Discuss this articleShare your views with other visitors, and read what they have to say
After years of hesitation, WTO Members have decided to look into private sector product standards, which developing countries in particular blame for penalising their exports.
The decision was taken at an October meeting of the Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (the SPS committee), which has grappled with the issue since 2005.
The WTO’s SPS agreement seeks to ensure that Members’ food safety and other health-related measures are based on science and do not unduly restrict trade. The agreement’s Article 13 requires governments to “take such reasonable measures as may be available to them to ensure that non-governmental entities within their territories […] comply with the relevant provisions of this Agreement.” A number of developing countries argue that this clause obliges governments to ensure that product certification and labelling schemes run by commercial or other private entities are consistent with WTO rules. Others, especially developed countries, say that the Article 13 text quoted above is not legally binding, and that they have no authority over private certification schemes that go beyond the SPS framework.
Despite the ongoing debate, delegates decided in October to move forward on the issue. With input from relevant international organisations, the WTO secretariat will prepare a report, which will compile and analyse information provided by Member countries on specific export products that they have identified as being affected by private standards.
The main reason for developing countries’ concern is the proliferation of non-governmental standards, which are often arbitrary and work against their exporters, who lack the capacity to fulfil the criteria. For instance, many developing country suppliers have difficulties in complying with the requirements of supermarket chains with regard to how a given good is produced rather than just delivering a finished product that fulfils government-mandated norms.
Private sector standards are only part of the picture, however.
Gypsy Moth, Novel Foods Regulations Spark Controversy
China, Japan, Korea and Indonesia objected to a new plant protection standard proposed by the North American Plant Protection Agency that would require that all ships be inspected for the Asian gypsy moth before entering territorial waters of Canada, Mexico and the US. The complainants argued that the proposed standard is not based on science or current international standards and that it was too broad since it covers all of temperate Asia and would subject entire shiploads, instead of just products, to inspection.
The proponents countered that the measure was based on proper risk assessment showing that the Asian gypsy moth could threaten 600 North American plant species if introduced. Furthermore, Canada, Mexico and the US said that they had taken their trading partners’ concerns into account by allowing regions to be declared pest free, and that ships entering and moving throughout any of the three countries waters would only need to be inspected once.
Peru, with the support of the Philippines and several Latin American countries, raised concerns over the EU’s proposed ‘novel food’ regulations, which they said were too burdensome on suppliers who must prove that consumption of traditional or ethnic products is safe by producing historical evidence covering a large region. They also complained that the EU had not notified the new regulations to the WTO. In response, the EU said that revision of the regulation was under discussion in the European Parliament and that the main concern was with extracts or food supplements, rather than with entire fruits or vegetables.
A number of delegates suggested that donor countries should allocate development assistance funds to help developing countries overcome SPS hurdles that impact on their trade performance.
The next meeting of the SPS Committee is scheduled for 25-26 February 2009.
Add a comment
Enter your details and a comment below, then click Submit Comment. We’ll review and publish the best comments.