further understood to  mean that Members shall always initiate 
consultations in the Committee whenever they propo se or intend to take any measures that are likely 
to affect imports from developing and least-devel oped country Members.  In the consultations, 
Members shall establish whether or not the proposed or intended measures, if justified under the 
Agreement, would adversely affect any deve loping and least-developed country Members.15 
                                                      
10 Ibid. 
11 Ibid. 
12 Ibid. 
13 TN/CTD/W/2. 
14 TN/CTD/W/3/Rev.2. 
15 Ibid. G/SPS/35 
Page 6  
 
17. Members shall establish a facility within the Global Trust Fund for ensuring that: 
(a) developing and least-developed country Memb ers have the financial and technical 
capacity to meet the requirements under the Agreement;   
(b) delegations from developing and least-d eveloped country Members attend and 
effectively participate in meetings of the Committee and relevant international 
standard-setting organisations;  
(c) developing and least-developed country Me mbers effectively utilise the flexibility 
under the Agreement;  and   
(d)  measures adopted under the Agreement do not  contravene the rights of developing 
and least-developed country Members.
16  
18. It is understood that technology transfer a nd any technical and financial assistance under the 
Agreement to developing and least-devel oped country Members shall be cost free.17 
C. PROPOSAL RELATED TO ARTICLE 10.4 
19. In Article 10.4 of the Agreement on the Appli cation of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures 
the term "should" be read to express "duty" rather  than mere exhortation.  This could be clarified 
through an authoritative interpretation under Article  IX.2 of the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing 
the WTO.  This would help achieve the intended objective of this S&D provision.18 
IV. UNDERLYING CONCERNS  
20. The underlying concerns relate to key difficu lties developing countries may face in meeting 
new or modified SPS requirements of their tradin g partners, and hence in achieving or maintaining 
access to markets for their products.  Import require ments that differ from those based on the relevant 
international standards, while not neces sarily inconsistent with the Agreement19, can pose 
considerable difficulties to developing countries.   Developing country Members may lack the 
necessary knowledge, infrastructure or technology to deal with new requirements.  These deficiencies 
can often not be overcome without initial institutional development, technical and financial assistance.  
These deficiencies can have negative consequen ces on the acceptability of products for trade. 
21. Members attach importance to technical assistance being provided both on a bilateral basis 
and through relevant international organizations.  However, such assistance is often characterized as 
supply-driven, and may be determined to a greater ex tent by the policy interests of the donor rather 
than the specific needs of the r ecipient.  At the same time, Members noted the general paucity of 
demand-driven requests, apparently partially due to  institutional capacity constraints.  Furthermore, 
Members expressed concern that in the absence of  more targeted, specific trade assistance goals, 
addressing timeliness and sustainability in an effici ent manner is highly difficult.  A particular 
concern is provision of assistance only after a developing country Member has lost market access due to a SPS measure.  Another concern reflects the uncer tainty of support and a desire to ensure that 
technical assistance is more predictable.  Some developing country Members also maintain that a 
simplification of the administrative procedures of  developed country Members would make it less 
costly and easier for developing country Members to  comply with their SPS requirements and export.  
Some Members have indicated that one advantage of making these provisions binding is that 
                                                     
 
16 Ibid. 
17 Ibid. 
18 TN/CTD/W/6. 
19 See, inter alia , Article 3.3  G/SPS/35 
 Page 7 
 
 
developing country Members would no longer be required to specifically  request technical assistance;  
however, all Members recognize that technical assist ance should be more needs- and results-driven. 
22. The general effectiveness of technical assistance has been questioned.  In particular, a number 
of developing country Members have indicated that much of the assistance they have received has not 
had the desired effect of allowing them to maintain  or achieve export opportunities in the face of new 
or existing SPS requirements.  This concern underlies a desire to find more e ffective means to ensure 
the better overall performance and demonstrated specific results of technical assistance.  
23. Developing country Members have further iden tified the need for special and differential 
treatment, in particular in the context of allowing more time for them to adjust to new requirements 
for the products they export.   
24. Another underlying concern relates to the diffi culties faced by developing country Members 
in effectively participating in the work of th e SPS Committee and relevant international standard-
setting bodies.  Physical presence at meetings is necessar y, but to ensure that participation is effective 
the necessary expertise and coordination must be  built-up within devel oping country Members. 
V. RELEVANT DEVELOPMENTS 
25. The Decision on Implementation taken at the D oha Ministerial Conference in 2001 included 
inter alia  a clarification on Article 10.2.20  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 be  understood to mean normally a period of not less than six months.  
Where the phased introduction of a new measure is  not possible, but a Member identifies specific 
problems, the Member applying the new measure shall enter into consultations, upon request, to try to 
find a mutually satisfactory solution.  The Decisi on also indicated that, subject to the conditions 
specified in paragraph 2 of Annex B of the SPS Agreement, a period of not less than six months shall normally be provided between the publication of a measu re and its entry into force.  Finally, the Doha 
Ministerial Decision instructed the SPS Committ ee to undertake a review of the operation and 
implementation of the SPS Agreement every four years.
21 
26. Since the proposals were submitted in 2002, a number of developments have occurred which 
address some of the underlying concerns.  With respect to the three standard-setting bodies of 
relevance under the SPS Agreement, trust funds have  been established to increase participation of 
developing country Members in the standard-setti ng activities of the International Plant Protection 
Convention (IPPC) and of the FAO/WHO Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex) 22, and the 
World Organization for Animal Health (OIE) will est ablish a trust fund before the end of 2005.  These 
trust funds are supported through contributions by donor agencies and member countries.   
27. With respect to the Codex trust fund established by FAO/WHO, during the period March to 
December 2004, a total of 83 persons from 75 countries attended 14 separate Codex meetings, 
including the Codex Alimentarius Commission meeting held in June-July 2004.  All 83 participants 
were funded entirely by the Codex Trust Fund an d most were government officials from least 
developed countries.  The breakdown of participants was:  60 per cen t from least-developed and other 
lower income countries;  29 per cent from lower mi ddle income countries;  and 11 per cent from 
                                                      
20 WT/MIN(01)/17, paragraph 3.1. 
21 The report of this review, the second since the en try into force of the Agreement, is contained in 
document G/SPS/36.  
22 See proposals in paras. 17(b) and 19 above. G/SPS/35 
Page 8  
 
upper middle income countries.
23  In order to improve the effectiveness of the trust fund, FAO/WHO 
plan an information meeting of both donor and beneficiary Members  in July 2005.  
28. In 2004, the IPPC established a trust fund under FAO rules to be used exclusively to the 
direct benefit of developing countries.  It is used to facilitate their participa tion and involvement in all 
IPPC activities, including in the Interim Comm ission on Phytosanitary Measures, in regional 
workshops on draft international standards for ph ytosanitary measures, in Expert Working Groups, 
and also in phytosanitary capacity-b uilding and information exchange.24 
29. The OIE will establish a trust fund before the end of 2005.  The OIE also continues to provide 
financial support for the participation of Chief Ve terinary Officers of its member countries in OIE 
standard-setting activities. 
30. Since the SPS Agreement entered into force,  the FAO/WHO, OIE and IPPC have also 
developed and/or strengthened technical assistance programmes, including conferences, seminars and 
workshops, to enhance national capacities on SPS matters .  The IPPC developed a diagnostic tool, the 
Phytosanitary Capacity Evaluation (PCE), to help  countries address their current capacity and identify 
needs for assistance.25  Similar diagnostic tools have been developed by the FAO/WHO with respect 
to food safety, and recently by OIE.26  In addition, other interna tional and regional organizations, 
including the World Bank, OIRSA, IICA, UNIDO and UNCTAD, provide regular updates to the SPS Committee on their programmes related to SPS capacity building. 
31. In order to address some of the needs identifie d with respect to technical assistance, the 
Secretariat has undertaken numerous regional and na tional training workshops  on the SPS Agreement, 
and, in particular, on how Members can use the provi sions of the Agreement to facilitate their trade 
interests.
27  The Secretariat also organized workshops in  Geneva on:  technical assistance needs and 
how to best address these in relation to the SPS Agreement (November 2002);  the principles and 
methods of risk analysis (June 2000);  the pro cesses and procedures of the relevant standard-setting 
organizations (March 2001);  and on the effe ctive operation of national SPS enquiry points 
(November 2003).  Furthermore, the Secretariat has developed a number of tools to assist Members 
with the understanding and implementation of the Agreement, including a booklet on "Understanding 
the SPS Agreement"28;  a handbook on the application of the transparency provisions of the 
Agreement;  and an inter-active CD-ROM explaining and discussing in detail the provisions of the 
Agreement and circulated two questionnai res on technical assistance to Members. 
32. In September 2002, following consultations by the Director-General with the FAO, OIE, 
WHO and the World Bank as requested by the Gene ral Council in October 2000, the Standards and 
Trade Development Facility (STDF) was established.  The purpose of the STDF, which is 
administered by the WTO, is to enhance the cap acity of developing countries in the SPS area through 
the provision of funding for projects in developi ng countries, as well as through cooperation between 
the relevant institutions in SPS-related ac tivities including joint institutional projects. 29  This facility 
can be used to finance projects to assist deve loping country Members, and in particular least-
developed country Members, make more effective use of all of the provisions of the SPS Agreement, 
                                                      
23 More information on the Codex Trust Fund is available in documents G/SPS/GEN/564 and 565, and 
from the web site http://www.who.int/foodsafe ty/codex/trustfund/en/  
24 G/SPS/GEN/482. 
25 http://www.ippc.int. 
26 See G/SPS/GEN/525;  also "Performance, Vision  and Strategy (PVS) for National Veterinary 
Services", available from http://www.oie.int. 
27 These training activities are described in  more detail in document G/SPS/GEN/521. 
28 WTO Agreements Series, Volume No. 4 
29 The Secretariat reports regularly to the SPS Committee on the STDF, most recently in 
G/SPS/GEN/523.  G/SPS/35 
 Page 9 
 
 
including those related to dispute resolution.30  As of June 2005, the STD F had funded approximately 
US$2 million of projects and project preparation grants.  These include projects proposed by 
developing country Members, as well as pilot proj ects developed to address specific needs identified 
by developing country Members in the SPS Committ ee.  The STDF also main tains a database, which 
provides information on SPS-related techni cal assistance and capacity building projects.31 
33. Several Members have also created specific m echanisms to assist developing countries to 
participate in the relevant international institutions  and in the activities of the SPS Committee, such as 
the Initiative for the Americas on Sa nitary and Phytosanitary Measures.32  Furthermore, bilateral 
technical assistance related to SPS capacity is being provided by many Members.33   
34. Guidelines and decisions adopted by the Committe e have regularly take n into consideration 
the specific needs and concerns expressed by de veloping country Members.  These include the 
recommended procedures for implementing the tr ansparency provisions of the SPS Agreement 
(G/SPS/7/Rev.2 and Add.1 and 2);  the guidelines to further the practical implementation of 
Article 5.5 (G/SPS/15), and the decision on the implementation of Article 4 of the Agreement 
regarding recognition of equivale nce (G/SPS/19/Rev.2).  For example, the most recently revised 
recommended procedures for the implementation of the transparency provisi ons of the Agreement, 
and the related format for the notification of SPS  measures, request the identification of which 
Members or regions may be particularly affected  by the measure being notified (G/SPS/7/Rev.2).34  
35. Furthermore, in October 2004, the Committee finalized a procedure to enhance both the 
provision and the transparency of special and differential treatment or technical assistance (G/SPS/33).  The decision by the Committee requires an importing Member to consider any requests 
for special and differential treatment or technical assistance which are made in response to the 
importing Member's notification of a new or modified SPS measure.  The importing Member is to subsequently submit a specific addendum to its notification which indicates that special and differential treatment or technical assistance had been requested;  the Member(s) affected;  the concern(s) identified;  if special and differentia l treatment was provided, and if so, the treatment 
provided.  This procedure is intended to ensure  that the importing Member consults with any 
developing country Member that has expressed a c oncern regarding the potential effect of the 
proposed new/modified measure on its exports with  the aim of finding a means to address their 
concerns.
35  The notification of solutions ensures fullest  transparency, especially for other developing 
country Members.   
36. Each regular meeting of the SPS Committee provi des any Member with the opportunity to 
raise specific trade concerns, including proposed me asures not yet implemented.  Unfortunately, many 
developing country Members, and in  particular least-developed country Members, continue to find it 
difficult to participate in the meetings of the SPS Committee.  Nonetheless, a growing number of 
developing countries are participating activel y under this agenda item in the SPS Committee 
meetings.  Developing country Members have rais ed 101 of the approximately 200 specific trade 
concerns with respect to measures proposed or taken by other trading partners which adversely affect 
their trade interests, although least-developed c ountry Members have raised only two concerns.36  In 
                                                      
30 See proposals in paras. 9, 15 and 17 (a), (c) and (d). 
31 Available on-line at http:/stdfdb.wto.org. 
32 G/SPS/GEN/549. 
33 Paragraphs 27 to 46 of document G/SPS/GEN/543 provide a summary descri ption of recent actions 
taken to enhance the provision of  SPS-related technical assistance. 
34 See proposal in para. 13.  
35 See proposals in paras. 9, 13, 14, 15 and 16. 
36 The European Communities was counted as one Member.  Similarly, when one Member spoke on 
behalf of ASEAN, it was counted as one Member only.  On  certain issues, more than one Member has raised the 
same concern at a Committee meeting.  Hence although the total number of specific trade concerns raised since 
1995 is 204, the number of Members raising concerns, 246, is higher. G/SPS/35 
Page 10  
 
149 cases, a developing country Member has supported another Member raising an issue.  In a 
number of cases, discussions in the Committee have  provided the impetus for bilateral actions to 
resolve these problems.
37  Several developing country Members have also made use of the good 
offices of the Chair of the SPS Committee to seek resolution of specific trade problems.38  The WTO 
also provides assistance to developing country Memb ers, and in particular least-developed country 
Members, involved in dispute settlement proceedings, as does the Advisory Centre on WTO Law, 
established in 2001.39  
VI. CONSTRAINTS TO FRAMING RECOMMENDATIONS 
37. The Committee faces a number of constraints in elaborating recommendations to ensure that 
the concerns of developing country Members are addressed in a precise, effective and operational 
manner.  First, there has been a paucity of conc rete recommendations submitted by Members since the 
Committee was first requested to consider this i ssue in 2003.  Second, the proposals submitted in 
2002 have implications at many levels, including at  the bilateral level, within the WTO as a whole, 
within the SPS Committee, at the level of the international standard-setting bodies, as well as at 
technical levels for executing capacity buildin g, and in political and negotiating contexts. 
38. A number of the submitted proposals would require actions outside of the sphere of influence 
of the SPS Committee, such as actions by the inte rnational standard-setting bodies, or by other 
institutions.  The SPS Committee could, however, agree to  draw certain issues to the attention of these 
other bodies, and encourage WTO Members to pursue cer tain results within the context of Members' 
involvement in the work of these other bodies. 
39. Of particular note is that the SPS Committee has only recently discussed the proposals and the 
underlying concerns with some specificity and frankness, and only recently have some concrete 
examples been described of problems due to the lack  of specific trade-related, needs-based technical 
assistance or of special and differential treatment.   Formulation of precise modifications or 
operational recommendations on the fi ve proposals remains a challenge. 
40. Finally, these discussions have revealed an "expectations gap" between Members.  All 
Members acknowledge that better-targeted and more effective technical assistance aimed at specific 
results will benefit developing country Members.  This can, however, only be achieved by more 
successful communications and competent teamwo rk among involved Members.  This commitment 
appears necessary to, at minimum, maintain the market access opportunities for products from 
developing country Members.   
VII. CONCLUSIONS 
41. The SPS Committee has to date been unable to  develop any clear recommendations for a 
decision on the proposals on special and differential treatment referred to it by the General Council. 
42. The Committee notes that some Members have i ndicated their intention to revise some of 
these proposals, and would welcome an opportunity to consider the revised proposals.  Furthermore, the Committee agrees to continue to examine the proposals before it with the aim of developing 
specific recommendations . 
                                                     
 
37 G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.5. 
38 Argentina, Chile, South Africa and Uruguay with respect to measures relating to citrus canker taken 
by the European Communities;  the United States with respect to restrictions on wheat and oilseeds maintained 
by Poland;  and Canada with respect to import restrictions on bovine semen maintained by India. 
39 http://www.acwl.ch/e/index_e.aspx  G/SPS/35 
 Page 11 
 
 
43. Building on previous discussions in the SPS Co mmittee on special and differential treatment 
and technical assistance, the SPS Committee agrees to expeditiously undertake discussions 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 Deve lopment Mandate.  The following represent some 
initial elements for this discussion: 
(a) Identify best practices, through which devel oping country Members, and in particular 
least-developed country Members, can become informed in a timely manner of SPS requirements of priority to th eir trade.  The Committee will, inter alia,  undertake to:  
• identify specific actions to make existin g transparency procedures more effective 
and operational for developing country Members, and in particular least-
developed country Members; 
• determine how  Members and the Secretariat can facilitate such actions; 
• examine whether further changes in th e recommended transparency procedures 
would be useful.  
(b) Identify means through which developing count ry Members, and in particular least-
developed country Members, can mo re productively evaluate which SPS 
requirements of their trading partners present trade problems.  The Committee will 
consider, inter alia :  
• the extent to which Members can more e fficiently identify at the earliest possible 
stage potential trade problems for developing country Members, and in particular least-developed country Members;   
• if a forum for the exchange of comments on notifications can operationally 
address some key concerns of developing country Members, and in particular 
least-developed country Members;   
• if problems identified in respect to any specific notified measure are limited to a 
particular country or region, or if they represent a more systemic barrier for 
developing country Members, and in  particular least-developed country 
Members. 
(c) Consider how developing country Member s, and in particular least-developed 
country Members, can make greater use of  the opportunities pr ovided by the SPS 
Committee to identify and resolve specifi c trade concerns.  The Committee will, inter 
alia, examine :  
• how to facilitate the effective particip ation of developing country Members, and 
in particular least-developed country Members, in the SPS Committee; 
• how to facilitate the use of existing or  new mechanisms for resolving specific 
trade problems.  
(d) Develop more effective mechanisms to m onitor the demand and supply of technical 
assistance with the objectives of improving  predictability, timeliness and results 
relative to specific trade-related needs of developing country Members, and in 
particular least-developed country  Members.  The SPS Committee will, inter alia:  G/SPS/35 
Page 12  
 
• evaluate the effectiveness of current sources of information on technical 
assistance, including the STDF database, the two SPS Secretariat questionnaires, and ad hoc summary submissions by Members;  
• identify mechanisms to provide opportun ities for recipient countries to report on 
how they have utilized technical assistan ce received, and to identify areas where 
future technical assistance could be most effectively targeted;  
• identify mechanisms for the Committee to assess the overall effectiveness of 
current technical assistance programmes and the extent to which recipient countries have utilized available technical assistance to meet specified needs and 
achieve desired results; 
• consider how to improve "global SPS cl earing-house" instruments to better align 
trade-related SPS technical assistance  resources with assessed SPS needs;  
• identify how to reduce repetitive questionna ire requests to recipient Members, 
including through exploring the feasibility of establishing "balance sheets" on 
SPS-related technical assistance at the national level;  
• identify examples and pursue recommendations of how SPS capacity-building 
can be effectively integrated into national development plans;  
• identify how developing country Members,  and in particular least-developed 
country Members, can more effectively re quest trade-related technical assistance, 
in particular through improved identif ication of, and access to, key technical 
assistance decision-making processes in both donor and recipient Members, and as appropriate, in other relevant bodies. 
(e) Develop best practices for SPS technical  assistance under the WTO Global Trust 
Fund with the aim of making these programmes more effective, precise and operational.  The Committee will, inter alia ,  
• identify ways to effectively improve a nd demonstrate specific results prior to, 
during and following national and regiona l training events, focusing on goal-
oriented preparation, appropriate (dec ision-making) participants, and specific 
follow-up work programmes;  
• identify ways to improve the targeting of technical assistance by (i) evaluating, 
on the basis of feedback from recipients , the effectiveness of previous assistance, 
and (ii) identifying the specific needs of  developing countries for future technical 
assistance. 
• develop an informal modus operandi to monitor the effectiveness and 
sustainability of SPS training events under the WTO Global Trust Fund;   
• evaluate the first WTO specialized course  on the SPS Agreement to be held in the 
fall 2005 at the WTO Training Institute, and make recommendations as 
appropriate.  G/SPS/35 
 Page 13 
 
 
VIII.  RECOMMENDATION 
44. The SPS Committee recommends that the General Council: 
(a) Take note of this report. 
(b) Take note of the Committee's commitment to continue to examine the proposals 
before it, and any revision of these proposal s, with the aim of developing specific 
recommendations for a decision. 
(c) Take note of the Committee's commitment to expeditiously undertake discussions on 
further work to assist the Committee to address the concerns underlying the proposals 
as identified by Members. 
(d) Instruct the Committee to report progress to  the General Council on (b) and (c) above. 
 
__________