SPS COMMITTEE MOVES ON EQUIVALENCE, S&D DEBATE TO CONTINUE

The WTO Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS), meeting from 17-18 March in Geneva, adopted the last of three clarifications of an October 2001 Decision on Equivalence (G/SPS/19, available at http://docsonline.wto.org), paving the way for the Decision's implementation. However, Members made only limited progress on the issue of special & differential treatment (S&D) for developing countries, with discussions set to continue at the next meeting. In addition, the Committee, which deals primarily with trade aspects of health and sanitary standards, heard concerns regarding more than 20 SPS measures implemented by Members.

Equivalence decision finalised

Equivalence refers to the mutual acceptance of another Member's risk-minimising measures that may differ in process but have an equivalent effect. The Decision on Equivalence was adopted to address one of the 'implementation' concerns raised by developing countries by outlining steps designed to make it easier for all WTO Members to make use of the "equivalence" provisions of the SPS Agreement. The aim of the Decision is to help developing countries prove that their products are as safe as those in developed countries. The third and final clarification adopted by the SPS Committee aims to speed up the recognition of equivalence of SPS measures for products previously traded, for which information already exists.

Transparency in S&D

Members continued discussions on Canada's proposal on enhancing transparency of special and differential treatment within the SPS Agreement, which would require Members to engage in bilateral consultations if an exporting country identified significant difficulties in complying with proposed regulations (see BRIDGES Weekly, 5 November 2003). Following the consultations, the notifying Member would inform the WTO of the S&D requested and provided (or reasons why S&D was not granted). The proposal had been adopted in principle at the April 2003 SPS Committee meeting, but the implementation details remain to be finalised. The Committee discussed the technical details of the procedures put forward by the Secretariat (G/SPS/W/132/Rev.1) as well as the changes proposed by the US (G/SPS/W/141). Among the issues discussed were concerns voiced by some Members over language in the US proposal that would treat technical assistance as separate from S&D, and thereby possibly as an alternative to giving developing countries more time to adjust to importing countries' new measures.

Trade concerns: coffee, GMOs

The Committee debated a range of specific trade concerns, ranging from India's new plant quarantine measures to the US's withdrawal of sanitary clearances for French meat processors. In this context, a group of coffee-producing countries -- including Colombia, Papua New Guinea, Nicaragua, Brazil, Cuba, India, Guatemala, Mexico, Ecuador, Bolivia, the Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Costa Rica and Peru -- raised concerns over proposed new German health standards for ocratoxin A (a microtoxin conaminant) in soluble and roasted coffee. The countries claimed that the regulations were too strict, not based on science and inconsistent given that similar standards for wine and beer were lower. In the case of Colombia, the German coffee market accounts for 17 percent of Colombia's total coffee export, and enforcing the standard could result in a rejection of up to six percent of Colombian coffee. In response, the EC noted that in the absence of an EU-wide standard, Germany could adopt its own levels. The EC added that EU-wide maximum ocratoxin A levels for coffee, wines and fruit juices were expected to be adopted by the end of 2004. The issue is also being discussed at the Codex Committee on Food Additives and Contaminants, meeting from 22 to 26 March in Rotterdam.

The US, Canada, Argentina and Australia again raised concerns over the EU's recently adopted labelling and traceability regulations for genetically modified organisms (GMOs), which they regard as disproportionate, trade restrictive and not scientifically justified (see BRIDGES Trade BioRes, 27 June 2002). The US requested further guidance from the EC for its farm industry, including how tests are to be conducted. The US is coming under increasing pressure from domestic farm groups to bring a WTO dispute against the EU's regulations -- set to come into effect in April -- in addition to the ongoing dispute over the EU's de facto moratorium on the approvals of new GMOs (see BRIDGES Weekly, 10 March 2004).

The next meeting of the SPS Committee is currently scheduled for 23-24 June, preceded by informal consultations on 21-22 June.

ICTSD reporting.