WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  G/AG/W/73/Rev.2 
6 September 2010 
 (10-4601) 
Committee on Agriculture  
  
 
IMPROVEMENT OF TIMELINESS AND COMPLETENESS OF NOTIFICATIONS:  
MEMBERS' SUGGESTIONS OF "BEST PRACTICES" 
 
Note by the Secretariat
1 
 
Revision  
  1. The present note consolidates the compilation of Members' suggestions of "best practices" for 
the preparation and review of notificati ons under existing requirements and formats
2 in light of the 
discussions held during the 2009 and 2010 meetings of the Committee on Agriculture.3    
2. In the course of the debate, Members highlight ed the need for the "b est practices" exercise 
initiated by the Committee in 2009 to be underpinned by a set of general principles.   These are 
identified in Section I.  The specific suggestions and comments made so far with regard to each of the 
26 proposals are also reproduced in tabl e format in Sections II to VI below. 
3. The Secretariat will continue to update the present annotated compilation to take account of 
the discussions under the Committee on Agriculture and future contributions from Members. 
 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 
Page  
I. GENERAL PRINCIPLES........................................................................................................2  
II. PROPOSED "BEST PRACTICES" OF A GENERAL NATURE ......................................3  
III. TARIFF AND OTHER QUOTAS (T ABLES MA:1 AND MA:2)........................................6  
IV. SPECIAL SAFEGUARD (TABLES MA:3 TO MA:5) .........................................................8  
V. DOMESTIC SUPPORT (TAB LES DS:1 AND DS:2) ...........................................................9  
VI. EXPORT COMPETITION (TABLES ES:1 TO ES:3) .......................................................10  
 
                                                      
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 G/AG/2 and G/AG/2/Add.1 refer. 
3 See, for example, paras 32-38 of G/AG/R/58. G/AG/W/73/Rev.2 
Page 2  
 
  I. GENERAL PRINCIPLES 
4. The following set of general principl es has been identified by Members: 
(a) Members should aim to determine a set of practices that will be useful in guiding 
them to prepare and review notifications.  These best practices must be based on the  notification requirements and formats adopted by the Committee in 1995.
4  I n  
particular:  
(i) any improvement should be without pr ejudice to the positions of Members, 
or to their rights and obligations under the WTO.  Some doubts were expressed as to whether some of the s uggestions should rather be addressed 
by the Committee on Agriculture in Special Session; 
(ii) any "best practice" should be implem ented by the Member concerned on a 
voluntary basis. 
(b) A balance must be found between the distin ct but common goals of "timeliness" and 
"completeness".  Some participants felt th at, while generally aiming at optimizing 
transparency, notably by improving the comp leteness of notified information, great 
caution should be exercised not to hamper  the timeliness of submissions.  In this 
light, some of the compiled suggestions were found: 
(i) to be more demanding on the "completeness" side (time- and resource- 
intensive), and as such, could be potentially burdensome, and therefore run counter to the equally important obj ective to improve "timeliness";   
(ii) to pertain more to the Review Process than to the submission process.  While 
the additional information could easily  be supplied in the course of the 
Review Process undertaken by the Comm ittee at each formal session, some 
participants felt that there was no n eed to include it upfront in their 
notifications. 
                                                     
 
4 G/AG/2 and G/AG/2/Add.1 refer.  
   G/AG/W/73/Rev.2
 Page 3II. PROPOSED "BEST PRACTICES" OF A GENERAL NATURE 
 
MEMBERS ' SUGGESTIONS  C OMMENTS  S UGGESTED FOLLOW -UP 
1.  Submit notifications in Excel format.   Broadly supported: 
o The Excel format would greatly facilitate the Review 
Process, but need for a harmonized format to be used by 
all Members. 
o Unlikely to be troublesome from the point-of-view of a 
number of developing countries.  
 Members already operating on the basis of Excel formats found 
the conversion into Word format for WTO purposes both unnecessary and prone to error.  Secretariat to prepare standardized Excel formats 
where calculations are requir ed (notably in the case 
of Table DS:1). 
 Members with experience in using Excel formats 
are encouraged to contact the Secretariat to share 
inputs. 
 Draft Excel formats to be posted on the Members' 
web page in due course, for Members' review and 
further discussion. 
 In the meantime, submissions may be made both in 
Excel and Word. 
2.  Design a website application using web template formats in order to allow Members 
to complete their notifications on-line; 
alternatively a stand-alone computer-based platform could be established to assist 
Members in compiling the relevant 
information and submitting their notifications while automating some of the 
calculations to be performed.  The idea was supported.  This is a long-term WTO-wide objective.   
 Secretariat to brief Members as and when progress 
is made.   
3.  Where written responses have not been 
provided to questions posed during the 
regular session of the Committee on Agriculture, Members should provide them 
no later than the day following the meeting.  Broadly supported the idea, but the proposed timeline for 
submission of written responses was not always shared:   
o the provision of some lead time is needed to align draft 
written responses with Members' oral statements as 
delivered during meetings.    Allow some flexibility to fulfill internal 
transparency procedures, perhaps two days 
(standard practice in several WTO Committees).  
  G/AG/W/73/Rev.2 
Page 4 MEMBERS ' SUGGESTIONS  C OMMENTS  S UGGESTED FOLLOW -UP 
4.  Send notification reminders directly to 
capital-based official in charge of 
notifications.  Doubts emerged as to whether changing the established 
channels of communications between Members and the WTO 
Secretariat would alleviate, or wo rsen, the "timeliness" issue.  
In particular, caution to be exercised in cases of turnover of 
capital-based officials.  
 Annual "calls" and semi-annual "reminders" of unfulfilled 
notifications are regularly channeled by the Secretariat through 
Missions to capitals.   Maintain current channels of communications.   
o Members facing difficulties with the current 
system to be invited to communicate these to 
the Secretariat with a view to receiving 
appropriate technical assistance. 
o In addition to the standard procedure, 
reminders could be sent directly to capital-
based officials where Missions have explicitly instructed the Secretariat to do so.  
5.  Indicate in the product description column of the notification, where possible, 
the relevant tariff lines and the applicable 
nomenclature (i.e. HS 2002)  Some support was received: such  best practices would provide 
a greater level of precision in notified data in certain 
circumstances.  One suggestion was even made to delete 
"where possible". 
 Serious concerns were also expressed, as the suggested two 
additions (i) could be difficult to implement and adversely 
impact timeliness, and (ii) are best addressed as part of the 
Review Process. - 
6.  Indicate whether changes have occurred 
in scheduled commitments pursuant to 
procedures initiated under Article XXIV:6 
or Article XXVIII of GATT 1994 (e.g. creation of new tariff quotas, expansion of 
tariff quota volumes, etc.); provide a source 
for the schedule of commitments being used in preparing the notification.  Some support was received: such  best practices would provide 
a greater level of precision in notified data in certain 
circumstances.  One suggestion was made to extend the 
proposed coverage to tariff lines that are the object of ongoing negotiations under the referred articles of GATT 1994.  
 Serious concerns were also expressed as this proposal (i) could 
be difficult to implement and a dversely impact timeliness, and 
(ii) are best addressed as pa rt of the Review Process. -  
   G/AG/W/73/Rev.2
 Page 5MEMBERS ' SUGGESTIONS  C OMMENTS  S UGGESTED FOLLOW -UP 
7.  Include references to official 
government websites to provide further 
information.  There was some support for this suggestion.  
 References to relevant official government websites : 
o might be useful where the additional information can be 
easily obtainable and is reconcilable with notified data. 
o should supplement, rather than supplant, notified 
information: references to particular measures and 
programmes should be fully described and explained in 
the notifications themselves.  In particular, they should 
not relieve the notifying Member from the obligation to supply information upon request from another Member. 
o should be up-to-date: the most common problem 
associated with referenced websites is obsolescence. 
 Some concerns were expressed about the usefulness of the 
suggestion, especially at  the submission stage.   Re-drafting was suggested to clarify that references 
to official government websites could be supplied by 
Members where they deem it appropriate and useful.   
8.  When notifications have been revised, 
provide a clear indication of the changes 
and the reason for these changes.  Generally supported and consider ed to facilitate the Review 
Process provided that the notifying Member is given flexibility 
to decide how best to reflect the changes.  Reason and reference to changes made to be 
explicitly stated on the cover page. 
  
  G/AG/W/73/Rev.2 
Page 6 III. TARIFF AND OTHER QUOTAS (TABLES MA:1 AND MA:2) 
MEMBERS ' SUGGESTIONS  C OMMENTS  S UGGESTED FOLLOW -UP 
 General comments  Several concerns were expressed.   The priority is to improve 
compliance with notification obligations.  By contrast, it was felt 
that the proposed practices generally : 
o went beyond the scope of the current "best practices" 
exercise; currently established notification formats; the 
Agreement on Agriculture; as well as the Committee's 
purview. 
o appeared to be time-consuming; could well lead to further 
delays in the submission of notifications as they implied 
additional burdens, particularly on developing country Members.   
o would be best addressed under the Review Process, in 
certain instances.  
9.  Indicate whether the product is subject to 
SPS measures or other restrictions that may 
have prevented the tariff quota from being filled.  Introducing this practice would necessitate a redefinition of all 
administrative services in cert ain cases, which is unacceptable. 
 Involving different institutions to implement some of the 
proposed practices would foster inter-agency communication but 
would perhaps cause further delays in the submission of 
notifications.  
10.  Include the relevant in- and out-of-quota 
tariffs being applied in the relevant period.  See General comments .    
   G/AG/W/73/Rev.2
 Page 7MEMBERS ' SUGGESTIONS  C OMMENTS  S UGGESTED FOLLOW -UP 
11.  Cross-reference any triggering of the 
SSG on the applicable tariff quota product, 
including the notification symbol.  Introducing this practice would necessitate a redefinition of all 
administrative services in cert ain cases, which is unacceptable. 
 Involving different institutions to implement some of the 
suggestions would foster inter-agency communication but would 
perhaps cause further delays in the submission of notifications. 
 Compliance with Article 5.2. of the Agreement on Agriculture 
would be important with regard to the proposed reporting 
practice.  
12.  Indicate whether imports for re-export, 
or imports under preferential arrangements 
have been counted against the tariff quota.  Reason and rationale behind this suggestion remain unclear. 
 Similar discussions are already taking place in the Committee on 
Regional Trade Agreements. 
 Introducing this practice would necessitate a redefinition of all 
administrative services in cert ain cases, which is unacceptable.  
  
  G/AG/W/73/Rev.2 
Page 8  
IV. SPECIAL SAFEGUARD (TABLES MA:3 TO MA:5) 
MEMBERS ' SUGGESTIONS  C OMMENTS  S UGGESTED FOLLOW -UP 
 General comments   Similar to the comments made with regard to Section III above.   
 Difficult to comply with the s uggestions made below. Doubts 
expressed on the rationale behi nd each proposal. Clarification 
was sought as to how the timeliness and completeness of 
notifications would be improved.  
13.  Indicate the additional duties that were 
applied, along with dates, shipments and 
tonnages affected.  The application of this suggestion on a shipment-by-shipment 
basis could be hampered by the lack of sophisticated 
computerized customs systems and thus affect the timely 
submission of notifications. The same consequence is foreseen if 
more agencies are also invo lved in compiling additional 
information. 
 In practice, it might not always be feasible to determine which 
exporting countries were actually affected by the triggering of 
the safeguard.  
14.  Indicate the exporting Members that 
were affected by the triggering of the 
safeguard.  Same comments as above.  See also General comments .   
15.  Indicate whether the product concerned 
is subject to scheduled tariff quota 
commitments. 
16.  Explain the rationale for the grouping of tariff lines used to trigger the SSG 
(particularly the volume-based SSG). 
17.  Indicate whether the additional duties 
apply on a shipment-by-shipment basis or for 
the remainder of the reporting period.  See General comments .    
   G/AG/W/73/Rev.2
 Page 9MEMBERS ' SUGGESTIONS  C OMMENTS  S UGGESTED FOLLOW -UP 
18.  Cross-reference the individual Table 
MA:3 and MA:4 notifications in the annual 
summary Table MA:5. 
19.  Explain why the most recent three-year 
period was not used to calculate the trigger 
level (e.g. in 2009, the relevant Member may 
be using 2005-07 imports). 
20.  Indicate the source and methodology for the domestic consumption data used to 
calculate the trigger level. 
21.  Cross-reference previous notifications of 
the SSG being triggered on the same 
product.  See General comments .   
V. DOMESTIC SUPPORT (TABLES DS:1 AND DS:2) 
MEMBERS ' SUGGESTIONS  C OMMENTS  S UGGESTED FOLLOW -UP 
22.  Provide the total value of agricultural 
production on a commodity and product 
level to justify claims of  de minimis exemptions, including the source of the data. 
23.  Cross-reference the relevant Tables 
DS:2 in Table DS:1. 
24.  Provide sub-totals and totals for Green and Blue Box expenditures in the 
notification.  These practices could be easily implemented, in view of the 
relevance of informati on to be included.   
 Several Members already supply such information in their 
notifications. 
 Domestic support is an area that would best lend itself to the use 
of electronic spreadsh eets in Excel format.  Introduce as "best practice" when submitting 
Table DS:1.  
 Include a calculator or a formula box with a view 
to providing subtotals and totals in the Excel 
formats (see also comments made above in 
relation to the possible use of Excel templates). 
  
  G/AG/W/73/Rev.2 
Page 10  
VI. EXPORT COMPETITION (TABLES ES:1 TO ES:3) 
 
MEMBERS ' SUGGESTIONS  C OMMENTS  S UGGESTED FOLLOW -UP 
25.  Indicate the applicable HS sub-heading 
(i.e. 6-digit) level covered by each notified 
product category for all Tables ES:1 to ES:3.  
This would be highly relevant for product 
categories that may contain both basic and 
processed products, but also for the 
"incorporated products" and "alcohol" categories. This would facilitate the 
verification of the repor ted level of exports 
and also whether the same tariff lines are being subsidized through more than one 
product category. 
26.  Harmonize reporting periods across Tables ES:1 to ES:3, and in Table NF:1; the 
periods in supporting attachments, annexes 
etc. should also correlate with the data 
reported in the notifications.  Difficult to comply with these suggestions (e.g. showing the 
actual expenditure per tariff line; ascertaining whether export 
subsidies have been granted to all the covered tariff lines given 
the broad definition of some product categories; harmonizing 
reporting periods in view of scheduled information, etc.).   
 Adherence to the suggestions would be time consuming and 
might not necessarily contribute to the better understanding of 
the notifications.  
__________