Top

Published in:

2017 | OriginalPaper | Chapter

Regionalization Within the SPS Agreement: Recent Developments

Author : Anna G. Micara

Published in: International Economic Law

Publisher: Springer International Publishing

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config

AI-assisted search

Off

Abstract

The SPS Agreement includes a significant provision according to which SPS measures are to be adapted to regional conditions (art 6). However, its implementation faces several problems, especially concerning complex and slow administrative procedures and the obtaining of recognition of international organizations’ standards. This Chapter will examine the process of adoption by the SPS Committee of the “2008 Guidelines to Further the Practical Implementation of Article 6 of the Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures” and will then focus on the interpretation of art 6 in the very recent WTO case law, so as to assess to what extent it gives more guidance. Finally, given the relevance of Free Trade Agreements, it will be appropriate to analyse SPS-plus measures in those agreements, especially the EU context as it includes regionalization’s provisions going far beyond art 6.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

previous chapter The Twenty-First Century Regionalism: Brazil and Mercosur in the New International Scenario

next chapter The Mutually Agreed Solution Between Indonesia and the United States in US – Clove Cigarettes: A Case of Efficient Breach (or Power Politics)?

WTO Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures, Annex 1 A of the Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, 15 April 1994, https://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/legal_e.htm.

On the notion of SPS measures see Annex A of the SPS Agreement and see, among others, Scott (2007), pp. 10 ff.

For a general overview of the SPS Agreement see, among others, Gruszczynski (2010), pp. 35 ff. Marceau and Trachtman (2014), pp. 351 ff. Alemanno (2007), pp. 239–290.

Loppacher and Kerr (2005), pp. 427 ff.

Gruszczynski (2010), p. 251.

The SPS Committee was established “to provide a regular forum for consultations” and carries out “the functions necessary to implement the provisions of this Agreement and the furtherance of its objectives” (SPS agreement, art 12).

WTO doc. G/SPS/12, Review of the Operation and Implementation of the Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures, 11 March 1999, para 21.

See WTO doc. G/SPS/R/31, Summary of the Meeting held on 29–30 October 2003, 23 December 2003, para 90 ff. see also in particular WTO doc. G/SPS/W/140, Draft Decision on the Implementation of Article 6 of the Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures, Proposal by Chile, 23 October 2003.

WTO doc. G/SPS/GEN/461, Review of the SPS Agreement, Update on adaptation to regional conditions, Submission by the European Communities, 12 December 2003, para 24.

WTO doc. G/SPS/GEN/388, Comments on Article 6 of the SPS Agreement – Regionalization, 1 May 2003 para 2; WTO doc. G/SPS/GEN/640/Rev.1, Issues on the Application of Article 6 of the Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures. Background Document, Note by the Secretariat, 14 September 2006, para 7 ff.

WTO doc. G/SPS/W/148, Article 6 of the Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures, Adaptation to Regional Conditions, Including Pest- or Disease-Free Areas and Areas of Low Pest or Disease Prevalence, Proposal by Peru, 7 July 2004, paras 3–4.

WTO doc. G/SPS/R/42, Summary of the Meeting of 27–28 June 2006, 25 September 2006, para 84.

WTO doc. G/SPS/R/37, Summary of the Meeting held on 29–30 June 2005, Note by the Secretariat, 11 August 2005, para 101.

WTO doc. G/SPS/R/44, Summary of the Meeting of 28 February-1 March 2007, 30 May 2007, para 106.

WTO doc. G/SPS/R/38, Summary of the Special Meeting on Article 6 (Regionalization) held on 30–31 January 2006 27 February 2006, paras 6–8–10.

Ibid., para 7. See also in particular, WTO doc. G/SPS/W/195, The Implementation of Article 6 of the Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (Regionalization) Communication from the Republic of Korea, 31 May 2006, para 12.

On the debate within the SPS Committee see, among others, Scott (2007), pp. 186–190; Loppacher et al. (2007), pp. 678–679.

WTO doc. G/SPS/48, Guidelines to Further the Practical Implementation of Article 6 of the Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures, 16 May 2008.

WTO doc. G/SPS/GEN/388, supra, n. 10, para 2.

WTO doc. G/SPS/GEN/640, Issues on the Application of Article 6 of the Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures. Background Document, Note by the Secretariat, 20 March 2006, para 27.

See US and EC in WTO doc. G/SPS/R/42, supra, n. 13, paras 83 and 85 as well as WTO doc. G/SPS/W/189, Comments On Background Document G/SPS/GEN/640 “Issues in the Application of Article 6 of the Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures”, Document Submitted Jointly By Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador, Paraguay And Uruguay 24 May 2006, p. 1.

WTO doc. G/SPS/R/42, supra, n. 12, para 83.

Gruszczynski (2010), p. 253. On harmonization and autonomy see also Arcuri (2013), pp. 164 ff.

See, among others, WTO Doc. WT/DS245/R Panel Report, Japan – Measures Affecting the Importation of Apples, 15 July 2003, para 8.241 “We recall that Article 5.1 requires the ‘risk assessment techniques developed by the relevant international organizations’ to be ‘taken into account’. We note first that this expression does not impose that a risk assessment under Article 5.1 be ‘based on’ or ‘in conformity with’ such risk assessment techniques. This suggests that such techniques should be considered relevant, but that a failure to respect each and every aspect of them would not necessarily, per se, signal that the risk assessment on which the measure is based is not in conformity with the requirements of Article 5.1”.

Gruszczynski (2010), pp. 256–257.

Art 6.1 refers to “relevant international organizations” without specifying which ones so other organizations’ standards may be taken into account but mainly the sister organizations deal with the adoption of those standards: Scott (2007), p. 180.

See, for example, OIE Resolution No. 17 Recognition of the Foot and Mouth Disease Status of Member Countries http://www.oie.int/fileadmin/Home/eng/Animal_Health_in_the_World/docs/pdf/2015_A_RESO_R17_FMD.pdf.

Horn et al. (2013), p. 1.

See, among others, WTO doc. G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.15, Specific Trade Concerns, 24 February 2015, para 2.79; WTO doc. G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.13, Specific Trade Concerns, 26 February 2013, paras 2.118 and 2.167.

WTO doc. G/SPS/R/76, Summary of the Meeting of 15 and 17 October 2014, 2 December 2014, para 7.4.

“Any determination under Article 6 should consider the strength and credibility of the veterinary or phytosanitary infrastructure of the exporting Member in accordance with the importing Member’s appropriate level of sanitary or phytosanitary protection” (WTO Doc. G/SPS/48 supra, n. 18, para 8).

See WTO doc. G/SPS/R/42 supra, n. 12, para 84: “the ultimate decision to recognize remains with the importing Member and very much depends on the trust in the competent authority of the exporting Member. This trust builds on the veterinary/phytosanitary system in place and previous experience with the exporting Member”. See also Canada and US in WTO doc. G/SPS/R/38, supra, n. 15, paras 13 and 18.

WTO Doc. WT/DS430/R, Panel Report, India – Measures Concerning the Importation of Certain Agricultural Products, 14 October 2014.

WTO Doc. WT/DS430/AB/R, Appellate Body Report, India – Measures Concerning the Importation of Certain Agricultural Products, 4 June 2015.

WTO Doc. WT/DS430/R, supra, n. 33, paras 2.7–2.12.

Ibid., paras 2.45–2.46.

Ibid., paras 2.47.

Live-Stock Importation Act, Act No. 9 of 1898, as amended by the Live-Stock Importation (Amendment) Act (No. 28 of 2001).

WTO Doc. WT/DS430/R supra, n. 33, para 2.3.

Ibid., paras 7.618–7.619.

Ibid, paras 7.631–7.645.

WTO Doc. WT/DS447/R, Panel Report, US – Measures Affecting the Importation of Animals, Meat and Other Animal Products from Argentina, 24 July 2015.

Code of Federal Regulations, Title 9, Part 94.1.

WTO Doc. WT/DS447/R, supra, n. 42, paras 7.626–7.629.

On the link between art 6 and art 5 see WTO Doc. WT/DS447/R, supra, n. 42, paras 7.644 and 7.651.

Ibid., paras 7.630–7.635.

WTO Doc. WT/DS430/AB/R, supra, n. 34, para 5.141.

Ibid., para 5.152.

WTO Doc. WT/DS430/R, supra, n. 33, para 7.674.

Ibid., para 7.674.

WTO Doc. WT/DS430/AB/R, supra, n. 34, para 5.152.

WTO Doc. WT/DS447/R, supra, n. 42, para 7.655.

WTO Doc. WT/DS430/R, supra, n. 33, para 7.690.

Ibid., para 7.709.

WTO Doc. WT/DS430/AB/R, supra, n. 34, para 5.133.

Ibid., para 5.133.

Ibid., para 5.143.

WTO Doc. WT/DS430/R, supra, n. 33, para 7.675.

Ibid., para 7.676.

WTO Doc. WT/DS430/AB/R, supra, n. 34, para 5.153.

Ibid., para 5.132.

Ibid., para 5.154.

Ibid., para 5.156.

Arcuri (2015), p. 9.

WTO Doc. WT/DS430/AB/R, supra, n. 34, para 5.157.

Ibid., para 5.157.

Ibid., paras 5.155–5.156.

WTO Doc. WT/DS430/R, supra, n. 33, para 7.695.

Ibid., para 7.698.

Ibid.

Ibid., para 7.701.

Ibid., para 7.702.

Ibid.

WTO Doc. WT/DS430/AB/R, supra, n. 34, paras 5.161–5.175.

Ibid., paras 5.136–5.137.

Ibid., para 5.137.

Ibid., para 5.138.

Ibid., ft 503.

Ibid., para 5.174.

WTO Doc. WT/DS447/R, supra, n. 42, para 7.656.

Ibid., paras 2.11–2.16.

On the measure at issue see WTO Doc. WT/DS447/R, supra, n. 42, para 2.2.

Ibid., para 7.658.

WTO Doc. WT/DS430/R, supra, n. 33, para 7.679.

WTO doc. G/SPS/48, supra, n. 18, para 2. See, instead, WTO Doc. WT/DS392/R, Panel Report, US – Certain Measures Affecting Imports of Poultry from China, 29 September 2010, paras 7.132–7.136 concerning the Decision on the Implementation of Article 4 of the Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures.

WTO Doc. WT/DS447/R, supra, n. 42, para 7.660.

Ibid., para 7.671.

Ibid.

Ibid., paras 7.518 ff.

Ibid., para 7.673.

On regulatory issues see, among others, Wiener and Alemanno (2015), pp. 103 ff.

Trade Agreement Between the European Union and its Member States, of the one part, and Colombia and Peru, of the other part, OJ 2012 L 354/3, art 94.5; Free Trade Agreement between the European Union and its Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of Korea, of the other part, OJ 2011 L 127/6, art 5.8.4; Agreement establishing an Association between the European Union and its Member States, on the one hand, and Central America on the other, OJ 2012 L 346/3, art 149.4.

Comprehensive Economic Trade Agreement EU-Canada (CETA), final text, published on 29 February 2016, available at http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2016/february/tradoc_154329.pdf (accessed 29 February 2016), art 5.5.1(c).

EU-Korea supra, n. 92, art 5.8.4; EU-Central America supra, n. 92, art 149.5.

EU-Peru-Colombia, supra, n. 100, art 94.6.

See EU-Korea, supra, n. 92, art 5.8.3; Peru-Colombia, supra, n. 92, art 94.2; EU-Central America, supra, n. 92, art 149.1.

In particular, EU-Korea, supra, n. 100, art 5.8.1; Peru-Colombia, supra, n. 100, art 94.2. See also EU-Vietnam Free Trade Agreement, Chapter on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures, http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2016/february/tradoc_154209.%20institutional%20-%20for%20publication.pdf (accessed 29 February 2016), p. 6.

Agreement on sanitary and phytosanitary measures applicable to trade in animals and animal products, plants, plant products and other goods and animal welfare, Annex IV of the Agreement establishing an association between the European Community and its Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of Chile, of the other part, OJ 2002 L 352/3, art 6.5.

CETA, supra, n. 93, art 5.5.1.e; EU-Peru Colombia, supra, n. 92, art 94.8; EU-Central America, supra, n. 92, art 149.7; EU-Vietnam, supra, n. 97, p. 6.

100

On this concept see Gruszczynski (2010), pp. 255–256 and OIE, Terrestrial Code, ch. 4.3, art 4.3.1.

101

EU-Peru Colombia, supra, n. 92, art 94.8.

102

Association Agreement between the European Union and its Member States, of the one part, and Ukraine, of the other part, OJ 2014 L 161/3, art 65.

103

Association Agreement between the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community and their Member States, of the one part, and Georgia, of the other part, OJ 2014 L 261/4, art 56.

104

See EU-US Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, Sanitary and phytosanitary issues, Initial EU position paper, http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2013/july/tradoc_151625.pdf (accessed 29 February 2016) and Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures, Consolidated proposals, https://ttip-leaks.org/andromache/doc11.pdf (accessed 27 May 2016).

105

Agreement between the United States of America and the European Community on sanitary measures to protect public health and animal health in trade in live animals and animal products (Veterinary Equivalence Agreement), OJ 1998 L118/3.

106

See, among others, Economic Partnership Agreements Between the European Union and its Member States, of the one part, and the SADC EPA States, of the other part, 15 July 2014, art 63.4.

107

Prévost (2010), p. 40.

Alemanno A (2007) Trade in food: regulatory and judicial approaches in the EC and the WTO. Cameron May, London

Arcuri A (2013) Law and economics of the SPS agreement: a critical perspective. In: Van Calster G, Prévost D (eds) Research handbook on environment, health and the WTO. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, pp 164–206CrossRef

Arcuri A (2015) Presentation of the Appellate Body’s findings in India – Agricultural Products, ICTSD Talking Dispute No. 13, Geneva, Switzerland, http://www.ictsd.org/sites/default/files/event/A_Arcuri.pdf. Accessed 30 Jan 2016

Gruszczynski L (2010) Regulating health and environmental risks under WTO Law, a critical analysis of the SPS agreement. Oxford University Press, Oxford

Horn H, Mavroidis PC, Wijkstrom EN (2013) In the shadow of the DSU: addressing specific trade concerns in the WTO SPS and TBT committees. Working Paper No. 494. http://ssrn.com/abstract=2478598. Accessed 30 Jan 2016

Loppacher LJ, Kerr WA (2005) The efficacy of World Trade Organization Rules on Sanitary Barriers: Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy in North America. JWT 39:427–43

Loppacher LJ, Kerr WA, Barichello RR (2007) The debate on improving implementation of the regionalization chapter of the SPS agreement: real problems or disguised protectionism? JWT 41:667–81

Marceau G, Trachtman JP (2014) A map of the World Trade Organization law of domestic regulation of goods: the technical barriers to trade agreement, the sanitary and phytosanitary measures agreement, and the general agreement on tariffs and trade. JWT 48:351–432

Prévost D (2010) Sanitary, phytosanitary and technical barriers to trade in the economic partnership agreements between the European Union and the ACP countries. ICTSD, Geneva

Scott J (2007) The WTO agreement on sanitary and phytosanitary measures, a commentary, Oxford commentaries on the GATT/WTO agreements. Oxford University Press, Oxford

Wiener JB, Alemanno A (2015) The future of international regulatory cooperation: TTIP as a learning process toward a global policy laboratory. Law Contemp Probl 78:103–39

Title: Regionalization Within the SPS Agreement: Recent Developments
Author: Anna G. Micara
Publisher: Springer International Publishing
Book: International Economic Law
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-44644-8

Electronic ISBN: 978-3-319-44645-5

Copyright Year: 2017
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-44645-5_7

Springer Professional

Abstract

Please log in to get access to your license.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Premium Partner