Trade facilita,on in the context of the SPS Agreement: lessons and experiences
ADB -‐ CAREC programme
6-‐8 October 2014 Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia
Standards and Trade Development Facility
A global partnership in SPS technical coopera3on
• Coordina3on mechanism among providers of SPS-‐related technical coopera3on to achieve greater coherence, avoid duplica,on of effort and enhance results
• Knowledge pla:orm for the sharing of experiences, iden,fica,on and dissemina,on of good prac3ce, discussion of cross-‐cu?ng topics
• Support/funding for development and implementa3on of projects that assist in complying with interna,onal SPS requirements; and in gaining/maintaining market access
SPS measures and Trade Facilita3on: context
• Outdated border clearance procedures and excessive red tape are a greater barrier to trade than tariffs (WB, 2011)
• Performance gap between health/SPS agencies and others
• Low-‐performing countries: far higher prevalence of physical inspec3on
• Import / export lead 3mes twice as long for top performers (generally high income) countries as for poor performers (generally low-‐income)
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
2010 2012 2014
Private sector % rate of sa3sfac3on with selected border agencies (bo[om quin,le respondents)*
Customs
Quality and Standards
Health/SPS
Source: World Bank Logis3cs Performance Index *include Afghanistan, Kyrgyz Republic, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and
Mongolia
Right of Members to protect human, animal, plant life or health (safeguard legi,mate regulatory objec,ves)
Avoiding unnecessary barriers to trade
(wai,ng ,mes, red tape, fees, transparency)
• SPS measures (and their implementa3on) may result in trade-‐related transac3on costs
• However, these can be jus3fied by the need to protect human, animal or plant life or health
SPS Agreement (1995)
SPS Agreement
Main trade facilita3on provisions • Minimal trade restric.on (Art. 5.6)
– Measures are not more trade restric,ve than required to achieve the appropriate level of SPS protec,on
• Harmoniza.on & Equivalence (Art.3 & 4)
• Transparency (Art. 7 + Annex B) – Enquiry points and prompt no,fica,on
• Control, Inspec.on & Approval Procedures (Art. 7 + Annex C) – undue delay prohibited; release ,mes
communicated; fees limited to cost; appeal procedures
Protec3on of human, animal and plant life or health
• Scien.fic jus.fica.on (Art. 2.2 & 5.2) – Legi,mate SPS measures and
controls based on scien,fic principles and assessment of risks
• Provisional measures (Art. 5.7) – SPS measures can be based on
available and per,nent informa,on, where scien,fic evidence is insufficient
STDF research in selected countries and for selected products
• Objec3ves: – Iden3fy key needs/good prac3ces to ensure health protec3on while
minimizing trade transac3on costs – Make prac3cal recommenda3ons to enhance technical assistance
focused on SPS and trade facilita3on
• Ques3ons: – How are SPS measures applied in prac3ce to imports, exports and
transit goods? – Can SPS-‐related trade costs/delays be reduced/avoided without
compromising SPS objec3ves? How?
• No direct link to new WTO TF Agreement – but opportunity to enhance dialogue and integrate SPS components in TF programmes
SPS-‐related procedural obstacles to trade: examples
…before the border? …behind the border?
• Complex and lengthy procedures • Excessive document requirements
(registra,on, licences, fees) • Formal / informal fees
• Lack of informa3on (transparency) • No complaints / appeal procedures • Arbitrariness and unpredictability
Do the procedural obstacles occur…
• Duplicate document requirements by impor,ng/expor,ng countries
• No dis3nc3on between mandatory and voluntary standards
• Overlapping jurisdic3on between government agencies
• (Mul,ple) inspec3ons, tests and sampling
• Repeated document checks • Long wai3ng 3mes • Lack of coordina3on between border
agencies (e.g. opening hours)
Preliminary findings: simple solu3ons • Improve transparency
– Use online tools whenever prac,cal. Leaflets and brochures are also useful.
• Reduce possibili3es for rent-‐seeking – De-‐couple revenue-‐raising ac.vity from regulatory ac.vity. Procedural obstacles
which are not accompanied by more effec%ve and efficient SPS protec,on should not be rewarded with increased revenue
• Reduce document requirements – Limit the use of (i) company and product registra3on, (ii) licences and (iii) import/
export permits to special groups of high risk products.
• Coordinate with trade partners – Apply equivalence and seek mutual recogni3on agreement to prevent duplica3ve
controls in expor,ng and impor,ng countries. Do not require mandatory export cer,fica,ons that are not required by the foreign buyer.
• Reduce wai3ng 3mes
More advanced solu3ons
• Risk-‐based SPS controls – The intensity of controls is adjusted according to the risk-‐profile of goods/
traders, but this depends on consistent and reliable data collec3on, sta3s3cal analysis and the procurement and maintenance of ICT hardware.
• Trade informa3on desks – TIDs act as a liaison between the private sector and the public sector, providing
informa3on and facilita3ng compliance with border controls. They can be run by the public sector, the private sector, or as a PPP.
• Single windows – Single windows bring border agencies together in one place, allowing operators to
make one declara3on and one payment for compliance with all border controls.
ARE SPS AUTHORITIES INVOLVED?
• Single Electronic Windows – SEWs allow traders to submit all import, export, and transit informa3on
simultaneously – Developing countries may not have the necessary communica3ons infrastructure,
technical capacity or human and financial resources for effec,ve implementa,on. – Premature introduc3on can be accompanied by arbitrary enforcement of parallel
(documents-‐based) procedures that are open to abuse by officials
• One-‐Stop Border Posts – OSBPs streamline clearance processes by bringing together equivalent
authori3es (in neighbouring countries) onto one side of the border, where controls on inbound/outbound are carried out simultaneously, saving ,me and resources by coordina3ng similar func3ons
– OSBPs must be preceded by procedural and process reforms
Most Advanced Solu3ons
SPS performance
EFFECTIVENESS The extent to which SPS measure or its implementa,on achieves a pre-‐
defined objec,ve
EFFICIENCY The extent to which a pre-‐defined objec,ve can be achieved at a lower cost in terms of resources and ,me
In order to evaluate the effec3veness and efficiency of SPS measures/ agencies one must: • define objec.ves and develop SPS performance indicators • carry out baseline studies of current performance • Monitor indicators on an ongoing basis and carry out ex-‐post evalua.on of
performance
Inputs (Resources spent to
ensure SPS compliance)
Ac3vi3es (Procedures and controls
for SPS compliance)
Results (Improvement in human, animal and plant health)
Does the SPS measure achieve its health
objec3ve?
Can the measure be adapted/reinforced so as to achieve its stated objec3ve?
Can the resources and 3me needed to (i) implement the measure (public
sector); and (ii) comply with the measure
(private sector) be reduced without compromising the objec3ve?
Facilitate Safe Trade
Reform the SPS measure
Consider whether the measure should be classified as an unnecessary barrier
to trade SPS measure is op3mal EFFICIENCY
EFFECTIVENESS
Yes
No
No
• What is the status of SPS reform in individual CAREC countries? • Are SPS agencies par,cipa,ng in Single Window / Coordinated
Border Management projects? • Is there scope for more regional coopera3on?
– Increased regional trade in goods subject to SPS controls – CAREC SPS Working Group?
• Are CAREC members par,cipa,ng in WTO needs assessments in the context of the new Trade Facilita,on agreement?
Reflec3ons
For more informa3on
Standards and Trade Development Facility World Trade Organiza3on Rue de Lausanne 154 CH-‐1211 Geneva Switzerland [email protected] www.standardsfacility.org
Subscribe to STDF electronic list and download STDF publica.ons