Overview Of SPS-related Assistance For Cambodia, Lao .
Overview of SPS-related assistance for Cambodia, LaoPeople's Democratic Republic and Vietnam (2001-06)Research work for the Standards Development Trade FacilityLaura L. IgnacioThis report reflects the views of the author alone and does not represent theviews of the STDF or any of its partner agencies or donors.
Abbreviations and GMSGPAIHACCPHPAIIAIJICALao PDRMultiMUTRAPNAFIQAVEDNORADNZOECDOIEPHRDPRARAISE SPSRPSSEAQIPSECOSMTQSPSSTARASEAN-Australia Development Cooperation ProgramAustralian Centre for International Agricultural ResearchAyeyawaddy-Chao Phraya-Mekong Economic Cooperation StrategyAsian Development BankAvian and Human Influenza FacilityAvian influenzaAsia-Pacific Economic CooperationAnimal and Plant Health Inspection Service (United States)ASEAN Reference LaboratoryAssociation of Southeast Asian NationsBovine spongiform encephalopathyCanadian International Development AgencyCambodia, Lao PDR, VietnamCambodia, Lao PDR, Vietnam, MyanmarClassical swine feverDanish International Development AgencyEuropean Commissionenzyme-linked immunosorbent assayEmergency prevention systemEuropean UnionFood and Agriculture OrganizationFood and Drug Administration (United States)Foot and mouth diseaseGood agricultural practiceGreater Mekong SubregionGlobal Program for Avian InfluenzaHazard Analysis and Critical Control PointHighly pathogenic avian influenzaInitiative for ASEAN IntegrationJapan International Cooperation AgencyLao People’s Democratic Republicmulti-countryMultilateral trade assistance projectNational Fisheries Quality Assurance and Veterinary DepartmentNorwegian Agency for Development CooperationNew ZealandOrganisation for Economic Co-operation and DevelopmentOffice International des Epizooties or World Organization for Animal HealthPolicy and Human Resources DevelopmentPest Risk AnalysisRural Agricultural Incomes with a Sustainable Environment, Assistance forTrade Capacity Building in Relation to the Application of Sanitary andPhytosanitary MeasuresRegional partnerships schemeSeafood Export and Quality Improvement ProjectState Secretariat for Economic Affairs (Switzerland)Standards, metrology, testing and qualitysanitary and phytosanitarySupport for Trade Acceleration (United States)ii
dards and Trade Development Facilitytechnical assistanceTechnical Barriers to Trade(Doha Development Agenda) Trade Capacity Building DatabaseUnited Nations Industrial Development OrganizationUnited StatesUnited States Agency for International DevelopmentUnited States Department of AgricultureUnited States Department of InteriorWorld BankWorld Health OrganizationWorld Summit on Sustainable DevelopmentWorld Trade Organizationiii
Currency exchange rates, as of end of 2006:AustraliaA 1 US 0.79A 1.26582 US 1CanadaC 1 US 0.8547C 1.17 US 1DenmarkDKK 1 US 0.17668DKK 5.66 US Euro 1 US 1.31930 0.75798 US 1New ZealandNZ 1 US 0.71NZ USThailand1 Thai Baht US 0.0278235.94396 Thai Baht US 1iv
Executive Summary1.Research work by the WTO's Standards and Trade Development Facility (STDF) seeksto determine the sufficiency, adequacy and effectiveness of SPS technical assistance. The firstphase of the research work is an overview SPS-related technical co-operation in the SoutheastAsia region for the period 2001-2006 with a focus on the countries of Cambodia, Lao PDR andVietnam (CLV). In the second phase detailed fieldwork study will be undertaken on a sample ofprojects in these countries to identify good practice which can be replicated elsewhere.2.A number of obstacles were faced in preparation of this report. The starting point for theanalysis was the WTO/OECD Trade Capacity Building Database. However, the informationreproduced in this database is only partial and had to be supplemented from other sources such asdonors’ databases, websites, requests for information etc. Furthermore, no information on theactivities of the private sector or private foundations could be collected. Broad descriptions ofprojects were available, but project documents were not always posted on websites – in particularfor assistance to control Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza. Approximately one third of therequests for information made to donor contact persons went unanswered. Against thisbackground, one conclusion which emerges is the need for better collection and management ofinformation on technical co-operation flows if an accurate picture is to be obtained.3.An estimated total of US 315 million was provided in assistance to the CLV countriesfor SPS related assistance in the period 2001-06. Of this total, Vietnam was the largest recipientof funds by value with US 155 million or 49% of the total for the entire period. Cambodia andLao PDR received 5% and 6% respectively of the assistance by value. 40% by value of theassistance given was provided through mutli-country projects.4.The regional distribution of projects is different if the total number of projects isconsidered. By total number of projects, multi-country projects become the largest category with62% of the total of 152 projects. The total number of projects for Vietnam is 22 % withCambodia and Lao PDR accounting for 7% and 9% respectively. One reason for the differencein figures between number of project and value of assistance provided is a project provided byDenmark to the fisheries sector in Vietnam. This project alone accounted for 27% of theassistance provided to the region as a whole in the 2001-2006 period.5.The high number of multi-country projects reflects the strength of regional institutions,notably ASEAN, Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC), and Asian Development Bank(ADB). There is South-South technical cooperation among the developing countries in the regionas exemplified by the Ayeyawaddy-Chao Phraya-Mekong Economic Cooperation Strategy(ACMECS) program of Thailand and the Greater Mekong Subregion (GMS) initiative of ADB.6.Australia, Canada, the EC and its member states, Japan and Norway were the mostimportant bilateral donors by value to the CLV countries. In terms of the number of projects, theUnited States was the second largest supplier of technical co-operation. Donor operations werealso directed at specific areas. Australia was most active in the plant health sector, while Japanand the US primarily directed assistance to food safety. The tendency to provide multi-countryassistance was also reflected in the operations of bilateral donors.7.The majority of SPS assistance were “soft” infrastructure development projectsconcerned with, for example, updating legal frameworks or providing technical skills forinspection, diagnosis and surveillance for food safety, plant and animal health. Soft infrastructurev
projects accounted for 76% of the total number of projects in the period. Information and trainingprojects have been related to WTO accession processes and have inevitably declined inimportance after the accession of Vietnam and Lao PDR.8.The number of project per year has risen over the period surveyed. In 2001, a total of 17projects were provided to the CLV countries rising to 25 in 2004 and 40 in 2006. The mainreason for the increase in assistance between 2004 and 2006 has been the fight against highlypathogenic avian influenza (HPAI). A total of 17 projects on HPAI started in 2006. This figureis also likely to rise since disbursement rates of committed funds on HPAI remain low for theCLV countries: 34% for Lao PDR and Vietnam and 46% for Cambodia. Overall, control ofHPAI accounted for 28% of total assistance by value in the 2001-06 period. In 2006, HPAIprojects accounted for 42% of the total number of projects in the CLV countries.9.There is significant variation in where assistance has been directed. For example, in thearea of food safety, Vietnam received a total of 12 projects in the 2001-06 period while Cambodiaand Laos were the direct recipients of 1 project. It should, however, be noted that 29 multicountry projects were implemented in the food safety area over this period.10.There is also significant variation in the type of assistance provided between countries.For example, Laos benefitted directly from only one hard infrastructure in the period, whileVietnam received six such projects. Again, the main focus of hard infrastructure projects was atregional level with 10 such projects in the 2001-06 period.11.From the preceding analysis, the following trends are clearly discernible:(a)A strong tendency towards multi-country interventions among all donors;(b)Considerable differentiation between countries and specific sectors in the volumeand value of assistance received;(c)Overall growth in SPS-related assistance to the region as a result of HPAI;(d)A preference among donors to provide soft, rather than hard infrastructure typeprojects.vi
2.Introduction1.Towards the end of 2005, the World Trade Organization (WTO) started a new initiativecalled Aid for Trade which seeks to provide further assistance to developing countries to takeadvantage of the trade liberalization occurring in the global markets. The assistance wouldincrease the country’s supply-side capacity to expand trade and access markets. An initial step todetermine the adequacy and effectiveness of current technical assistance is a global review oftechnical cooperation activities that aims to look at trade needs identified by individual countriesand the suitability and adequacy of donor response. In this light, the Standards and TradeDevelopment Facility (STDF) initiated a research work to examine technical assistance thatfocuses on a specific issue: sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) measures2.The general objective of the research work is to examine supply and demand of SPSrelated technical co-operation in the three regions of Central America (Costa Rica, El Salvador,Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua and Panama), the East African Community (Kenya, Tanzaniaand Uganda) and a sub-group of Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) membercountries (Cambodia, Lao People's Democratic Republic (PDR) and Vietnam or, simply, CLV).For this report, the specific objective is to verify with donors current and forthcoming SPS-relatedtechnical cooperation projects and programs and to provide an overview of all SPS-relatedtechnical co-operation in the Southeast Asia region for the period 2001-2006 with a focus on thecountries of Cambodia, Lao PDR and Vietnam.3.Chapter 2 of this report discusses methodology. Chapter 3 provides an overview oftechnical cooperation projects in the three countries and in the Southeast Asia region as a whole.Chapter 4 presents the conclusions, lessons learned and recommendations.1
2. Methodology4.A starting point for the gathering of information on SPS-related projects was the DohaDevelopment Agenda Trade Capacity Building Database (TCBDB). The database was a jointeffort of the WTO and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) toprovide information on trade-related technical assistance and capacity building projects tofacilitate coordination at the (beneficiary) country, international and inter-agency levels. Bilateraldonors and multilateral/regional agencies provide the information; database includes projectsfrom 2001 to 2005 and some for 2006. No information is reported in the database on technicalco-operation offered through private sector channels, e.g. trade associations or charitablefoundations (such as the Bill Gates Foundation).5.The project search was supplemented by information from the databases of OECD, theFood and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and the United States Agency for InternationalDevelopment (USAID) Trade Capacity Building Database. Other important sources ofinformation were the websites and staff of the donor agencies (see Appendix 1 for a list ofsources and websites). For the US projects, the documents (G/SPS/GEN/181), submitted by theUS to the WTO’s Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures, list US SPS-relatedtechnical assistance projects.6.Donor agencies were contacted to verify and add to the list of projects, to provideadditional information not found in the databases and websites, and relevant project documents,such as progress and evaluation reports. An overview of the projects based on the informationreceived is presented in the next chapter. It is to be noted that this report as a whole is a surveyand not an assessment of SPS projects. An evaluation of a sample of SPS projects will be made inthe second phase of this research project.7.The following points were noted in the gathering of information on projects: Project identification Projects included were those which concentrated on food safety,plant and animal health, metrology and conformity assessment and WTO accession.Other projects with a focus on trade facilitation, competitiveness or private sectordevelopment that were not included may also have had sub-components dealing with SPSissues. Project documentsThe websites of the Asian Development Bank (ADB), ASEANAustralia Development Cooperation Program (AADCP), Asia-Pacific EconomicCooperation (APEC) and Danish International Development Agency (DANIDA) haveproject documents available (for most, if not all, projects). The Australian Centre forInternational Agricultural Research (ACIAR) and Canadian International DevelopmentAgency (CIDA) have project descriptions, duration and budget indicated. The rest havelists of projects with the corresponding budget (for some) and duration. Updates Updates for ongoing projects are generally not available, instead contactpersons are provided. Staff response Enquiries made to web administrators and contact persons listed receivedvarious responses - from immediate and helpful to non-response. Approximately onethird of enquiries were unanswered.2
2.1 Comparability of statistics8.The use of the (total) numbers and (project) values below is a tool to have someindication of the focus of projects, some measure of the “activities” by themes or by countries.Comparability of projects requires some care, however, since projects differ in the number ofcountries covered, the components included or the time frame. Thus, a workshop does notcompare to a region-wide food safety capacity building project. Also (since most of the projectsare multi-country) reference to multi-country totals (number of projects or values) does not referto the whole Southeast Asia region considering that projects gathered are those involving only theCLV countries. Also, it is to be noted that not all of the projects listed have values available. Ofthe 152 listed projects, 6 projects or about 4 percent had no value available.3
3. Overview of SPS-related Projects3.1 Classification9.Data on projects is classified according to the following categories:Type of assistance10.The Secretariat of WTO’s SPS Committee classified technical assistance according tofour general categories (WTO 2000)1: Information—assistance (conferences, seminars or workshops conducted) to improveawareness and general understanding of the SPS agreement either for public officialsinvolved with SPS implementation or policymaking or for the general public or media; Training—assistance (seminars, workshops or training courses) on specific SPS issuessuch as risk analysis, dispute settlements, and establishment of enquiry points; “Soft” infrastructure development—assistance with more technical or scientificorientation such as training activities for veterinarians, plant pathologists, food chemistsand microbiologists; development of SPS-related software or regulatory frameworks;consumer education programs; initiatives in harmonization of standards; training incertification, surveillance, risk assessment, laboratory practices, diagnostic techniques,HACCP techniques; and “Hard” infrastructure development—assistance that provides equipment andinfrastructure, facilities, create databases, or establish systems (such as surveillancesystems).Country11.The projects were carried out either in one of the CLV countries or more than onecountry (“multi-country”), that is, either involving the three countries, one of the three countrieswith other Asian countries, a sub-regional group (the Mekong countries) or the ASEAN group asa whole.Theme12.The projects are classified by theme—food safety, plant or animal health, highlypathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) or general. General category includes projects about WTOaccession and projects involving two or more of the major themes, thus, projects on laboratories,standards, metrology and conformity assessment that have both food safety and animal health, forexample. HPAI was treated as a separate category because of the numerous assistanceconsidering the seriousness of the problem and because a number of such projects involve bothanimal and public health components.Donor13.The major donors for the CLV countries are regional neighbors such as Australia, Japanand New Zealand, trading partners such as Canada, the European Union (EU) (as a group andindividual member states) and US, regional bodies such as ASEAN and APEC and international1G/SPS/GEN/2064
institutions such as ADB, FAO, United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO),World Health Organization (WHO), WTO and the World Bank.3.2 Projects by types of assistance14.Tables 1 and 2 show the breakdown by types of assistance for each country and theme,respectively.Table 1. Types of SPS assistance by country, 2001-2006CambodiaNumber of projectsInformationTraining“Soft” infrastructure“Hard” infrastructureTotalIn per centValue of Projects(US ’000)InformationTraining“Soft” infrastructure“Hard” infrastructureTotalIn per cent101117.214,74161915,3604.9Lao PDRVietnamMulticountryTotalIn 80315,7652.68.676.312.51000.79.047.043.3100Table 2. Types of SPS assistance by theme, 2001-2006FoodsafetyAnimalhealthNumber of projectsInformationTraining“Soft” infrastructure“Hard” infrastructureTotalIn %33574529.6Value of Projects(US ’000)InformationTraining“Soft” infrastructure“Hard” infrastructureTotalIn HPAIGeneralTotalIn 10015.About 89 per cent of the listed projects are infrastructure projects with “soft”infrastructure development projects comprising 76%, followed by “hard” infrastructuredevelopment projects (13%). Training (9%) and information projects (3%) have small shares.Although, in the classification process, projects that provide facilities and equipment and thatwere categorized under “hard” infrastructure also have “soft” infrastructure components such astraining. This dominance of the “soft” infrastructure projects can also be seen in the country levelfor all three countries. Most of the information and training projects are given on a multi-country5
basis and not to individual countries. “Soft” infrastructure projects are also the main types ofassistance for food safety and plant and animal health (including HPAI) (see Table 2).16.In the case of HPAI, most of the projects have no project documents, thus, providing noinformation as to the specific kind of assistance or whether facilities or equipment have beenprovided. The only projects with documents were those of the World Bank GPAI projects in LaoPDR and Vietnam; these were classified as “hard” infrastructure projects. The rest of the AIprojects were thus classified as “soft” infrastructure development projects.217.In terms of values, however, the infrastructure projects make up 90% of the total, with“soft” and “hard”
CSF Classical swine fever DANIDA Danish International Development Agency . Canada, the EC and its member states, Japan and Norway were the most important bilateral donors by value to the CLV countries. In terms of the number of projects, the United States was the second largest supplier of technical co-ope
600 Ring 0 CNC 700 Ring 0 Zeile 800 Ring 0 TC2 SPS 801 TC2 SPS Laufzeitsystem 1 . 852 TC3 SPS Laufzeitsystem 2 853 TC3 SPS Laufzeitsystem 3 854 - TC3 SPS Laufzeitsystem 4 - 900 Nockenschaltwerk 950 CAM-Tool 1000-1199 Ring 0 IO Ports 2000 Ring 0 Benutzer 2500 Crestron Server . Invoke-ID4 BytesFr
V1.0 02 February 2016 SPS Commerce Draft Release V1.1 15 March 2016 SPS Commerce Added THE ICONIC GLN V 1.2 23 May 2016 SPS Commerce Added Shipment date/time, requested in Header DTM Update to TOD segment V 1.3 08 March 2018 SPS Commerce Changed the maximum length for fields, Order number, supplier/ vendor number and Vendor Part
2.2 Installing the Zend Server on the SPS Server This section shows how to install the Zend server on the SPS server. To install the Zend Server on the SPS Server: 1. Copy the Zend installation file to a temporary directory on the SPS server. 2. Run the Zend server installation file ZendServer-6.3.-php-5.3.28-Windows_x86.exe.
SPS is using Jira to keep track of subawardinvoices. Since Spring 2018, SPS is keeping track of subaward invoices in “Jira” When SPS receives a sub-contract invoice, SPS checks it for the major components, uploads it into Jira and sends it to the dept. The de
career move within SPS Commerce Reimbursed up to 5,000 per year Reimbursement percentage is based on final grade received on class or course . Pet Insurance You care about your pets and consider them members of your family. So, whether your family includes kids with two feet or kids with four paws—or both—SPS has coverage for you!
Work and Proposed Fee are outlined below. Additional Scope of Work: Proposed Fee . This Fee Proposal utilizes SPS Architects' Mohave Contract No. 16C-SPS-0506. Additional Services Hourly Rates. SPS Architects' proposed fee is provided in Attachment A. 1. Payment terms: a. SPS will invoice monthly on a percent complete basis. b.
1 11th EDF SPS Project – EOI Reference: CaRC/BB/SPS-EOI/C1-01/20 Call for Expression of Interest (EOI) 11th European Development Fund (EDF) “Support to CARIFORUM States in furthering the implementation of their Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) commitments and in meaningfully reaping the benefits of the Agreement” SANITARY AND PHYTOSANITARY MEASURES (SPS) PROJECT
SPS system plan rolls up to Southwest Power Pool (SPP) regional plan and SPP stakeholder process. 2. . TPL-001-2, update to existing TPL-001 through TPL-004 . 5,880 MW by 2015, 10,000 MW by 2025. SPS has energy sales ratio share of total. .
