WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  G/SPS/R/60 
17 December 2010 
 (10-6800) 
Committee on Sanitary a nd Phytosanitary Measures  
  
 
WORKSHOP ON TRANSPARENCY  
HELD ON 18 AND 22 OCTOBER 2010 
 
Note by the Secretariat
1 
 
 
A. SUMMARY  
1. The Secretariat of the World Trade Organi zation organized a special workshop on the 
transparency provisions of the Agreement on the A pplication of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures 
(SPS Agreement) in Geneva, Switzerland.  The workshop began on Monday, 18 October and 
continued on Friday, 22 October 2010.  The programme for the workshop, contained in 
G/SPS/GEN/1021/Rev.1, was prepared taking into account the past two transparency workshops2 held 
in 2003 and 2007, the Committee's discussions on this  topic, as well as specific inputs from Members.  
The first day of the workshop (Monday, 18 October) provided for an overview of transparency issues 
and allowed for the exchange of national experien ces in the plenary and during the break-out sessions.  
The second day of the workshop (Friday, 22 October)  provided more hands-on training with practical 
exercises. 
2. The presentations and documentation from this workshop are available from  the "Members' 
transparency toolkit" section under the SPS Gateway (http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/s ps_e/wkshop_oct10_e /wkshop_oct10_e.htm
). 
B. SESSION I:  INTRODUCTION  
3. The first session consisted of an overview by the Secretariat covering the transparency 
provisions of the SPS Agreement as well as tools to assist in their implementation.  The Secretariat 
underlined that transparency not only brought clarity and predictability to the trading system, but that 
it also indicated a well-functioning national system  that created trust in Members' policies and 
procedures.  The main provisions on transparency are in Article 7 and Annex B of the SPS Agreement 
while the Committee's Recommended Procedures for Im plementing the Transparency Obligations of 
the SPS Agreement are in document G/SPS/7/Rev.3. 
4. As of October 2010, 138 out of 153 WTO Memb ers had informed the Secretariat of their 
designated SPS National Notification Authority (NNA) and 146 Members of their SPS National 
Enquiry Point (NEP).  For those Members which had more than one Enquiry Point, it was important 
to have well-functioning communication channels among these and also with the NNA.  In practice, 
the NNA and the NEP were the same in most de veloped Members, which brought efficiency gains 
and facilitated coordination.  These entities coul d also assist Members in benefiting from the 
multilateral transparency system by alerting stakehol ders to changes in trad ing partners' regulations. 
                                                      
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. 
2 For the reports of these workshops, s ee G/SPS/R/32 and G/SPS/R/47, respectively. G/SPS/R/60 
Page 2  
 
  5. Practical transparency tools available to Me mbers included the SPS Information Management 
System (SPS IMS), the mentoring mechanism, the email distribution list for all SPS documents and notifications, and the Procedural Step-by-Step Manual for SPS National Notification Authorities and 
SPS National Enquiry Points (" http://www.wto.org/english/res_e/booksp_e/sps_procedure_manual_e.
pdf"). 
6. The SPS IMS, which was publicly available in English, French and Spanish, facilitated  
searching and reporting on SPS notifications, othe r SPS documents, and specific trade concerns 
according to a wide range of criteria.  It also incl uded the most up-to-date information available to the 
Secretariat on Enquiry Points and Notification Authorities. 
7. The mentoring mechanism was launched in 20 08 (G/SPS/W/217) to assist developing country 
Members with the operation of their NEPs and NNAs.  This voluntary procedure, which was 
originally proposed by  New Zealand, brought together officials from different Members with similar responsibilities for information exchange and suppor t.  The Secretariat had so far matched 19 
requesting Members with nine mentors. 
8. The Secretariat had circulated a questionnaire to see how the mentoring mechanism had been 
working.  The results had been mixed in that some  pairs had been able to exchange information and 
meet each other while others had not had substa ntive exchanges.  The difficulties encountered 
included technical problems, such as emails bouncing back, as well as internal procedural 
requirements and staff turnover.  Lessons learne d and recommendations included the need for setting 
concrete objectives and timetables and for Memb ers receiving mentoring be more proactive in 
identifying needs.  Some had suggested that the Secretariat take a more active role throughout the 
mentoring process.  Another suggestion was for Me mbers involved in mentoring to provide written 
accounts of their experiences to share with the Committee. 
9. The Secretariat also referred to the online Notification Submission System (SPS NSS) due to 
be launched at the beginning of 2011 as the first WTO online facility for receiving notifications.  The 
Secretariat was in the process of finalizing several issues related to internet security and in-house 
processes.  With this new system, Members would receive guidance while filling out notifications on 
what format to use and on what type of information to fill out for each item of the format.  The system 
would not only facilitate the Members' task in providing timely and accurate information but would 
also provide efficiency gains for the Secretariat. 
10. In addition, the Secretariat presented the latest update of the Overview Regarding the Level of 
Implementation of the Transparency Provisions of the SPS Agreement (G/SPS/GEN/804.Rev.3).  In 
particular, the Secretariat noted that two new Memb ers had notified the WTO of the establishment  of 
their NEP and NNA (the Democratic Republic of  Congo and Sierra Leone) and one Member 
(Namibia) of their NNA.  In addition, two Memb ers, namely the Gambia and Saudi Arabia, had 
submitted their first SPS notifications in the previous year. 
C. S
ESSION II:  SHARING OF NATIONAL EXPERIENCES  
11. The representative of Australia, Dr. Paul Vitol ovich, spoke primarily about the importance of 
notifying.  His main message was that the notif ication process was neither resource-intensive nor 
difficult to implement.  It allowed compliance with  transparency obligations, which in turn supported 
and enhanced international trade by providing greater certainty an d increased confidence levels.  He 
also emphasized that there were costs that accrued when notifications were not forthcoming.  In 
responding to questions, he noted that Australia had one person who ran the SPS enquiry point, which 
was an economical model.  G/SPS/R/60 
 Page 3 
 
 
  12. The representative of Canada, Ms Andrea Sp encer, presented Canada's experience in 
facilitating and regularizing the preparation of notif ications.  She noted that the challenge for a 
number of Members was how to operationalize their obligations.  Canada's Export Alert Notification 
Service enabled users to know about changing prod uct requirements in global markets before they 
became law.  Canada was willing to share this technology and set up new partnerships with other 
Members.  She explained how draft regulatory proposals were publishe d in the Canadian Gazette with 
a Regulatory Impact Analysis Statement (RIAS).  Regulators were required to complete an RIAS, which provided a clear, non-technical synthesis of in formation that allowed the various stakeholders, 
including the Canadian enquiry point, to better understand the regulation.  The RIAS enabled an assessment of questions such as the existence of in ternational standards or differences of content from 
international standards, impact on trade, countries affected, etc. 
13. Ms Spencer noted that Canada's SPS and TBT Enquiry Point/Notification Authority operated 
with four staff members and that having staff dedi cated to these tasks was an important aspect for the 
proper functioning of th is body.  Other best practices were having systematic procedures to 
screen/assess regulatory measures as well as an establishe d service standard in terms of the time taken 
to produce notifications.  The service standard was two business days after receiving information on a 
draft measure in order to ensure sufficient time  for comments from other Members.  Since 2000, 
Canada was including the hyperlink for the full text of draft regulations within the notification format, 
reducing the number of requests for texts of measure s and allowing staff to focus on other activities. 
14. The representative of Argentina, Mr. Fabián Sáez, shared Argentina's experience regarding 
the management and administration of incoming not ifications.  In Argentina, the NNA drew up a 
weekly document which summarized all SPS notificati ons that were submitted the previous week.  
This information was then distributed internally  among the different focal points of the National 
Agri-Food Health and Quality Service (SENASA):  food safety, animal health, plant protection and veterinary products.  One person within each of  these directorates was responsible for further 
distributing the information and categorizing it by colour:  green, yellow or red, depending on the 
level of impact to Argentina. 
15. Mr. Sáez recommended to involve the private sector  as much as possible.  He observed that it 
was common in many countries to expect the g overnment to follow these measures and react 
appropriately.  Although the government had an importa nt role to play, it needed to be backed up by 
the private sector, which actually carried out trad e transactions.  Another recommendation was to set 
up mechanisms to filter notifications of interest.  In addition, he noted that providing follow-up to 
comments made by domestic technical experts wa s a good practice in order to acknowledge the work 
carried out by them. 
16. The representative of El Salvador, Ms Verónica Bustamante, presented a project that the 
Directorate of Trade Treaty Administration in El Salvador (DATCO) was working on to establish a notification and export alert system.  This system in tended to strengthen the work of the contact point 
and improve internal coordination among those that developed, adopted, and/or monitored technical 
regulations.  She noted that the new system would distribute notifications from both El Salvador and 
other Members to interested parties.  It would cont ain all current technical regulations of El Salvador 
for the production, importation, commercializati on and distribution of specific products.  The new 
system would also contain an export alert system where interested parties could sign up to receive 
email alerts regarding a notification from a market and product of interest.  She noted that the export 
alert was based on other successful systems such as  those from Colombia, Argentina and Mexico.  
She highlighted that this system would not substitu te the procedures that were already in place but 
rather would be a simple, user-friendly tool that  would automate several of the services for the 
SPS/TBT contact point. G/SPS/R/60 
Page 4  
 
  17. In responding to questions from other participants , the Secretariat clarif ied that there was no 
obligation in the SPS Agreement to create a S PS National Committee;  however, Members' 
experience indicated that those which had a formal  or informal national SPS Committee were able to 
manage SPS issues more effectively.  The representa tive of IICA noted that those countries that had 
initiated such institutional processes were able to have sustainability in the area of transparency.  
Several Members also noted the benefits of ha ving a national forum to discuss and coordinate 
positions among national stakeholders. 
18. The representative of Chile noted that creating a whole new unit within one of the Ministries 
in order to take up the tasks of the NNA could be  complicated and burdensome for some Members 
given that it would require additional resources.  She added that an NNA for less developed countries 
should only require one to two staf f Members, who would also be working on other tasks and not 
solely on the functions of the NNA. 
19. The representative of Senegal, Mr. Alhousseynou Moctar Hanne, stated that his country had 
been able to organize a national plan of action regarding the implementation of the SPS Agreement 
thanks to several technical assistance activities, in particular with the European Union.  Certain 
problems relating to the export of fruit and vegetabl e products to Europe had encouraged Senegal to 
come up with the action plan.  The plan enabled Se negal to define prioriti es and in particular to 
implement transparency-related procedures.  It took into account the strengths, weaknesses, the 
expected outcomes, the strategies to undertake,  the implementation periods, success indicators, 
corrective actions, and the costs. 
20. Coordination among various Ministries and decidi ng which Ministry should be designated as 
the Enquiry Point were among the challenges in im plementing the plan.  In terms of the positive 
outcomes, Senegal had begun notifying a number of measures to the SPS Committee and enjoyed a 
functional relationship between the Enquiry Point and various Ministries.  In terms of success 
indicators, Senegal noted an increase in exports of  fruit and vegetables in 2008, enabling his country 
to move forward with the plan.  Burkina Faso, Ma li, Mauritania, Niger and Senegal were trying to 
synergize their actions to train personnel. 
21. The SPS contact point (NNA and NEP) from New Zealand, Ms Sally Jennings, and the 
representative from Saudi Arabia, Mr. Majid Alkhalaf (in replacement of Dr. Al Sheddy), made a joint presentation on how to maximize benefits from a bilateral technical assistance project.  Ms Jennings stated she had been designated as a mentor to  five Members but that it had been difficult to 
establish a relationship with any of them.  Although many Members were eager to sign up to the 
mentoring mechanism, few were actually in a position to benefit from it as they neither had the basic 
mechanisms in place nor had they identified thei r needs.  Saudi Arabia was not a New Zealand 
mentoree, but they had independently sought out assi stance, notably after having put together their 
plan for developing an SPS contact point. 
22. Mr. Alkhalaf gave a brief presentation on the history of the Saudi Food & Drug Authority 
(SFDA), which is in charge of the SPS contact po int.  He noted that in February 2010, an SPS 
Facilitation Programme had been completed by Ms Sally Jennings which included, inter alia , a 
general WTO/SPS overview workshop as well as a SPS notification writing workshop.  Following 
these workshops, Saudi Arabia had issued a Dr aft Procedural Manual for the SPS National 
Notification Authority and SPS National Enquiry Point in both Arabic and English.  Saudi Arabia had 
also issued a Draft Handbook for Completing National SPS Notifications in Arabic.   As a result of 
these activities, in March 2010, Saudi Arabia  had submitted its first SPS notification. 
23. Mr. Melvin Spreij, the Secretary to the STDF, gave an update on STDF's transparency-related 
activities.  He noted that although most Members had designated an NEP and an NNA, these were not 
always very effective.  Some of the contributi ng factors were inadequate  human and/or financial  G/SPS/R/60 
 Page 5 
 
 
  resources, ongoing difficulties to access Internet, lo w government salaries, and staff motivation.  The 
STDF had been funding various projects that  aimed to increase tr ansparency through SPS 
coordination at a national and regional level, as well as enhanced linkages between government 
agencies and the private sector. 
24. The STDF had recently published a scoping study on regional SPS frameworks and policies 
in Africa developed and adopted by Regional Economic Communities (RECs).  This study, which had 
been requested by the African Union Commission (AUC ), was a first step in analyzing the various 
existing and planned regional SPS frameworks in Africa and in guiding future work in this area.  
Several regional SPS frameworks required notifica tions to regional SPS bodies.  Such multiple 
notification requirements could create an unnecessar y burden on many African countries which had 
limited resources and which were members of more than one REC.  It was rather recommended that 
these RECs make use of the existing transparen cy procedures developed by the SPS Committee.  
Another recommendation was for SPS web pages to be better organized and kept up-to-date, both at 
the national and regional level. 
25. The STDF was currently funding the preparation of a parallel scoping study to identify the 
factors that contribute to successful SPS coordinatio n mechanisms at the national level and a first 
draft would be available by the beginning of 2011.  Increasing political awareness about the importance of SPS measures for trade, where possibl e illustrated by cost-benefit analysis examples, 
was essential to providing an operational and e ffective framework for managing and coordinating 
work on SPS measures at the national level.  Without this high-level commitment and support, 
institutional rivalries and limited incentives for inte r-agency collaboration often obstructed efforts to 
promote improved coordination and transparency. 
26. The representative of the European Union drew a ttention to its analysis of the use of the 
transparency guidelines and formats adopted in  2008 by the SPS Committee (G/SPS/GEN/1044).  The 
European Union urged Members to identify the appr opriate international sta ndard relevant to the 
measure being notified under Item 8 of the notificati on format and to give a clear explanation of any 
deviation from that international standard.  He also po inted to the lack of tran sparency in plant health 
import requirements and encouraged Members to work further in this field. 
27. The representative of Chile noted that they had undertaken major efforts to notify all 
quarantine and regulated pests but that they had not received any comments from other Members.  It 
was not only important for importing Members to pr operly fill out Item 8, but also for exporting 
Members to perform the subsequent analysis on incoming notifications. 
28. The representative of Morocco descr ibed several of the recent measures Morocco had taken to 
implement SPS transparency obligations (G/SPS/ GEN/1047).  Prior to January 2010, Morocco had 
designated two Enquiry Points to respond to all r easonable questions and provide relevant documents 
on SPS matters.  However, following the creation of the National Office for Food Safety, a single Enquiry Point was designated as responsible for a ll SPS questions, leading to efficiency gains. 
D. S
ESSION III:  WHAT ACTIONS COULD IMPROVE THE IMPLEMENTATION AND BENEFITS OF 
SPS  TRANSPARENCY PROVISIONS ? 
29. The WTO Secretariat facilitated four concurre nt breakout sessions, two in English, one in 
French, and one in Spanish.  During these sessions, Members identified possi ble solutions to common 
concerns regarding the implementation of the transparency provisions. G/SPS/R/60 
Page 6  
 
  30. The recommendations arising from the breakout sessions included: 
(i) The development of a best practices guide on the implementation of the transparency 
provisions, such as national coordination me chanisms and the operation of NEPs and 
NNAs.  Some suggested that this could be preceded by a questionnaire and/or a 
meeting on the margins of the SPS Committee to identify themes to include in the 
guide; 
(ii) Further training on the SPS Information Management System; 
(iii) Encourage Members to provide the text of regulations through the Secretariat's 
facility for uploading PDF files; 
(iv) Encourage Members to circulate translations of regulations; 
(v) Members could make better use of the mentoring mechanism by using the SPS 
Committee meetings to have face-to-face me etings with their partners to discuss 
concrete timelines and project proposals; 
(vi) Members should not be overambitious, but would benefit from taking small simple 
steps when creating a well-functioning national transparency mechanism; 
(vii) SPS contact points could better filter incoming notifications, for example on the basis 
of product lists, in order to have a more targ eted distribution to relevant stakeholders;  
and; 
(viii) The Procedural Step-by-Step Manual for SPS National Notification Authorities and 
SPS National Enquiry Points should be updated as necessary and more widely 
disseminated, perhaps by e-mailing an electronic version to all NEPs and NNAs. 
E. S
ESSION IV:  PRACTICAL SESSION ON HOW TO PREPARE NOTIFICATIONS  
31. The WTO Secretariat gave a brief overview on how to prepare notifications and drew the 
participants' attention to where they could find in formation on the various notification formats.  These 
included the Recommended Procedures document (G/SPS/7/Rev.3) as well as the "Member's Transparency Toolkit" section on the SPS Gateway 
(http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/sps_e/transparency_toolkit_e.htm
). 
32. The Secretariat also presented the new online notification submission system (SPS NSS), 
which would allow Members to enter notifications  directly through an online interface as an 
alternative to filling out a format in MS Word and sending it via mail, fax or email to the WTO Central Registry of Notifications (CRN).  The SPS NSS would provide guidance to users as they went through the various steps of filling out a notificatio n, which in turn would reduce errors while also 
decreasing the processing time for the Secretaria t to distribute notifications to Members. 
33. During the hands-on session, participants were ask ed to fill out a sample notification through 
the SPS NSS, which was based on a fictional situation prepared by the Secretariat.  For this purpose, 
they either used their own laptops or one of th e 40 computers provided by the WTO.  Participants 
were very enthusiastic about the system and provi ded useful feedback in preparation for its launch 
scheduled for early 2011.  The Secretariat noted that the SPS facility would pave the way for the 
development of similar systems for notifications in other WTO areas.  G/SPS/R/60 
 Page 7 
 
 
  F. SESSION V:  PRACTICAL SESSION ON HOW TO TRACK INCOMING NOTIFICATIONS  
34. The Secretariat presented the SPS Information Management System ( http://spsims.wto.org/ ) 
and described the benefits of using the system.  It s Help File, which was available by clicking on the 
"Help" link on the top of the homepage, had recentl y been updated.  This resource offered detailed 
descriptions and helpful tips on how to use the different features of the system. 
35. The representative of New Zealand, Ms Sally Jennings, presented useful tips for preparing 
alerts using the SPS IMS, identifying and maintain ing stakeholder lists, and filing and maintaining 
records of SPS-related information.  In New Z ealand's experience, having the NEP and the NNA in 
one entity had been very beneficial.  If a Member was in the process of setting up an NEP and NNA, it would be beneficial to house them in one entity. 
36. She underlined that a best practice for SPS c ontact points was to use the SPS IMS and noted 
that its use had significantly added efficiency gain s in terms of her day-to-day work.  She showed 
participants how to prepare a user-friendly summary  sheet of notifications by using the custom 
reporting feature from the SPS IMS and noted that sh e produced and sent these tables to stakeholders 
on a weekly basis.  Regarding the development of  distribution lists, she recommended consideration 
of the types of stakeholders who needed to follow SPS notifications and most importantly to maintain 
good working relations with them.  Networking a nd communication skills were key in this area. 
Stakeholders could include business groups, other g overnmental departments, research/educational 
organizations, industry groups, etc.  Record-keepi ng of both follow up actions on notifications made 
by other Members as well as handling comments or document requests from other Members was a necessary step in maintaining an efficient SPS contact  point.  Best practice was to use email for both 
communicating with as well as sending documentation to interested parties. 
37. Several participants had identified difficulties in obtaining translations during the workshop, 
and Ms Jennings recommended using online facilities su ch as "Google Translate" in order to get an 
idea of what the regulation was about.  She noted that her office used these types of facilities on a 
regular basis and explained that although not fully ac curate, it did allow users to get a general idea of 
whether the document was of relevance to stakeholders. 
38. In response to a question, Ms Jennings sugg ested that if a Member had not received a 
response or an acknowledgment following a request for information from the SPS contact point of 
another Member within the normal five business da y period (G/SPS/7/Rev.3, para. 19), they should 
request the mission or embassy of the relevant Memb er to facilitate access to the information.  If a 
Member was preparing a regulation that would affect  a specific trading partner, a notification should 
probably not be the only method of conveying that in formation to the affected Member.  Rather, as a 
best practice, there needed to be  dialogue between the technical experts even before the notification 
was issued. 
39. Referring to the WTO's email distribution list for unrestricted SPS documents, Ms Jennings 
noted that staff working directly as the SPS NEP or NNA needed to be included in this list rather than 
just supervisors or other representatives to facilitate ownership and speed of reaction time.  Interested 
officials could go to the WTO's SPS Gateway to find out more about joining this mailing list. 
40. Following the presentations, the participants e ngaged in a hands-on exercise on how to use 
the SPS IMS.  Participants were asked to search fo r and prepare reports on notifications, specific trade 
concerns, other SPS documents, and SPS Enquiry Poin t contact information.  Although several 
participants had heard of the SPS IMS, the hands-on training allowed them to  delve into the system 
and realize its usefulness as a transparency tool.  Ma ny participants indicated their intention to use it 
regularly upon return to capital. 
__________