Standards and Trade Development Facility - What problem does the STDF tackle?


		Français
		Español

	Home > Background > What problem does the STDF tackle?

Background

	What problem does the STDF tackle?
	Value added by the STDF
	Structure of the facility

Coordination activities

Funding opportunities

Ongoing & completed activities

What problem does the STDF tackle?

Examples of developing country weaknesses in management of SPS standards

- Absence of national strategy on food safety, animal and plant health and out-dated and incomplete SPS legislation

- Absence of a “competent authority” recognized by importing countries to implement and certify basic SPS requirements.

- Under-funded regulatory agencies lacking skilled staff, appropriate infrastructure and adequate inspection, monitoring and certification capabilities.

- Insufficient public-private dialogue and cooperation in standards development, implementation, domestic enforcement and export market strategy.

- Lack of technical capacity and available resources to engage in standards development and to assess the technical justification and economic implications of new standards and their application domestically or by export partners.

- Lack of information on export market SPS requirements in both the public and private sector.

- Inability to control plant and animal pests and diseases through initiatives such as surveillance, eradication or zoning. Problems in securing international recognition of disease free areas of production.

- Inability to monitor, manage and report data on plant pests and animal diseases. Weak institutional capacity to respond to requests for information on disease and pest prevalence.

- Weak private sector technological capability, shortage of trained staff, outdated processing, quality and safety systems, poor management of coordinated supply-chains (especially those involving smallholders).

- Lack of institutional capacity to engage in market access negotiations, provide data for importing country risk assessments and to exercise rights and obligations under the SPS Agreement.

Trade liberalization has reduced tariff barriers, but it has exposed another layer of "behind the border" measures, in the form of standards, which can prove just as difficult to surmount for developing country exporters. Experience with duty- and quota-free access schemes, notably for least developed countries (LDCs), demonstrates that market access does not automatically follow from such initiatives as producers still need to comply with mandatory official sanitary and phytosanitary controls and commercial requirements. Furthermore, these official control and commercial requirements are evolving as a result of changing competitive forces, evolving consumer attitudes in response to food scares and compliance requirements which stretch back along through the production chain.

The entry into force of the WTO Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS Agreement) in 1995 brought to light the need for assistance to developing countries. The Agreement itself created new challenges and opportunities for developing countries. One particular task is to harmonize sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) measures on as wide a basis as possible with the standards guidelines and recommendations developed by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), the World Organization for Animal Health (OIE) and the International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC). Given the institutional and resource constraints of developing countries, this is a tough challenge.

However, this process of harmonization of domestic rules with international standards also provides opportunities. The rules-based framework of the SPS Agreement, allied to the standards, guidelines and recommendations of Codex, OIE and IPPC, creates new means for developing countries to pursue market access opportunities and poverty reduction goals while improving human health, animal health and the phytosanitary situation.

Many developing countries are heavily dependent on food, agricultural, forestry and fish products for export revenue, and are also significant importers of food and agricultural products. As such, science-based SPS controls are an imperative and essential element to maintain and expand market access, as well as protect against the negative human, animal or environmental consequences of sanitary or phytosanitary problems. Developing countries with weak institutional and resource constraints, in both the public and private sector, can thus not only be marginalized in trade terms but also leave themselves exposed to sanitary and phytosanitary hazards.

Developing country demand for SPS-related technical co-operation has risen considerably in recent years. Demand for ever high levels of consumer protection coupled with technological progress (for example in new testing equipment that can detect ever lower concentrations of contaminants and pathogens) is leading to reinforcement of agricultural and food inspection systems in developed country markets. This is raising the costs of entry for countries seeking to diversify away from their traditional raw commodity export base into higher value products and raising the risk of rejections for all market players. Furthermore, much of the dynamic of this process is being generated by large commercial buyers in developed markets where food safety, plant and animal protection have become a point of market or brand differentiation.

Developing countries need to be selective in allocating their resources in the SPS area and creative in the linkages they foster between the public and private sector to ensure cost-effective efficient SPS services. One element to consider is cross-border co-operation and the optimal utilization of resources at regional level. A key component of the STDF is the establishment and application of country and sectoral SPS planning tools to assist in resource allocation questions. Finally, south-south trade in SPS-sensitive products is growing at a rapid rate, increasing new commercial opportunities, but also challenges in managing SPS requirements.

Site Last Updated on February, 2008