The WTO Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS) met from 24-25 June, with Members raising specific export-related concerns with regard to health and safety standards set by other Members. The meeting was preceded by informal consultations on 23 June.

Discussion on private sector standards to continue, divisions remain on form

A number of developing countries are highly critical of the use of private sector standards, saying they reduce the efficacy of the SPS regime by creating higher standards outside of government control. These countries stress that the standards are arbitrary and end up penalising developing countries and small farmers exporting to the North since they lack capacity and funding. Many developing countries argue that governments should to take responsibility for standards set by private-sector actors within their boundaries. Others, especially developed countries, say that private sector standards fall outside the remit of the WTO and its SPS Agreement. This debate has been going on since 2005 (see Bridges Weekly, 6 July 2005, http://www.ictsd.org/weekly/05-07-06/story3.htm).

Uruguay, one of the proponents of further discussions on how to rectify problems posed by private sector standards, made a submission outlining the terms of reference for a Working Group on Private Standards (G/SPS/W/225, available at http://docsonline.wto.org) just prior to the latest session of the SPS Committee. According to the submission, the Working Group would be charged with coming up with concrete recommendations to the SPS Committee within a defined timeframe. It would be chaired by a developing country representative. The scope of its work would be limited to SPS aspects of private sector standards, although a joint workshop could be held with the Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT). The Working Group would: undertake a study of the differences between standards set by the private sector and the official standards in the same area; address government responsibilities with regard to private sector standards; communicate and coordinate with the SPS reference organisations (Codex Alimentarius, the International Animal Health Organisation and the International Plant Protection Convention); and undertake a legal analysis of the consistency between private standards and the SPS Agreement.

Members discussed how to move the work forward during an informal meeting on 23 June. While several countries supported the proposal by Uruguay, others felt that it prejudged any work by taking a negative approach to private standards. During the discussions, disagreements surfaced around the areas of work suggested by Uruguay, and also over practical issues, such as the size and chairmanship of the group.

Following the meeting, the Secretariat will send Members a questionnaire about the organisation of further work on private standards. Based on the replies, countries will continue informal discussions on the way forward in conjunction with the next SPS Committee meeting.

Using the “good offices” of the Chair

During the formal meeting of the SPS Committee from 24-25 June, Members continued considering ways to facilitate their own work. Members have the option of using the Chair’s “good offices,” or mediation, to help resolve differences and conflicts that occur between trade partners with regard to health and safety standards. This option provides a middle way between an airing of concerns within the SPS Committee and a full-fledged dispute. However, mediation is seldom used, so the group discussed the development of concrete guidance on the practicalities of using the Chair’s assistance when needed.

Both the US and Argentina had put forth proposals in this regard since the last meeting of the SPS Committee (G/SPS/W/227 and G/SPS/W/219). Both papers set out concrete timelines and steps to be taken in case the Chair’s mediation was needed. Both also emphasised the technical and scientific nature of the consultations, and suggested inviting expert input from the Codex Alimentarius, International Animal Health Organisation or International Plant Protection Convention as needed. The Geneva-based consultations would be voluntary and confidential in nature, although the Chair would provide a general report to the SPS Committee at the end of the consultations.

The US and Argentina said they would work on consolidating their two drafts in advance of the next meeting of the SPS Committee. This meeting is scheduled to take place from 8-9 October 2008.

ICTSD reporting.