March 20, 2007

 

Australian shrimp rules spark debate on private and government standards

 

 

Australia's stringent new risk management measures on imported shrimp has sparked off discussion in the WTO on whether private-sector standards or government standards should apply to food safety.

 

The debate on private sector standards was sparked off in 2005 when the small island state of St. Vincent and the Grenadines highlighted the challenges it faced when trying to access the EU market due to strict standards set by commercial supermarket chains.

 

While the Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary (SPS) Measures took the two years to argue the issue, private standards has continued to flourish in its various forms all over the world.

 

Around 400 standards exist currently, according to the UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD).

 

Even the WTO finds the distinction between voluntary private standards and official measures increasingly blurry, as private requirements often become the industry norm.

 

During the SPS meeting, Argentina noted that to be able to continue selling to large buyers, such as major supermarket chains, exporters are obliged to follow the standards that are set by them.

 

However, a number of countries still insist on a focus on government requirements.

 

The EU and Chile spoke in support of private standards, arguing that they help expand trade as only exporters who meet these standards would be allowed to enter the markets.

 

For example, talks on setting standards on biofuels is an example in which participants can promote international trade and production through the development of standards.

 

Other countries, including Brazil, Cuba and Egypt argued however, that private standards pose significant challenges to small countries due to the cost and the fact that they sometimes conflict with government or international standards.

 

In addition, the numerous standards often do not recognise one another as equivalent, meaning that exporters would have to comply with several different schemes.

 

The original plaintiffs, St. Vincent and the Grenadines noted the negative effects of private standards on small farmers, and claimed that the standards are "in conflict with the letter and spirit of the SPS Agreement.

 

Private sector requirements are barriers to trade and causes confusion, inequity and lack of transparency, a paper submitted by the country's representatives said.

 

The paper proposed the creation of a support facility for producers in small economies and involving producers and international standard-setting bodies in the development of private standards. It also suggested that the standards be more flexible, taking into account specific crops and country situations.

 

Australia's current shrimp safety measures covers imports from China and several Southeast Asian countries. Thailand, one of the affected, said the measures were overly restrictive, and have been asking Australia to accept its safety testing and measures.

 

Under the SPS Agreement, WTO Members are allowed to set a standard of human and plant protection that they consider 'appropriate', but any trade restrictions must be backed by a scientific risk assessment.

 

Australia's new standards have even been controversial inside the country itself.

 

While some Australian farmers welcomed the move as it leveled the playing field, environmentalists are warning that shrimp shortages may soon wipe out local supplies if foods from elsewhere cannot be imported into Australia.