Proponents of the SPS Declaration for the 12th Ministerial Conference (GEN/1758/Rev.2) noted that the COVID-19 pandemic has underlined the importance of coordinated responses to global crises and of leveraging available regulatory tools such as the SPS Agreement in meeting these challenges in a science-based manner. Despite the postponement of the 12th Ministerial Conference, initially scheduled to be held in Nur-sultan (Kazakhstan) in June 2020, the proponents said they hoped to reach consensus on the initiative and welcomed the opportunity for an exchange of views.

Co-sponsors said a Ministerial Declaration would help promote food security and international trade and would establish a work programme, open to all members. This work programme would complement the efforts of the SPS Committee by addressing the challenges faced by many countries in the implementation of the SPS Agreement, including those related to biotechnology, the use of pesticides, climate change and environmental sustainability.

Considering that the work of the SPS Committee is fundamentally connected with issues being discussed at high political levels, such as disease transmission, pest control, sustainability and food security, it was stressed that a Ministerial Declaration would contribute by linking the Committee's more technical work with these larger issues and their effects on trade, strengthening the deliberative function of the WTO.

Some members said they were still considering their position but they saw merit in celebrating the 25th anniversary of the SPS Agreement by underlining the Agreement's connection to high-level concerns that could be addressed at ministerial level. In general, members were open to engagement on the Declaration.

Fifth Review

Members achieved a milestone by adopting the Report of the Fifth Review of the Operation and Implementation of the SPS Agreement (G/SPS/W/313/Rev.3) on an ad referendum basis. This means that the text will be definitely adopted if no objections are raised by 31 July 2020. While a few delegations initially expressed reservations on certain recommendations, members showed flexibility in reaching consensus on the report.

Every four years, WTO members evaluate how they are applying the SPS Agreement. The Fifth Review process started in March 2018 and was driven by members' proposals for new work by the committee relating to specific topics.  

The report includes recommendations on the following topics:

  • appropriate level of protection, risk assessment and science
  • control, inspection and approval procedures
  • equivalence
  • fall armyworm
  • national SPS coordination mechanisms
  • notification procedures and transparency
  • maximum residue levels (MRLs) for plant protection products
  • regionalization
  • role of the Codex Alimentarius, the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) and the International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC) in addressing specific trade concerns (STCs)
  • voluntary third-party assurance schemes.

EU MRLs for plant protection products

A large number of members called on the European Union to suspend for 12 months and review the processes under way for determining maximum residue levels (MRLs) for plant protection products due to the negative impact they may have on imports of fruits and vegetables from third countries.  They also called for the delayed entry into force of the MRL reductions planned for 2020 in response to the trade and economic downturn caused by the COVID-19 pandemic.

A group of 33 members presented a proposal stressing that under the current circumstances, the implementation of certain SPS measures that create additional restrictions or burdens on international trade in animals, plants or plant products constitutes a challenge that hampers worldwide economic recovery efforts, especially in developing countries.

The COVID-19 pandemic is the biggest global challenge in recent history and has forced WTO members to focus their efforts on protecting people's lives, ensuring public health and guaranteeing food security for their populations, these members stressed.

The EU, which is the largest common market in the world and the largest importer of fruit and vegetables, said in its response that the standards applied are always based on scientific studies addressing the potential risk to consumer health. The EU reiterated that all MRL-related processes are notified to WTO members with sufficient time for their food business operators to prepare for the new requirements that will result from the modification of existing standards. The EU committed to engage in addressing the consequences of the pandemic, it said.

Members also participated in an information-sharing session on COVID-19, where they stressed the importance of ensuring coordinated responses to global crises and ensuring that trade in agricultural and food products is not unduly restricted. The extensive work done by the WTO Secretariat in compiling SPS measures implemented since the start of the pandemic was commended. More information about that session is available here.

New STCs

The SPS Committee discussed a range of measures regarding food safety and animal and plant health, with many exporting countries raising concerns about import requirements that they said are more stringent than necessary. Twenty-nine STCs were addressed, of which 17 were discussed for the first time. A large number of WTO members and observers contributed to the discussions. The new STCs were the following:

  • Thailand's phytosanitary restrictions on imports of fresh citrus fruit due to sweet orange scab or SOS — raised by Japan
  • US non-recognition of the pest-free status in the European Union for Asian longhorn beetle and citrus longhorn beetle — raised by the European Union
  • India's fumigation requirements for grain and other products — raised by the Russian Federation
  • Nepal's import ban on energy drinks — raised by Thailand
  • Modification of EU MRLs for plant protection products: Chlorpyrifos and Chlorpyrifos-methyl — raised by Colombia and Ecuador
  • Modification of EU MRLs for plant protection products: Mancozeb — raised by Colombia, Costa Rica, Côte d'Ivoire, Ecuador and Paraguay.
  • Thailand's draft list of hazardous substances regarding food containing pesticide residues — raised by the United States
  • General restrictions on imports of chocolate and cocoa products due to maximum levels of cadmium — raised by Peru
  • Viet Nam's regulations on animal feeds and husbandry — raised by Argentina and the United States
  • India's new requirements for animal feed — raised by the United States
  • Guatemala's import restrictions on bovine and swine meat — raised by Mexico
  • Costa Rica's import restrictions on swine meat products — raised by Mexico
  • Costa Rica's import restriction on dairy and dairy products — raised by Mexico
  • Peru's import restrictions on pork — raised by Brazil
  • India's approval procedures for animal products — raised by the Russian Federation
  • China's administrative measures for registration of overseas manufacturers of imported food — raised by the United States
  • Saudi Arabia's temporary suspension of Brazilian poultry exporting establishments — raised by Brazil

Both new and previously raised issues can be found in the new password protected eAgenda system for members, which allows members to submit agenda items, statements and STCs online, and in the public SPS Information Management System.

Next meeting 

The SPS Committee is scheduled to hold its next meeting on 5-6 November 2020, preceded by an informal meeting.




Problems viewing this page? If so, please contact giving details of the operating system and web browser you are using.