Introduction

With establishment of the WTO, the international scenario has changed rapidly with opportunities being available to all countries to benefit from greater access to world markets. Annually around 500 million metric tons of foodstuffs are traded internationally having an estimated value of the order of US$ 400 Billions. This global trade is further expanding rapidly and significantly due to increase in consumer demands linking to education and awareness of consumers, internationalization of food tastes and habits, development in food science and technology, improvement in transportation and cold chain linkages.
However, India’s contribution to world food trade is relatively insignificant. Considering the fact that India is the third largest producer of food products in the world, its insignificant presence in world trade is not a very positive sign.
One of the major factors for such low exports has been the quality and safety aspects. Consumers all over the world have become conscious of quality and are showing their preference for high quality products while at the same time governments have realized their role in protecting the health and safety of their populations by imposing stringent requirements relating to pesticide residues, contaminants, microbiological parameters, pests, disease as well as various aspects of hygiene controls. At the international level, limits for such sanitary and phytosanitary measures have been specified by Codex Alimentarius Commission.
To ensure that standards and regulations do not create unnecessary barriers to trade, certain rules and disciplines are required to be maintained, which are being taken care of through the non-tariff agreements, especially the SPS Agreement. The SPS Agreement stresses on the health and safety aspects and permits member countries to impose measures to protect the health and safety of their population within certain rules. It also refers to use of Codex standards.
In the present scenario, the implications of Codex and WTO for export of food commodities and the issues that need to be addressed are highlighted below.

Harmonization

The SPS Agreement provides for harmonization of SPS measures of member countries with international standards, the Codex, in the case of food products. The Codex Alimentarius Commission also has a clear and strategic interest in promoting maximum use of these standards both for domestic regulations and international trade. The SPS Agreement, however, allows Member States to lay down standards more stringent than Codex but these needs to have a scientific justification. It has been observed that certain countries are at times laying down norms more stringent than those specified by Codex and without any scientific basis which are difficult to meet; or the test methods specified are different to those specified by Codex and are not validated or have a very high level of sensitivity which may not be justified and due to which the cost of testing becomes disproportionately high.

Transparency 

The SPS Agreement requires governments to notify other countries of any new or changed sanitary or phytosanitary measures which affect trade. They also allow for a reasonable interval between the publication of such regulations and their entry into force in order to allow time for producers in exporting members and particularly developing country member to adapt their products and methods of production to the requirements of the importing Members. To be able to meet the SPS requirements of various WTO member countries, there is a need to have access to the norms laid down by them. It has often been observed that there is absence of information and lack of transparency on the procedural norms and regulations of various countries as related to specifications as well as methods of sampling, inspection and test. New Regulations are brought out and implemented without even giving the producers in the exporting country a chance to get familiar with these. Often the standards are available only in the language of the importing country or are presented in a very complicated manner .The result is that exporters are, at times, not clear about the specific requirements prescribed by the country of destination, which has led to rejection at the point of import.

Safety Management Systems Approach

In addition to end product criteria, it is increasingly becoming necessary that food items are produced and processed taking into account critical factors to ensure quality and safety throughout the food chain from primary production till final consumption. HACCP, a food safety assurance and management system, has been recognized by the Codex Alimentarius Commission as a tool to assess hazards and established control system with focus on preventive measures instead of relying on primarily on end product testing for health and safety aspects. The HACCP-based approach is currently being incorporated into the hygienic codes under development by the Codex Commission. Such a safety management systems approach is also being insisted upon by many countries including USA, Canada, Australia, and many members of the European Union both in the domestic and overseas trade presently for more risk prone products such as marine, meat, poultry and dairy. 
Guidelines for the application of HACCP systems in small or less developed businesses are also being developed by Codex. In addition, draft guidelines for the utilization and promotion of quality assurance systems to meet requirements in relation to food are also under development.
In export certification, the focus needs to and has, in some areas, shifted from consignment wise inspection to a food safety management systems approach based on implementation of HACCP/ GMP/GHP at all stages of the food chain and their capability to meet end product requirements with periodic surveillance to ensure that systems and products requirements are implemented on a continued basis. This would need to gradually be introduced in the entire food sector.
Another significant issue is implementation of such systems at the primary production level, which is being initiated in certain sectors such as marine and egg products.

Increased Participation in International Standards Formulation

The recognition and status of Codex guidelines and recommendations for quality under the WTO Agreement in the application of SPS measures has resulted in increased interest by member countries in the activities of Codex Alimentarius Commission and greater acceptance of Codex standards. The SPS Agreement also clearly emphasizes on countries to participate in international standards work.
India had earlier not been participating very actively in Codex work, as the documents brought out by Codex Committees were not obligatory and the status within the country was dependent on the level of acceptance by the country. In the present scenario, where Codex standards have become very significant and are being used as a benchmark for global trade, India has increased participation and is also contributing in a big way towards development of international standards. Contribution has been significant in the Codex Committees on food additives, labeling, Food Hygiene, General Principles, Fresh Fruits & Vegetables and Food Import & Export Inspection and Certification Systems. The aim has been to ensure that Indian conditions are reflected in development of international standards thereby leading to acceptance of Indian products in global markets.

Risk-based Approach

Risk to consumers resulting from hazard in foods has been identified as a significant concern at the international level. Article 5 of the SPS Agreement provides that sanitary and phytosanitary measures should be based on risk assessment taking into account an appropriate assessment of the actual risk involved and if requested by the exporting country make known details of this assessment. Codex Alimentarius Commission is also promoting constant application of risk analysis principles throughout all Codex Committees. High priority is also being accorded to on-going development of concepts and principles and establishment of sound working principles for application of risk analysis both at national and international levels.
It has been observed that in some importing developed countries are fixing standards without carrying out any risk assessment work. An example can be cited in the case of marine products where consignments are being rejected due to presence of certain microorganisms such as Vibrio parahaemolyticus is a nil limit has been laid down. In this connection, it may be pertinent to bring out that Vibrio parahaemolyticus is a habitant of the marine environment of the tropical waters and there is every chance for the presence of these organisms in raw fish and fishery products. They are generally destroyed during chilling/freezing or by heating at 60 degrees C. Besides, the organism is not considered as a potential hazard in raw frozen products, which are to be cooked before consumption. Further, generally importing countries such as Japan have specified limits for Vibrio parahaemolyticus only for ready-to-eat cooked products or sea foods for raw consumption and not in products which are to be cooked before consumption. Here again limits have been specified at levels raging from 1000 to 10,000 per gram.
It is understood that no such risk evaluation has been carried out by the importing country as inspite of repeated requests the same has not been made available.

Capacity Building

To comply with the requirements of developed importing countries, capacity building is important and some of the areas identified for capacity building by India to meet requirements of importing countries especially of the EU include, upgrading testing facilities (very important today in the area of residue analysis); upgrading or empowering human resources in areas of testing, risk analysis, development and auditing of HACCP plans etc; development of GMP/GHP/HACCP modules for implementation at national level as well as for exports; establishment databases on requirements of importing countries.
It is essential to strengthen our laboratories not only to provide backup to certification but also to ensure that the raw material procured by processing units meet their requirements to be able to lead to a safe food item. Laboratories need to be strengthened in terms of equipment, manpower and systems to meet the requirements of importing countries. In addition, recognition and networking of laboratories in the country both for domestic testing as well as for imports and exports is important so that the facility is not unnecessarily duplicated while at the same time is available even in remote areas.
Article 9 of the SPS Agreement provides for extending technical assistance to developing country members to enable them to comply with the SPS measures needed to achieve the appropriate level of SPS protection in markets of the importing countries.
India has taken up some of these aspects for assistance under FAO/WHO and is also looking at such assistance under bilateral programes from developed trade partners.

Food Safety

Food safety is an important issue and the SPS Agreement allows members to lay down standard to protect the health and safety of their populations provided these are scientifically justifiable. Codex standards have also acknowledged that the aim is to set standards for protection of health and safety.
At the national level, India is now reorienting its food laws by increasingly emphasizing on food safety as compared to food quality. Standards for domestic as well as exports are covering parameters like pesticide residues, antibiotic residues, heavy metals, aflatoxin, pathogens as well as other contaminants.

Equivalence

The concept of equivalence has been recognized in the SPS Agreement and is also being encouraged at the international level by the Codex Alimentarius Commission with a view to using pooled resources more effectively, avoiding duplication of inspection and testing, and ensuring that health and safety requirements are met effectively.
Government of India is emphasizing on development of Equivalence Agreements with the health authorities of major trading partners. EIC, as the Official Certifying Body of the Government of India, has already been designated as Competent Authority by the European Commission for marine products and basmati rice and is awaiting recognition for egg products and milk products. EIC has also finalized an Equivalence Agreement with AQIS, Australia and the Agreements with Sri Lanka and Italy are in an advanced stage. EIC has also entered into dialogue for the purpose with USA, Canada, Argentina, Japan, South Korea and other countries including those of the EU. Under such agreements, in addition to recognition of our certification, it is proposed to cover exchange of information on standards; methods of sampling, inspection and test, and also to have a provision of retest and appeal in case of rejections, return of rejected consignments etc. These would serve as an important means of facilitating trade by recognition of our standards and our certification systems to provide for an equivalent level of protection against health risks as those of the importing countries and also lead to reduced rejection rates and provide for reduced inspection of our products in overseas markets.
Although such Agreements have been visualized under both the SPS Agreement and Codex standards, some issues of concern have been identified and need to be addressed such as: 

• The SPS Agreement states that “Members shall accept the sanitary or phytosanitary measures of other Members as equivalent, even if these measures differ from their own or those used by other members trading in the same prod, if the exporting member objectively demonstrates to the importing member that its measures achieve the importing member’s appropriate level of sanitary or Phyto-Sanitary protection”. It has been observed that the importing country at times wants ‘sameness’ and not equivalence, which becomes a major impediment.

• The SPS Agreement further states that “Members shall upon request, enter into consultation with the aim of achieving bilateral or multilateral agreements or recognition of the equivalence of specified SPS measures.” Members often avoid such Agreements even after receipt of a formal request as either the administrative burden of entering into these is not justified or they do not want to lose their control over imports. Some countries have even expressed that import controls is a means of their income and by signing such Agreements they would lose financially and therefore are not interested to enter into such ‘Agreements’.

Certain Health Authorities have recently started destroying the contaminated consignments (either because of biological or chemical contamination) instead of returning them to the exporting countries as requested by the exporters/importers. Further, they are not even providing full details of the methods of sampling, analysis and results obtained.
The document on Guidelines for Exchange of Information between countries on Rejection of Imported Food developed by the Codex Committee on Food Import & Export Inspection & Certification Systems (CCFICS) lies down that in case of rejections, the importing country should provide all details of methods of sampling, analysis and results obtained. Further, as per the standard, the importing country can take a decision on destruction of the consignment. In such cases the exporting country is not being consulted. It is necessary to involve the exporting country in such decisions for various reasons as given below:

• The assessment of brought back consignments has, at times, shown absence of contamination. It is, therefore felt necessary that the consignments found contaminated in the importing country are brought back to enable the competent authority to retest them and ascertain whether the consignments were contaminated or not and if contaminated examine the cause.

• It has been observed that on number of occasions, the importing country is adopting different methods for sampling and testing and also testing for parameters/contaminants, which are not notified in their standards, which at time become reasons for rejections e.g. countries like Italy are rejecting the consignments testing positive for all strains including non pathogenic ones for Vibrio cholerae, whereas only the non-01 strain is pathogenic. Destruction of such consignments may not be justified. Eggs are also there of consignments which have tested positive in one lab of the importing country and negative in another lab. Therefore unless there is uniformity in methods of testing being followed, such rejections would not be justified.

• By conducting complete re-testing of the brought back consignments, it would be possible to identify the contaminants if any and take immediate measures to control /eliminate its recurrence.

• Destruction of a consignment leads to wastage of a large amount of money and some cases of contamination can be taken care of through reprocessing.

Health Certificates

Health certificates for export consignments of food products are issued by the competent authority in a prescribed proforma as per the requirements of the importing countries. Certain Health Authorities have since some time started insisting that the health certificates be filled in their local language for e.g. Spain is requiring that the health certificate for consignments meant for export into their country be filled in Spanish instead of in English. Filling of health certificates in a foreign language becomes difficult and such issues need to be addressed Codex guidelines for ‘generic official certificate formats, production and issuance of certificates’.
Another example is in the case of issuance of health certificates retrospectively. While as a rule health certificates are issued before shipment of the consignments, but at times, due to unavoidable circumstances, the exporter may not be able to apply for the health certificate on time and the same may need to be issued retrospectively. Some countries do not accept Health Certificates issued retrospectively and they insist that health certificates are issued by the Competent Authority prior to shipment of the consignments.
In this connection, it may be mentioned that the above Codex guidelines do provide for issuance of certificates on retrospective basis if agreed by the competent authorities of the importing and exporting country. The clause in the Codex guidelines is as follows:

It is important that such certificates might, at times, be allowed retrospective issue especially for consignments from exporters approved by the competent authority and who are under the regular surveillance system.

Conclusion

Emergence of WTO regime has led to dismantling of barriers- tariff and non-tariff-quality and issue have become important which has given an impetus to adoption of international standards by member countries both for product quality as well as conformity assessment procedures, thereby ensuring free flow of trade across borders. Importing countries are at times imposing conditions that are not in the spirit of the SPS Agreement. India needs to take advantage of the SPS Agreement and international standards for addressing various concerns either by taking up with the importing governments or through amendments in the Codex standards. This would go a long way in increasing our presence in global markets and would ensure that the product exported from India conform to the requirements of the importing countries, both with regard to products as well as systems. 

The author is director
Export Inspection Council