National Strategy
On
Sanitary & Phytosanitary (SPS) & Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)
Proposed By:
Dr. Syed Wajid H. Pirzada
Focal Person (SPS/TBT)/
Chief Scientist/Director
WTO-FARM Cell
Pakistan Agricultural Research Council
Islamabad
(May-2005)
National Strategy on Sanitary & Phytosanitary (SPS) & Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)
Vision:
An effective SPS/TBT strategy, aiming at developing competence in competitiveness, can help underpin Pakistan’s prospective trade in food & agriculture in general and High Value Agriculture in particular.
Objectives:
- Protect plant & animal resources of the country, from exotic pathogens & diseases.
- Institutionalization of monitoring system for disease & pests, and pesticide/veterinary drugs residues.
- Proactively manage & resolve SPS/TBT related issues to counter technical barriers to trade.
- Enter into Equivalence arrangement with trading partners.
- Harmonization of Standards with International Standards.
World Trade Organization (WTO), through its binding Agreements, seeks to liberalize international trade in goods, services and innovative technologies & ideas (Intellectual Property). Liberalization of trade in goods, includes inter alia trade in agricultural goods. One of the WTO Agreements namely “The Agreement on Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary measures-The SPS Agreement, also seeks to liberalize international trade in agricultural products. It requires WTO Member (148) that SPS measures-border control measures necessary to protect human health, and life & health of animals & plants, must not be applied in a manner which constitute a means of arbitrary and unjustifiable discrimination between Members, where the same conditions prevail, nor they be used as disguised restrictions to trade. It asks Members to base in this regard their SPS measures, on international standards.
The SPS Agreement, however, allows countries to deviate from international standards, when choosing their level of SPS protection, provided that:
i. Countries base their deviations on scientific risk assessment.
ii. Countries avoid discrimination by requiring comparable levels of SPS protection in comparable situations.
iii. Countries not implement SPS measures (standards) that are more restrictive of trade than necessary, to achieve the level of SPS protection that they seek.
Yet another WTO Agreement, The Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade-The TBT Agreement, is also designed to ensure that products requirements do not act as unnecessary obstacles to trade. The Agreement commits Members to use, in this regard, international standards and conformity assessment procedures as integral tools for development of free trade worldwide.
Since, international trade in agro-livestock products can potentially increase the movement of pathogens across the borders, the SPS issues in the agricultural sector have become a major area of concern, both domestically and internationally. Key concerns in this regard are the possibility of introduction of new/exotic plants, insects and diseases into agro-livestock production area, which may be deleterious to local plant & livestock resources, and can also inflict damage to public health and national economy. In an effort to contain the spread and/or introduction of exogenous pathogens, Phytosanitary regulations have the potential to impact Pakistan’s prospective trade in food & agriculture, through policy-induced constraints on international trade. For SPS policy differences between international trading partners can cause conflict in the international arena, as SPS regulations can act as technical barriers to trade. These technical barriers cause a reduction in the volume of trade, trade distortions and may create a retaliatory atmosphere.
There is, therefore, naturally a growing concern, especially among the developing countries (DCs) including international development community that standards like SPS/TBT may undermine competitive progress of these countries, and present insurmountable barriers to new entrants, like Pakistan, into high-value food trade.
Notwithstanding these concerns of DCs, food safety (public health), agricultural health risk management and quality management stipulated under SPS & TBT Agreements needs to be viewed as a core competence in the competitiveness of DCs, especially in the context of trade in high-value Agriculture, which countries like Pakistan aim at. The SPS/TBT – related challenges should, therefore, need to be addressed within the broader context of development of competitiveness in the agricultural sector in general and high-value agriculture in particular, for standards in the area of SPS/TBT can help:
· Promote sectoral & market efficiency
· Foster international trade
· Encourage competition and help minimize barriers to market entry
· Diffuse new technologies
· Protect consumers against unsafe/substandard products and deceptive fraud
· Protect human health & mother environment
The implementation of standards however has a cost both in static & dynamic market failures. For example, in case of absence of and poorly working standards:
- Transaction cost & barriers to trade can increase, and it can also
- Constrain and entrench inferior technologies, and
- Hinder the development of interoperable systems
Instead of, therefore, resisting the positive change of standardization, Pakistan needs to engage proactively in the process of standardization. It should harness the opportunities such as training, resource/infrastructure development and guidance towards sustainable trade development in agro-livestock sectors.
Failing that, we need to realize that standards can have high stake impacts, for these can tip the balance in favour of certain competitors and even certain nation economies, for creation and widespread adoption of international standards, could forestall products containing non-compliant technologies, from export markets.
Proactive Agenda:
i. A ‘Strategic Action Plan’ needs to be mounted to manage SPS/TBT standards, aiming at protection of public, plant & animal resources at one hand, and securing international market access on the other.
ii. Systematic approach needs to be employed in control and risk analysis, with regard to food safety (public health) and agricultural trade-related plant and animal health issues.
iii. Seek alliance and coalition with trading partners, neighboring and regional countries/blocs, for collaboration, sharing experience and entering into equivalence arrangements on one hand, and forging effective coalition in WTO on SPS issues on the other.
On domestic front, the areas that need immediate attention are:
i. Complete and exhaustive review of compliance of national SPS/TBT related laws food, plant and animal health (quarantine) etc. with WTO regime on SPS/TBT.
NB. First reading & draft quarantine laws has already been completed. A 2nd reading and review by SPS/TBT consultants be arranged, and final draft may be got vetted from Law & Justice Departments.
ii. Development of, and investment in quality infrastructure including inter alia packaging and labeling. BOI may be approached for lining up investment in packaging, labeling industries
iii. Institutional development: Each country that trades agricultural products has government agencies to determine and implement SPS policies for agricultural imports, and to ensure that exporters follow the proper SPS protocols for agricultural exports. SPS policies and regulations are determined by the collective efforts of various interest groups: consumers, producers, scientists, policy makers, trading partners and civil society. There is urgent need to institutionalize SPS services, like Veterinary Public Health [VPH]/National Plant and Animal Health Inspection Services (NAPHIS) supported by institutions like SPS Council /Food Safety Policy Institute & accredited laboratories, and their integration in to National SPS/TBT Enquiry Point.
NB. A proposal on institutionalization of NAPHIS has already been agreed by MINFAL. Measures need to be taken to implement the decision.
iv. Human resource in food quality and safety management. Embassy of New Zealand has at one stage indicated interest in training of Pakistan’s human resource in SPS management. Esteemed Missions of New Zealand, Australia and Germany may be approached through EAD/Foreign office to secure training facilities, in this area.
v. Development of cool-chain and market infrastructure to contain post-harvest losses. BOI may be approached for securing investment in these areas.
vi. Focus on value-added industry, especially in livestock, horticulture/floriculture and fisheries.
vii. Adoption of international standards like Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point (HACCP), good Agricultural / Animal Husbandry Practices (GAP) and ISO Standards, especially related to product and process safety, Total Quality Management (TQM), Good Laboratory Practices (GLP).
HACCP for dairy, meat, fisheries & juice sub-sectors needs to introduced, and incentives provided to industries complying with these standards Similarly incentives for farms complying with GAP, laboratories complying with GLP and agricultural industries complying with GMP needs to provided. USDA & EU may be approached for training in this area.
viii. Institutionalization of monitoring and Early Warning System, regarding plant/animal health and pesticides/insecticides residue building, and risk management.
This would require inter alia building capacities of laboratories, working in this area, and their accreditation with ISO and other relevant agencies in collaboration with Pakistan National Accreditation Council (PNAC), MoST.
ix. Rationalization of imports, and use of pesticides/insecticides and veterinary drugs, by promoting GAP and rational veterinary therapeutics.
An independent Board needs to be constituted involving key stakeholders including inter alia consumers associations/networks, in the MINFAL to address this issue.
x. Launching of countrywide media campaign “From Farm to Fork” using print and electronic media, for promotion of food safety. Assistance may be sought from USDA in this regard.
xi. Added focus on VPH& plant health in R&D programs. Either through proposed SPS Council, or through a special program with in NARS, such a program can be launched.
xii. Participation in standards setting process, and negotiations on SPS/TBT of National Focal Person/Enquiry Point.
Participation in the meetings of Codex Alimentarius Commission [CAC], International Plant Protection Commission [IPPC] and Office Epizootic International [OIE] needs to be secured through financial support by FAO/WHO.
xiii. Training of Trainers (ToT).
Training of provincial trainers be arranged and special courses be launched with the support of
xiv. Changes in Veterinary and Agricultural Universities Curricula/Syllabi to accommodate SPS/TBT related matter.
xv. Technical assistance from multilateral agencies/donors, as promised in SPS Agreement needs to be secured for purpose of capacity building in the area of TBT/SPS management.
xvi. National SPS/TBT Portal may be launched with the assistance of e/governance unit of Ministry of Science & Technology.
No comments:
Post a Comment