. /.  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  G/SPS/W/172 
4 March 2005 
 
 (05-0938) 
Committee on Sanitary a nd Phytosanitary Measures Original:   English 
  
 
 
MONITORING OF INTERNATIONAL HARMONIZATION: 
REGIONALIZATION 
 
Communication by Australia
 
 
  The following communication, dated 3 March 2005, is being circulated at the request of the 
Delegation of Australia.  
_______________ 
 
 
I. BACKGROUND 
1. This matter has been under serious and active consideration by the SPS Committee since the 
26
th Committee meeting (2-3 April 2003) and has been  the subject of a number of proposals from 
Members.1  Informal and formal discussions rela ting to regionalization held at the 31st meeting of the 
SPS Committee (27–28 October 2004) demonstrated a wide range of views among Members about: 
(a) the need for guidelines for importing count ries to improve the implementation of 
Article 6 of the SPS Agreement;  
(b) the respective roles of the SPS Committee and the international standard-setting 
bodies (in this case, only the IPPC and the OIE2) in developing any such guidelines; 
and 
(c) the most appropriate way to resolve these questions. 
2. An additional factor introduced into this debate  at the October 2004 mee ting is the distinction 
between "technical and scientific" and "administrative"  or "implementation" issues in the application 
of Article 6.3 
3. Both the IPPC and OIE have ongoing work program s relating to the application of Article 6.  
The 7th Session of the Interim Commission on Phytosanitary Measures meeting 4-8 April 2005 will 
consider whether to establish an out of session open-ended working group to consider, inter alia , 
whether further guidance is required on regiona lization beyond existing relevant plant health 
standards and draft standards. The OIE is currently  working on expanding the chapters of the Animal 
Health Codes on the principles and procedures for r ecognition of disease-free areas.  Draft text would 
be available to Members after the OIE C ode Commission meeting in January 2005. 
                                                      
1 G/SPS/W/140/Rev.2; G/SPS/W/145; G/ SPS/W/148; G/SPS/W/151; G/SPS/W/168; 
G/SPS/W/162/Rev.1; G/SPS/ W/166 and G/SPS/W/167. 
2 Regionalization is an issue that would generally not arise in the Codex Alimentarius Commission. 
3 G/SPS/35, paras 123–125. G/SPS/W/172 
Page 2  
 
 4. This paper seeks to build upon earlier proposals by  several Members, including New Zealand, 
the European Communities, and various South and North American countries, and the discussions on 
regionalization at the October 2004 meeting of the Committee.
4 
II. ISSUE 
5. In order to advance the consideration of this  matter by the Committee in a way that takes 
account of expert advice in the fields of animal and plant health, promotes coordination between the 
Committee and the international standard-setti ng bodies recognized under the SPS Agreement and 
avoids duplication, Australia proposes the following: 
(a) That the SPS Committee invite the IPPC and OIE to consider and advise the 
Committee on the following specific matters, as provided for by Article 12.6 of the 
SPS Agreement: 
(i) Whether there is a need for the IPPC and OIE to develop general guidelines 
regarding the implementation of Article  6 of the SPS Agreement to assist 
both exporting and importing Members to apply the concept of regionalization, consistent with thei r rights and obligations under the SPS 
Agreement; 
(ii) How best to ensure a consistent and coordinated approach to these matters by 
the international standard-setting bodies (the IPPC and OIE);  
(iii) The role(s) of the IPPC and OIE vis-a-vis  the SPS Committee in addressing 
administrative as well as technical aspects of regionalization in any guidelines on regionalization;  and 
(iv) The technical feasibility of assigning specifi c time limits to specific steps in 
the process for considering regionalization requests. 
(b) That pending advice from the IPPC and OIE, recognizing that further input from 
these bodies would better inform the Committee’s deliberations, the Committee defer further consideration of the specific question of whether the Committee should 
develop guidelines for Members on applica tion of Article 6, but that Members 
continue to share practical experiences in the application of Article 6. 
 
__________ 
 
                                                     
 
4Including G/SPS/W/140/Rev.2; G/SPS/W/145; G/SPS/W/148; G/SPS/W/151; G/SPS/W/162/Rev.1;  
G/SPS/W/164; G/SPS/W/166; G/SPS/ W/167;  and G/SPS/W/168.