MEETING THE EXACTING REQUIREMENTS OF SANITARY AND PHYTOSANITARY (SPS) MEASURES

Almost all agricultural products consumed in developing countries are covered by sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) regulations. These are necessary for consumer protection and for protecting plants and animals in the importing country from disease.

These measures have an important impact on the ability of developing countries to export products to developed (and developing) country markets. Furthermore, with pressure for agricultural trade liberalization increasing, there are concerns that SPS measures could be used as protectionist measures.

The quality standards demanded by developed countries are high and, for some developing countries, difficult to achieve. And, what's more, quality standards get higher as the degree of processing is increased towards a fully manufactured product produced for direct consumption.

Overcoming the difficulties of producing goods which comply with the quality standards of consuming countries almost certainly represents the most important challenge for developing countries in a liberalized world. It is far more important, for instance, than comparatively minor (and falling) barriers to trade represented by import tariffs.

The Sanitary and Phytosanitary Agreement is designed to protect animal and plant life or health arising from the spread of pests and disease and to protect human and animal life from disease and toxins. The SPS Agreement is closely linked to the WTO Agreement on Agriculture (AoA) although they are separate agreements. The AoA endorses the SPS Agreement by stating that '…the SPS Agreement should be given effect by all members'.

While several African, Caribbean and Pacific countries, including South Africa, Zimbabwe and Mauritius, have sufficient resources and expertise to meet all the exacting standards required by customers in industrialized countries for food products, most ACP developing countries do not. These standards not only apply to the safety of the products, but also to its appearance, packaging and labelling of contents.

Meeting these standards requires a long list of systems to be in place, including quality control at the farm level and in processing, laboratory facilities, access to clean inputs such as water and packaging materials, controlled temperature storage facilities and testing facilities and certification systems. If customers in importing countries are not confident about the standards of any of these facilities, they are likely to demand additional testing at the port of discharge and may reject any defective goods. This adds significant costs and uncertainty to any transaction.

Developing countries merit special consideration from importing countries over the time they may take to develop control systems. Assistance with the difficulties of setting up and administering these systems is also available from a number of international development organizations, such as the World Bank and Commonwealth Secretariat, overseas development departments of governments of industrialized countries and NGOs.

The most comprehensive programme of assistance is offered by the UN Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO). Among the services offered by the FAO are:-

• strengthening laboratory analysis and food inspection capabilities.
• providing training in all aspects of food control.
• providing advice, information and documents on a wide range of
• related subjects.
• publishing manuals on food quality control.
• providing assistance in the strengthening of administrative structures.

Although this assistance may go a long way to help developing countries to meet their obligations under the Agreement, many countries may still lack the necessary resources and experienced personnel to run these systems effectively and to participate fully in the functions of the Agreement.

Implication:

Improving quality standards in fresh produce should represent a high priority for exporters in ACP countries, not only to protect the health of their own populations but also to enable them to export produce to countries with increasingly demanding hygiene requirements. Smallholder producers are particularly at risk from this trend. Thus, despite the real economic, social and ethical advantages of vegetables sourced from smallholders, they may be squeezed out of global markets. It is important that proactive measures are put in place to ensure that this does not happen. The information in this Guide is intended in part to assist in this process.

Related Information: MRL Harmonization Programme; Pesticide Approvals; ACP Pesticides Initiative; Implications of EU Legislation