This paper presents a systematic mapping and analysis of recent agreement-specific proposals aimed at strengthening Special and
Differential Treatment (S&DT) provisions for developing countries within the World Trade Organization (WTO). Drawing on WTO

negotiating documents and member submissions, we catalogue and categorize proposals tabled between 2019 and 2024 across key
covered agreements—including Agriculture, Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS), Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT),
Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM), and Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS). Combining legal-
textual analysis with qualitative coding, we identify four recurrent objectives of the proposals: (1) extending transition periods and
compliance flexibilities; (2) tightening substantive thresholds (e.g., de minimis levels, export-competitiveness criteria) that trigger
obligations; (3) expanding the scope of available technical assistance and capacity-building; and (4) introducing monitoring and
transparency mechanisms to improve the enforceability of S&DT.
The mapping reveals a high concentration of proposals originating from the African Group, the Alliance of Small Island States
(AOSIS), and the least-developed-country (LDC) coalition, with limited convergence among emerging economies. We find that while
Agriculture and SPS proposals emphasize differentiated timelines and safeguard flexibilities, TBT and TRIPS submissions focus on
technology transfer and longer implementation windows. SCM discussions center on raising the export-subsidy phase-out thresholds
for low-income members. The paper concludes by highlighting three critical gaps: (i) the absence of a unified graduation framework
to determine S&DT eligibility; (ii) the lack of binding dispute-settlement remedies for non-compliance with S&DT obligations; and (iii)
insufficient integration of cross-cutting development indicators (e.g., food security, climate vulnerability) into agreement-specific
flexibilities. We propose a matrix-based tool that negotiators can use to benchmark new S&DT language against existing provisions
and evolving development priorities.