RESTRICTEDWORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONWT/COMTD/LDC/M/30
25 February 2003
(03-1148)
Sub-Committee on Least-Developed Countries
Thirtieth Session
NOTE ON THE MEETING OF 7 NOVEMBER 2002
Chair:  Ambassador Johan Molander (Sweden)
A. ADOPTION OF AGENDA
1. The Sub-Committee adopted the agenda for the meeting contained in WTO/AIR/1948/Rev.1.
B. WTO WORK PROGRAMME FOR LEAST-DEVELOPED COUNTRIES
2. The Chairman noted that the WTO Work Programme for LDCs, WT/COMTD/LDC/11, had
been adopted by the Sub-Committee on 12 February 2002, in accordance with the mandate contained
in paragraph 42 of the Doha Ministerial Declaration.  At the 28th Session of the Sub-Committee,
Members had reaffirmed their commitment to the implementation of the WTO Work Programme for
LDCs and the need to prioritise and focus on a few elements of the Work Programme at each session
of the Sub-Committee.  This session was focussed on (i) Market Access for LDCs; and (ii) Trade-Related Technical Assistance and Capacity Building Initiatives for LDCs.
(i) Market Access for Least-Developed Countries
(a) Notifications by Members
- Notification by Japan (WT/COMTD/N/2/Add.11)
- Notification by Switzerland (WT/COMTD/N/7/Add.1)
3. The Chairman recalled that in paragraph 42 of the Doha Ministerial Declaration, Ministers
had committed themselves to the objective of duty-free and quota-free access for LDCs exports and
had agreed to consider additional measures for progressive improvements in market access for LDCs.
He recognised that several Members had on an autonomous basis, accorded preferential access to
LDCs in their markets.  Some Members had also notified these new or modified measures affecting
market access for LDCs.  The Committee on Trade and Development (COMTD) at its 41st Session
had forwarded two Notifications, by Japan and Switzerland, to the Sub-Committee, for substantivediscussion and reporting back.  He invited the representative of Japan to introduce its notification
WT/COMTD/N/2/Add.11 in so far as it pertained to market access for LDCs.
4. The representative of Japan said that his comments were in relation to the GSP scheme as it
pertained to LDCs, as there had already been a fuller discussion on the GSP scheme as a whole at the
COMTD.  He said that initiatives had been taken by developed Members such as the Everything ButArms Initiative (EBA) by the EC, similar measur es by Norway, AGOA by the Un ited States, and the
initiative announced at the recent G-8 summit by Canada.  Japan also continued to work towards the
objective of duty and quota-free access for all LDCs products.  Measures had been taken such asWT/COMTD/LDC/M/30
Page 2
making 99 percent of industrial products, including  textiles and clothing, duty-free and quota-free for
LDCs.  Against this background, he said that there were a few changes in the coverage of countries
and coverage of products that had been mentioned in their notification WT/COMTD/N/2/Add.11.
Senegal had been added to the list of LDC beneficiaries of Japan's GSP scheme.  The GSP scheme
was open to all LDCs.  If any LDC wished to benefit from Japan's scheme, it had to so advise theJapanese government.  On product coverage, he informed Members that at the recent G8 meeting, Mr.
Koizumi, the Prime Minister of Japan, had taken a decision to consider an expansion in the product
coverage of duty-free and quota-free treatment for LD Cs.  This would be examined in the context of
revising tariff-related laws for the next fiscal year starting 1 April 2003.
5. The Chairman thanked the representative of Japan for his statement and noted that with the
amendment to the GSP scheme all 49 countries, currently classified by the UN as LDCs, could avail
of the LDC specific preferences.  He invited the representative of Switzerland to introduce itsnotification contained in WT/COMTD/N/7/Add.1.  The COMTD had forwarded this addendum to the
Swiss GSP in favour of LDCs to the Sub- Committee for discussion and reporting back.
6. The representative of Switzerland stated that the new initiative taken by his government
pertained to the agriculture sector since all industrial products originating from LDCs were already
duty-free.  In January 2002, Switzerland had reduced the still existing tariffs by 30 percent on averagefor all agricultural products originating from LDCs.  The tariffs were reduced at the tariff chapter
level.  As a second stage, in April 2004, a further general reduction of tariffs by 30 percent on average
would take place.  It was planned that in 2006, a ll LDC exports would be duty-free.  This revision to
its GSP entailed a zero tariff and zero quota initiative.
7. He said that additional measures were to be examined as well in order to render effective
tariff reductions and improvements in LDC market access.  Switzerland was undertaking two studies.
One study would look at tariff escalation and tariff peaks in Swiss agriculture and the other study was
examining the system of quota management in agriculture.  These studies would explore whether
there was a bias against LDCs and other developing countries.  Another issue that needed to be
examined in the context of the revision of its GSP scheme was country classification.  Switzerlandwas interested in this matter as it applied to th e WTO system.  There was perhaps some rationale on
development, economic and trade grounds to include other similar low-income countries as
beneficiaries of LDC benefits.  Finally, he mentioned that for effective access, behind the border
impediments as well as export capacities of LDCs were of relevance.  Issues to be further discussed
included rules of origin, a matter that had been raised in the COMTD by the delegation of Sri Lanka.
In response to the clarification sought by Sri Lanka he said that there were no changes in the rules of
origin requirements in the revised Swiss GSP.  Rules of origin and greater flexibility in their
application even on a temporary basis could be examined to foster trade between developing countries
and LDCs.
8. The Chairman thanked Switzerland for the presentation of the revision to its GSP scheme as
well as for the proposals for further work.
9. The representative of Australia said that the Prime Minister, Mr. John Howard, had on 25
October 2002, at the APEC leaders Summit in Mexico, announced tariff and quota free access for all
products originating in LDCs.  This would be effe ctive for all LDC exports entering the Australian
market from 1 July 2003.  East Timor that was yet to be formally designated as a LDC by the UN
would also be eligible to receive tariff and quota free access under this scheme.  The initiative
included the continued application of a 5 percent margin of preference for certain developingcountries.  Average tariff rates for Australian imports were currently 3.9 percent for developing
countries and 1.72 percent for LDCs.  Australia's initiative was unqualified.  There was no exclusion
nor was there any phase-out period for the removal of tariffs and quotas on sensitive sectors such asWT/COMTD/LDC/M/30
Page 3
agriculture or textiles.  This initiative was a demonstration of Australia's commitment to the Doha
Development Agenda.  Formal notification of th e scheme would be provided in due course.
10. The Ambassador of Zambia thanked Japan and Switzerland for notifying their market access
measures in favour of LDCs.  He welcomed th e announcement made by Australia.  He expressed
appreciation to the EU for their EBA initiative, the US for AGOA, Canada for its recent market accessannouncement, and thanked Norway and other countries that had extended similar market access
initiatives for LDCs.  This goodwill by developed co untry partners had resulted in some improvement
in access conditions.  Chances of graduation from LDC status could be further enhanced if developed
countries went a step further.   Switzerland was further examining such additional measures.  Duty-
free treatment needed to be extended to all products.  Rules of origin requirements needed to be
realistic and flexible to match the industrial capacities of LDCs.  Furthermore the preferences
accorded could be nullified by non-tariff measures such as technical standards and SPS requirements.There was therefore need for a legal instrument th at provided a contractual commitment for duty and
quota free access.  This would make market access for LDCs secure, stable and predictable.  One of
the main pillars of the WTO was binding or predictability of the multilateral trading system.  In the
Services negotiations, LDCs had received requests to make binding commitments.  Notwithstanding
the need to improve LDCs' own national policies there was also a need for a holistic approach to makepreferential access a better instrument for integrating LDCs into the multilateral trading system.  He
said that his comments did not suggest lack of appreciation for existing measures but were more
constructive suggestions to developed country partners to further improve LDC access conditions.
11. The Ambassador of Bangladesh expressed his delegation's support to the statement made by
Zambia.  He welcomed the recent initiatives taken by Japan, Switzerland and Australia.
12. The Ambassador of Haiti thanked Australia, Japan and Switzerland for their recent initiatives.
He said that Australia had sent a letter informing his delegation of the recent decision taken by Prime
Minister John Howard.  He welcomed the statement made by Switzerland and its intention to follow-
up and examine possible additional measures to improve access for LDCs.  In addition to market
access strengthening supply side capacities in LDCs was important.  He supported the statement madeby Zambia on the need for a legal instrument to ensure stable and predictable access for LDCs.
13. The Ambassador of Djibouti said that his delegation supported the statements made by
Zambia, Haiti and Bangladesh.  He welcomed the notifications by Japan and Switzerland and the
announcement by Australia.  The need for follow -up with additional measures as alluded to by
Switzerland was also important for the fuller integration of LDCs in the trading system.
14. The representative of Tanzania thanked Australia, Japan and Switzerland for the market
access initiatives in favour of LDCs.  She called upon other trading partners to join in with such
initiatives. In addition to improved access addressing supply-side concerns was also important for
LDCs.
15. The representative of Uganda said that his delegation supported the statement by Zambia on
behalf of LDCs.  He thanked Japan, Switzerland and Australia for the market access opportunities and
noted that earlier, other trading partners had also announced market access measures in favour ofLDCs.  The initiative of Switzerland would go further to progressively include agricultural products
and was welcomed, as Uganda was an agricultur e-based economy.  He hoped Ugandan agricultural
products would be available in Switzerland at more affordable prices as a result of this initiative.
16. The representative of Madagascar supported the statement made by Zambia as LDC
coordinator.  He thanked the delegations that had announced measures in favour of LDCs.  The
representative of Switzerland had mentioned the need for additional measures and tackling exportWT/COMTD/LDC/M/30
Page 4
constraints in LDCs.  These supply side constraints needed to be addressed to allow LDCs to benefit
from improved access.
17. The representative of Sudan stated that his delegation supported the statement made by
Zambia on behalf of LDCs.  Sudan expressed appreciation for the goodwill and initiatives taken by
Japan, Switzerland and Australia towards the objective of duty and quota free access for LDCsexports.  Addressing the issue of standards and TBT as mentioned by Switzerland was important.  He
called upon other trading partners to follow suit with market access initiatives in favour of LDCs.
18. The representative of Guinea said that her delegation welcomed the preferential access
announced by Australia, Japan and Switzerland.  Th ese initiatives would assist LDCs in their
integration in the international trading system.  She invited and encouraged other trading partners that
had not yet accorded improved access to LDCs to do so.
19. The Chairman proposed that the Sub-Committee take note  of the two notifications and of the
statements that had been made.  As requested the record of these discussions in the Sub-Committee
would be reported and forwarded to the COMTD.
20. It was so agreed.
21. The Chairman recalled that paragraph 7 of the LDC Work Programme mandated the Sub-
Committee to review improvements in LDC market access.  He requested Members to notify their
preferences, as appropriate, for the regular monitori ng of changes and improvements in market access
for LDCs.  Simplified notification procedures for LDC market access had been agreed to in the
COMTD and Council for Trade in Goods.1 In accordance with these agreed procedures, all
notifications pertaining to LDC preferences were  forwarded to the Sub-Committee for discussion and
reporting back.  He encouraged Members that had not submitted updated notifications, to do so at theearliest, to facilitate work in this area.
(b) Market Access Issues Related to Products of Export Interest originating from LDCs:
Note by the Secretariat (WT/COMTD/LDC/W/28)
22. The Chairman invited Members to consider the Note by the Secretariat on LDC Market
Access Issues.  The Note had been prepared to facilitate work in the Sub-Committee and focussed on
the elements for review and further examination listed in the WTO Work Programme for LDCs.  He
noted that the work of other WTO bodies, such as the Negotiating Group on Market Access was also
of relevance.  The Note by the Secretariat had therefore been issued as a joint document of the Sub-
Committee on Least-Developed Countries and the Negotiating Group on Market Access
(WT/COMTD/LDC/W/28 and TN/MA/S/7).  The Ne gotiating Group on Market Access had met on 4-
5 November 2002 and had also considered the document.   He requested the Secretariat to introduce
the document.
23. A representative from the Secretariat said that the document was also presented to the
Negotiating Group on Market Access where there wa s some discussion.  He noted that the Sub-
Committee's mandate of tracking improvements in market access for LDCs had some similarities with
the ongoing review of the implementation of the Millennium Development Goals (MDG).  Goal 8 of
the MDG was the "partnership for development" and a target had been set for an "open and stabletrade and financial system".  An indicator for this was "duty and quota free access" for LDC products
into developed country markets.
                                                     
1 See WT/COMTD/M/32 and G/C/M/47 respectively.WT/COMTD/LDC/M/30
Page 5
24. He stated that the Note by the Secretariat was an Issues paper and did not make extensive
interpretation or judgements about Members positions.  It was for the Members themselves to draw
their conclusions on the issues presented.  The paper included a short section on Participation of
LDCs in World Trade that was extracted from the document WT/COMTD/LDC/W/26 considered in
the Sub-Committee in May 2002.  On Methodology, the paper had sequenced the analysis.  The majormarkets and products exported by LDCs were identified.  This had been elaborated in Section IV
entitled Export Profiles.  To examine the impediments in market access for LDCs, tariff and non-tariff
measures were surveyed in Sections V and VI of the paper.  In terms of tariff measures, the paper
looked at market access in the context of i) MFN rates, since many of the major markets for LDC
exports did not accord preferences; and ii) preferential rates in the markets that did offer preferential
access.  There was also some examination of residual protection, in terms of high tariffs and tariff
peaks, as well as tariff escalation.  On Non-Tariff Measures, the paper looked at rules of origin,standards and anti-dumping measures.  Section VII studied initiatives to improve market access.
Notifications and announcements of improvements on the tariff side were presented together with
some of the other efforts to reduce the non-tariff impediments and to assist LDCs take advantage of
improved access conditions.  Section VIII was a br ief concluding section.
25. The Ambassador of Zambia on behalf of LDCs thanked the Secretariat for the document and
its consultations with LDCs during the preparati on of the paper.  Many LDCs continued to export
their products to developed country markets.  The Secretariat Note indicated that 69 per cent of total
LDC exports went to these markets.  Developing countries in East Asia also became increasingly
important as markets for LDCs' products.
26. He expressed views and sought clarifications on the following points made in the paper:
(a) In Table 2 of the document, the period under review was 1996 to 2000.  During this
period, and in particular after 1997, there was a downward trend in the percentage of
duty-free imports from LDCs to the developed countries.  He sought an explanation
for this trend and to explore if, in this context, there was a role for assistance to
address the situation.
(b) Under “Structure of preferences”  on page 10, the report noted the absence of IDB
data on preferences from the EU – the largest market for LDCs.  He sought
clarification on the availability of further information.
(c) On tariff escalation, on page 14, he commended Canada, the EU, and the US for the
duty-free access offered to LDCs.  Tariff escalation was not an issue of concern on
these products in their markets.  He sought clarification from the Secretariat on
whether this was the case just for fish or for all other product chains.  He alsocommended Japan for not having tariff escalations in prepared and preserved fish
products.  But, were there other products in Japan with tariff escalation and what
were the steps being taken to address this issue?
(d) On tariff peaks,  in table 6, the message was that Australia, Canada, EU, Japan, New
Zealand, Norway, Switzerland and the US were the main sources of tariff peaks inrelation to products originating in LDCs.  Paragraph 28 suggested this.   If this were
case, what could be inferred and done about this?
(e) On non-tariff measures, he noted with regret that LDCs themselves, apart from Niger,
had not responded to the questionnaire circulated.
(f) Rules of origin, affected LDCs trade.  He noted that the study suggested that rules of
origin in the US and EU had limited the use of market access preferences.  This wasWT/COMTD/LDC/M/30
Page 6
indicated in paragraph 32 of the paper.  The study cited the example of Lesotho, an
LDC with export growth prompted by rela xed rules of origin.  He hoped that LDCs'
trading partners would address the issue of rules of origin expeditiously.  A mix of
favorable policies and measures was the key to increased utilisation of preferences.
WTO work on non-preferential and preferential rules of origin needed to beaccelerated or initiated so that they could be brought under clear multilateral
disciplines.
(g) On standards,  the study identified many important LDC exports, such as bananas,
beef, processed chicken, fish, fresh flowers and other vegetables, which faced barriers
in the area of standards.  The EU had been singled out as the main market exercising
these measures.  He hoped that this issue could soon be addressed.
(h) Anti-dumping  was yet another problem facing LDC exports.  He thanked the EU for
its announcement to forego the use of anti-dumping measures on imports from LDCs.
(i) On initiatives to improve market access, he welcomed the number of existing
measures and those underway.  He reiterated LDCs position that binding market
access and measures taken on rules of origin, SPS, technical barriers to trade, etc.
were central to improving market access for LDCs.  If a combination of theseelements were implemented, it would have a multiplier effect to the extent that even
the supply capacity problems could be addressed.
27.  In concluding, Zambia made a few suggestions for the preparation of a follow up study.  (a)
The deficiencies in data on preferential trade of LDCs suggested the need for WTO to collaborate
with UNCTAD and utilise their combined trade databases and analytical resources to prepare a followup study.  (b) Progress towards the objective of duty-free and quota-free market access for LDCs
should be continually monitored and assessed.  Reporting of measures taken was not adequate.
Gauging the effectiveness of these preferences in generating trade was essential so that conclusions,
such as the one in paragraph 45 of the paper, that “significant advances have been made on a number
of fronts to improve market access conditions…” could be empirically verified.  The statement andwork to be undertaken by Switzerland was relevant in this regard.  (c) The issue of binding of
unilateral preferences was a matter that remained to be resolved and as LDCs he stressed that future
studies look into this matter.
28. The Ambassador of Bangladesh endorsed the statement made by Zambia as Coordinator of
LDCs.  There had been some discussion on the initiatives taken by Japan, Switzerland and Australia
and reference had also been made to supply-side issues.  The discussion on market access largely
concentrated the demand-side.  Supply side res ponses could only follow if there was genuine market
access or demand-side initiatives.
29. He said that in the Work Programme for LDCs, the study on market access was given
particular importance.  Through this study, LDCs had wanted an overview of developments in market
access, and to draw on the knowledge that the study would provide to assist in the negotiations.  The
paper W/28 adopted a good methodology and examined the issues in a systematic manner. LDCswere not currently major exporters of manufactured goods.  So when developed countries offered duty
and quota free access in manufactures it had limited effect in real terms.  For market access to be
meaningful, it had to be provided in agriculture and products that LDCs were exporting. The study did
not emphasise this in detail.  On tariff measures there was reference in the paper to the lack of data on
preferences.  Without the data from some of the main trading partners the conclusions on tariffpreferences could be misleading. With regard to tari ff escalation, apart from fish, the analysis of some
other products of interest to LDCs could also have been undertaken. For instance, African LDCs were
interested in cotton and coffee.  The issue of tariff peaks had also not been adequately addressed in theWT/COMTD/LDC/M/30
Page 7
study.  The sensitive products and high tariffs or peaks faced in specific trading partners had not been
listed exhaustively.  Data on peaks was available in other studies that could have been drawn upon.
The database of the IDB offered considerable information and he commended the work and assistance
provided by the WTO Statistics Division. He suggested that the IDB database be used more
effectively to examine individual country profiles and barriers to LDCs trade.  The non-tariffmeasures referred to in the study were important.  There had been some reference to the lack of
information from the LDCs in response to the questionnaire sent out.  He said that the LDCs would be
unable to provide data on the non-tariff barriers unless they actually had exported those products.
WTO researchers could themselves examine non-tariff barriers in greater detail. Rules of origin had
correctly been cited in the paper as a critical element that could affect the value of preferences to
LDCs.  The Secretary-General of the United Nations had also highlighted this point in his address to
the ECOSOC in 2001. Further and more thorough examination of this issue was needed. Table 8 wasuseful, though it would also be helpful to move beyond a listing and to examine the impact in LDCs
after these preferences had been granted.  The initiatives listed in Section VII appeared weak and
omitting this section of the text was suggested. On the whole he said that the study was constructive
and good. His comments were to improve and to add to any further analysis to be made in this area.
30. The representative of Switzerland welcomed the Note by the Secretariat. The issues
highlighted in the paper were important.  These included behind the border measures that were
obstacles to market access. The new technical assistance initiative on Standards by the World Bank
and WTO was mentioned. His delegation was conc erned that the World Bank/WTO program may
have multiplied the number of technical assistance initiatives in the area of standards and led to
inefficiencies. Standards was an area where it was difficult to intervene on the importers side as thepossibility of simplification, particularly when it related to health was limited. It was therefore
important to examine the extent to which LDCs a nd developing countries had capacity to comply with
standards. The issue of flexibility in the applicati on of rules of origin was also of interest to his
delegation. On paragraph 34, he sought further information from the United States on the rules of
origin requirements under the AGOA initiative as it applied to Lesotho. What did the four year
exemption from cumulation imply?  It was intere sting to examine such temporary time limited
exemptions though he noted that it could also result in a loss of predictability in the regime. On tariffs
and tariff escalation, he said that Table 5 suggested that escalation was not just an issue for the
industrialised countries but also for the developing countries. There was scope for improvement in
LDCs market access in the major developing country markets. He wondered what steps were being
taken towards the objective of duty and quota free access for LDCs in these markets and suggested
that some goals be established for LDC preferences in this regard.
31. The Ambassador of Haiti supported the statement made by Zambia on behalf of LDCs. He
thanked the Secretariat for the document and requested that it be made available in all working
languages of the WTO.  In the conclusion of the paper, the Secretariat had mentioned the issue of
addressing supply-side constraints which was of importance to his delegation. On the issue of the
WTO/World Bank program on standards, he differed with the views expressed by Switzerland. TheWorld Bank had a critical role to play in strengthening supply side responses. Regional banks such as
the IADB could also make further positive contributions. Cooperation between the WTO and other
multilateral and regional bodies was an avenue that needed to be further explored and encouraged. He
sought further clarification on Switzerland's concerns in this regard.
32. The representative of Uganda thanked the Secretariat for the study.  His delegation associated
itself with the statement by Zambia on behalf of LDCs. LDCs goals to diversify exports and attempt
to industrialise would be facilitated if the issues of rules of origin, tariff escalation and making
preferences secure, stable and predictable were addressed. These three pillars were "make or break"
issues in LDCs' attempts to industrialise. He cited the experience of the local cotton industry in
Uganda in this regard. In agriculture SPS measures remained an issue. He hoped that LDCs'development partners would look at the issues involved on a regular basis.WT/COMTD/LDC/M/30
Page 8
33. The representative of United States said that her delegation had previously commented on the
paper at the Negotiating Group on Market Access.2  The paper was useful as it gave a good overview.
The paper indicated the evolution of more "South-South" trade. On this there was need for some more
understanding on which product areas this trade was occurring. LDC exports were probably currently
most concentrated on commodity trade. However, improved understanding of the global supply chain
and trade between "least" and "less" developed countries would assist in efforts to move LDCs into
different areas of trading. The profiles of LDC exports included in the paper were helpful in the
context of the Doha negotiations. The negotiations called for expansion of access in the products of
interest for LDCs and others and these export profiles assisted in this work. Products of interest were
not static and there was movement and dynamics involved. Addressing the future and not merely the
past was important. Information on US preferences included in the paper was out of date. Further
inputs would be provided to the Secretariat.  On tariff escalation she supported the statement made bySwitzerland and noted that this was not only a developed country issue. In the anti-dumping area,
recent measures were applied on imports originatin g in LDCs by some developing countries.  The
issue of lack of data had been mentioned. The US offered to provide LDCs and other Members
assistance to compile data. She noted that the representative of Bangladesh had alluded to the need for
more information on the impact of the different initiatives. Although the data in the Secretariat studyrelated to only the first year of AGOA, there were significant results to report. In 2001, imports from
Senegal were up 274 percent, imports from Lesotho were up 53 percent, and imports from Swaziland
were up 27 percent. These figures were set to increase in 2002. AGOA results were therefore
significant and were also being supported by technical assistance. In response to the query from
Switzerland on rules of origin, she said that a clarification had been sought from Capital that would bemade available shortly.
34. The representative of the European Communitie s thanked the Secretariat for the paper. The
message stemming from the document was that Members were moving in the right direction with
regards to LDCs market access. He however recogn ised that there still remained work to be done
which was a collective challenge. The challenge in some of the major trading partners was to extendthe duty and quota free initiatives while in others, including the EC, addressing behind the border
measures such as standards and rules of origin was an issue.  In emerging markets for LDC exports,
particularly some of the Asian developing economies the issue was taking positive measures to further
develop "South-South" trade. The paper also provided  an opportunity for LDCs themselves to further
target their priorities in the ongoing market acces s negotiations. Some further work to improve the
understanding of the issues as suggested by the US could be useful. He recalled that there were also
other documents available that had been considered by the Sub-Committee in the past two years.These documents had identified tariff barriers including those impeding South-South and regional
trade. On non-tariff barriers, the section on anti-dumping was illuminating and highlighted increase
usage by developing countries.
35. In response to some of the comments made he said that Table 2 did not indicate the flow of
LDC trade. The EU had decreased in relative impor tance as a destination for LDC exports and this
may have accounted for the trend. He took note of the points raised by Zambia, Bangladesh and others
on rules of origin. Rules of origin were a necessary accompaniment, since the aim was to target the
preferences to the selected beneficiaries. There had been attempts made to simplify origin
requirements with some easing of cumulation requirements. With standards, the findings focused on
the EU as a main market for LDCs. The situation was largely similar in other developed countries, asthey tended to have equivalent standards. On data, he regretted that a full notification had not been
made to the IDB. However Table 3 did not need to have blank cells as the EC had notified its GSP
and EBA schemes to the WTO and did accord duty and quota free access to LDCs. In response to the
comment by Bangladesh on paragraphs 37 onwards in Section VII, he said that the section did address
some of the issues raised and showed that there was movement in this respect.
                                                     
2 TN/MA/M/4.WT/COMTD/LDC/M/30
Page 9
36. The Ambassador of Djibouti supported the statem ent made by Zambia on behalf of LDCs. He
underlined the need for strengthening export capacities in LDCs. Assistance was needed in this
regard. WTO could not fully meet LDCs technical assistance needs and therefore cooperation with
other international organisations was important.
37. The representative of India thanked the Secretariat for the document. He sought a clarification
on the use of the term "Asia" in the paper. Footnote 9 on page 4, stated that Asia comprised 10
economies while in the footnotes to page 29, Asia was defined differently. He wondered if different
sources of data accounted for the difference.  The representative said that a recent World Bank and
IMF study on market access for developing countries (WT/WGTDF/14) had an interesting table on
effective ad valorem  tariff equivalents. The table showed that in Canada the effective ad valorem
tariff equivalents for all developing countries trade was 4.4 percent and for LDCs it was 6.7 percent.
In the US the figures for developing countries was 4.5 percent while for LDCs it was 13.6 percent(excluding AGOA). The World Bank/IMF study also indicated that the revenues and duties collected
by the US on imports from Bangladesh was similar to the collections on imports from France, though
the US imports from France were twelve times greater than those from Bangladesh.  He suggested
that the Secretariat could further look at this Bank/Fund paper in directing the debate on these issues.
38. The representative of Sudan thanked the Secretariat for the document and associated his
delegation with the statement made by Zambia on behalf of LDCs. The document gave a general idea
on access problems. Trade volume and direction was indicated. However, as stated by the Secretariat,
due to lack of information the study was not comprehensive. It was a start to be built upon. There was
a possibility to use data and information from LDCs on the difficulties faced.  There was also a role to
be played by national focal points in providing this data. On tariffs the problems faced at the productor tariff line level had not been clearly indicated. On non-tariff barriers the issue of standards, rules of
origin remained problems and further examination would be useful.
39. The representative of the International Monetary Fund said that the market access paper
referred to by India, had been submitted by the World Bank and the IMF,  to the Working Group on
Trade, Debt and Finance. The paper was entitled "Market Access for Developing Country Exports –
Selected Issues" and was contained in document WT//WGTDF/14. The paper supplemented the
discussions held on market access in the Sub-Committee.
40. The Secretariat thanked delegates for their constructive and detailed comments. In response
he said that the paper was an issues note and was not intended to be exhaustive on all the issues
highlighted.  At the Sub-Committee meeting in Ma y 2002, he had referred to document TN/MA/S/1,
which was a bibliography of research on market access issues. There was a sub-section in the
document on LDC market access. Some of the comments that related to particular products or specificissues that were not in the paper WT/COMTD/LDC/W/28 were covered in other documents listed in
the bibliography.
41. In responding to the specific points made, he said that he would follow the order of the points
made by Zambia and also incorporate other delegation's comments in his response. First, Table 2 on
the proportion of duty-free imports from LDCs into developed country markets was a ratio. It was theoverall ratio that had declined. This could have been because the denominator was increasing faster
than the numerator and the LDCs exports entering duty free were increasing slower than the exports
that were not entering duty free.  It was reasonable to assume that it was not the case that the
numerator of this ratio had in absolute terms declined. Monitoring progress regularly was important.
There was always likely to be a gap between when data was available and when policy initiatives bytrading partners were made. For LDCs market access the latest available year for reliable data was
2000. Initiatives and announcements made subsequent to that, such as the recent one by Australia,
were not covered in the paper. One aspect of the Secretariat's work on the Millennium Development
Goals (MDG) was to collaborate with other Secretariats and attempt to refine the updating of data.WT/COMTD/LDC/M/30
Page 10
42. Second, he noted that data limitations did exist. On tariff and protection data, there was a
reasonable deficit in the IDB in terms of preferential tariff data. But there were other sources for such
data such as UNCTAD's databases. The Bank/Fund study cited by India used yet another database and
a different methodology. There was close collaboration with UNCTAD in the preparation of the Note
by the Secretariat.  Table 3 used IDB data while table 4 was based on UNCTAD TRAINS data. It wasdifficult to mix and seek to compare the various data sources.  A representative of the WTO Statistics
Division would speak further on data issues.
43. Third, the representative from the Secretariat noted that the table on tariff escalation had
generated a number of comments. The information in the table on fish products was extensive though
there was no attempt made to interpret the data. In response to Bangladesh's query on the limited
coverage of the paper and its comment on whether tariff escalation was not an issue in sectors other
than fish and fish products, he said that there was escalation in other sectors.  Tariff escalation was anissue, and fish and fish products were mentioned by way of example. Earlier WTO Secretariat
documents had data on escalation in Jute, Textiles and Wood Products. The purpose of the table was
illustrative and as Switzerland, EU and the US had pointed out,  the challenges of market access were
different for different markets.
44. Fourth, on table 6 and tariff peaks he stated that some Members had explicitly adopted a
policy of duty and quota free access for LDCs. The table indicated the exceptions to that policy of
duty/quota free access.  The table would by definition list a tariff peak because everything else was a
zero tariff. Many of the exceptions listed in the table were in the agriculture sector.  The table
reinforced the point made by Bangladesh that there were still barriers to LDC exports in agriculture.
Australia and Switzerland had announced steps taken to remove these barriers. Table 8 hadaccordingly been prepared to keep track of notifications and improvements in access.
45. Fifth, on non-tariff measures he said that there were varying reasons for governments' use of
these instruments.  The extent to which the use of such measures nullified market access for LDCs
was not quantified in the paper as it was difficult to do so. The issues paper indicated that rules of
origin could condition market access as shown in the example of Lesotho's exports to the US. The
example showed that a discrete policy change resulted  in a significant change in exports. In collecting
data from LDCs, he said that he had met with the LDC Consultative Group and had sought permission
to contact export promotion agencies in LDCs. The questionnaire that was sent was not very detailed
but was more of a request for any available information. The response from LDCs was limited. Case
studies were the appropriate methodology for examining non-tariff measures which was why a
questionnaire had be used.  Exporter surveys had been recently undertaken by DFID and a
consultancy firm and this information was used. The available resources for research in the Secretariatdid not permit extensive and individual LDC field visits.
46. Sixth,  on the issue of effectiveness of preferences he said that significant advances had been
made. Notifications however needed to be kept up to date. Also, and given the number of different
databases and national web-sites involved there wa s need for channelling information. Finally, with
respect to binding of tariff preferences, he said that this issue was not looked at in the study whichexamined applied market access conditions for LDCs.
47. Another representative from the Secretariat said that data on preferences from the EU and
some other trading partners was not available in th e IDB. However he wished to clarify that the IDB
had official submissions on MFN Applied, Curr ent Bound Duties and Imports. The submission of
data on preferences to the IDB was not an official  notification requirement. However most developed
and some developing countries did supply such data. In response to the comment made by the EU, he
added that if notifications had been made to the COMTD they could not be automatically included
into the IDB. This was also the ca se with regard to information provided for the Trade Policy Review
(TPR) Mechanism. If such information was to be in cluded into the IDB, the Statistics Division neededWT/COMTD/LDC/M/30
Page 11
to be notified accordingly. He called on Members to supply data to the IDB. For delegations that
wished further information on the database he referred to the document TN/MA/S/2.  In response to
the delegate of Sudan, he stated that Observer governments could also participate in the IDB and upon
submission of data, Observers could obtain full access to the database.
48. The representative of Zambia said that on the issue of derogation of rules of origin under
AGOA with respect to Lesotho, it would be helpful if the US could provide further information. It
would also be useful to know which other countr ies were enjoying this derogation. Did the EU also
offer such derogations? The possibility of a follow-up study had been mentioned by his delegation.
Future studies should look at the issue of bindings of preferences and any correlation between
bindings and  export growth.
49. The representative of Uganda said that on the issue of a follow-up study, his delegation would
appreciate concrete country examples  like the one given on Lesotho under AGOA.
50. The representative of Chad said that his delegation had not provided data to the IDB. He
requested Secretariat technical assistance in submission of this data.
51. The representative of United States said that she would seek and provide further information
on Lesotho and AGOA derogations in the near future. She informed the representative of Chad that
her government had a standing offer to assist countries in compilation of their data and would bewilling to assist Chad in this regard.
52. The representative of the European Communities said that paragraph 33 and 34 of the paper
did mention the derogations on rules of origin that were provided at some stage under the Lomé
Convention. Figure 4 indicated that exports of Lesotho to Europe had not changed much and were
quite low. He would need to seek more information on this matter.
53. In response to the query from Chad, the representative from the Secretariat said that there had
been 12 missions in 2002 to assist Members with the IDB. In spring 2002, a mission had been
conducted to assist Brussels-based delegations. In December 2002, a regional seminar would be held
in Senegal to assist francophone African countries. Chad would be invited to participate in this
seminar. For the year 2003, the TA plan was still under consideration. A similar number of activitieson the IDB were foreseen.
54. The Chairman proposed that the Sub-Committee take note
 of the document
WT/COMTD/LDC/W/28 and of the statements made. He also proposed that an item on "Market
Access for LDCs" be retained on the agenda for the last meeting of the Sub-Committee in 2003.
55. It was so agreed.
56. The Chairman recalled that the Sub-Committee had been mandated in paragraph 8 of the
WTO work programme for LDCs, to report each year  to the COMTD on its monitoring and review of
this item. These substantive discussions in the Sub-Committee would be an element of the end-of-year
report to be compiled and considered in the COMTD.
(ii) Trade-Related Technical Assistance and Capacity Building Initiatives for LDCs
-  WTO Secretariat Annual Technical Assistance Plan
-  Integrated Framework Status ReportWT/COMTD/LDC/M/30
Page 12
57. The Chairman said that the importance of trade-related technical assistance (TRTA) for LDCs
to overcome capacity constraints and to draw benefits from improved market access opportunities
under the rules based trading system was well recognized. Ministers in the Doha Declaration had
given due emphasis to technical cooperation and priority to the delivery of technical assistance (TA)
to LDCs. This priority had been reflected in the delivery of TA under the WTO Secretariat AnnualTA Plan for 2002 and the proposed Plan for 2003. In the TA plans, Members had recognized the
important role of TA in the areas of agreed ne gotiations at Doha. The Sub-Committee in July 2002
had discussed the priority accorded in the delivery of technical assistance to acceding LDCs.
Members would also recall that the COMTD had regularly monitored technical cooperation and that
at its 42
nd Session, the WTO Annual TA Plan for 2003 (WT/COMTD/W/104 and Add.1) was
presented and considered by Members.  He invited  the Secretariat to brief Members on the priority
that had been accorded to LDCs in the delivery of WTO technical assistance in 2002 and in the draftTA plan for 2003.
58. A representative from the Secretariat said that LDCs presented a challenge with regards to
trade capacity building. LDCs were therefore a priority focus of the TA efforts by the WTO.  There
had been extensive consultations with LDCs in dr awing up TA priorities. The TPRs of several LDCs
had been reviewed, consultations had been held at the margins of the Geneva Week, counterparts inother organisations had been contacted and the Diagnostic Trade Integration Studies (DTIS) within
the context of the Integrated Framework (IF) had also been carefully examined.  The TRTA and
capacity building needs were in the three areas men tioned by the Director-General at the meeting of
the COMTD on 8 October 2002:  short-term needs focussed on building capacity to effectively
participate in the negotiations; the short to me dium term needs centred on increasing understanding
and implementation of the rules.  And thirdly, se veral LDCs had also mentioned the importance of TA
for building commercial infrastructure.
59. He said that work on the implementation of the 2002 TA plan and the priority given to LDCs
in the 2003 TA plan was being carried out at several levels. On volume, the TA plan for 2002
included 70 discrete national activities for the LDCs. In the proposed 2003 TA plan 115 nationalactivities had been programmed for LDCs.  While up to three national activities were being allocated
to LDCs, all other beneficiaries were eligible for up to two national activities in 2003.  This reflected
the priority given to LDCs. LDCs were also recipients of TA under the Integrated Framework (IF).
Moreover, TA was being delivered to LDCs with in the framework of the LDC Consultative Group,
which met on a weekly basis. The Secretariat serviced these meetings. The Group regularly invited
resource persons from within and outside the Secretariat and it was an important forum for LDCs'
capacity building.
60. As for the implementation rate in 2002, he stated that at the end of October, 54 out of the 70
activities programmed for LDCs had been delivered.  Further implementation would be undertaken by
end 2002. WTO Reference Centres had also been esta blished in almost all the LDCs and the centres
were in a sense the Secretariat's in-country operations. Reference Centres were being upgraded. This
was a part of the proposed 2003 TA plan. He added that in response to the difficulties with telephoneand internet connections faced by some LDCs and the resulting problems in accessing WTO
documentation electronically, the WTO had extended to SITA connections to about 32 LDCs.
61. He said that WTO continued to fund LDCs participation at meetings. This included
participation in regional and Geneva based seminars. Some LDCs were also invited to participate in
the "Geneva Week for Non-Residents". Value a dded in TA delivery to LDCs in 2003 would be
brought about by the extension of the WTO Internship Programme to include internships to regional
co-ordinators and the co-ordinator of the LDC Cons ultative Group.  These interns would be paid for
by the WTO for six-month periods and the interns would work in the offices of the respective co-
ordinators. In 2003 LDCs would also participate in approximately 150 regional activities. This wouldWT/COMTD/LDC/M/30
Page 13
be in addition to the 115 national activities programmed for the next year. Finally, he said that he
would report on the Integrated Framework under the next sub-item on the agenda.
62. The representative of Zambia on behalf of the LDCs thanked the Secretariat for its efforts in
developing the WTO TA plan. The Secretariat had c onstraints and LDCs did not want to ask for more
than what the WTO could offer. He suggested some broad guidelines to add value to the 2003 Plan.These guidelines could help define the main featur es of more favorable TA and capacity building for
LDCs. In terms of the nature and objectives of TA, and for effective and adequate WTO related
technical assistance for LDCs in the context of the Doha negotiations, such assistance needed to:
(a) Balance the assistance that aimed at implementation of WTO obligations with
assistance for understanding and utilisation of the rights provided by WTO rules for
the LDC Members;
(b) Provided tools that identified the development impact of trade rules at the national
and regional level, and took into account the development needs of the LDCs;
(c) Enhanced the negotiating capacity of the LDCs – in Geneva and at Capitals- to ensure
that the new trade rules that were shaped by the ongoing negotiations matched LDCs
development needs;
(d) Enhanced the long-term capacity of the LDCs in formulating their own trade policies
and negotiating strategies;
(e) Encompassed all the topics of the Doha Work Programme and not only some of them,
while determining the TA priorities in consultation with the beneficiaries;
(f) Supported national consultations between the different stakeholders to ensure their
participation and coherence with other domestic economic policies of the LDCs;
(g) Enhanced the understanding and awareness of the context where the implementation
and the negotiation of trade rules took place by taking into account the
regional/subregional trade schemes;
(h) Enhanced the understanding of the supply-side aspects that intervened in LDCs' trade
policies and in their participation in the multilateral trading system; and
(i) Built and supported national institutional coordinating mechanisms for trade
negotiations to enhance country effectiveness in participating in the multilateral
trading system.
63.  In the guidelines listed, he said that WTO was competent as regards  item (a) on the basis of
its mandate as a rules-making organisation. All the other items listed in the guidelines required
developing complementarity between the WTO and ot her national, regional and international agencies
involved in trade-related technical assistance and capacity building.  Any WTO TA plan needed to
identify which activities required complementarity with other agencies, and devise ways and means to
implement them. The WTO Secretariat should deliver TA only when it focused on trade rules and
similar legal aspects of the trade agenda. Assist ance going beyond the legal framework and involving
development issues as well as negotiating issues needed to be based on close cooperation between theWTO and other development-oriented agencies pa rticularly UNCTAD and ITC. He sought further
information on whether the 2003 TA Plan had since its introduction in the COMTD in October 2002
been enriched with a clear cooperation strategy or plan with UNCTAD and ITC.WT/COMTD/LDC/M/30
Page 14
64. He encouraged the Secretariat to also include long-term goals in the Plan, for instance,
enhancement of the local capacity to provide research and analytical inputs to policy-makers and
negotiators and training in the area of trade issues. He also sought to emphasise the concept of
ownership of technical assistance by LDCs so that  they did not feel it was imposed. This would mean
close consultations with national authorities and to ensure that the process was demand-driven. Hethanked the Secretariat for its ongoing efforts in assembling the TA Plan and urged that their
preliminary comments be taken into account.  He assured the Sub-Committee of LDCs support in
ensuring that the Plan was a success. What was good for LDCs was good for the Secretariat.
65. The Ambassador of Djibouti endorsed the statement by Zambia on behalf of LDCs. He
thanked the Secretariat for their considerable work on the TA plan. The post-Doha framework for TA
went beyond the WTO.  There was need for coordination with other relevant regional and
international organisations. These organisations co uld contribute to the long-term financing of TA
within WTO.  A lot had been done by the WTO but it was seen that there were no resources to meet
all the needs of the LDCs. There was therefore need to explore additional links to supplement WTO
resources.
66. The Ambassador of Haiti expressed support to the statement by Zambia made on behalf of
LDCs. He thanked the Secretariat for its work in 2002 and in drawing up the plan for 2003.  The
Reference Centres mentioned represented one of the ways of assisting LDCs. He suggested that the
WTO cooperate closely with ITU in the management of these centres. The Secretariat had also done a
lot on Reference Centre training in Geneva. He confirmed that as stated by the Secretariat, LDCs had
benefitted from the Secretariat's financial contributions to enable LDCs participation in regional or
Geneva-based meetings. In addition to trade ministries, finance and agriculture ministries had alsobenefitted.  The proposal to finance an intern or trainee from the Capital to assist the rotating co-
ordinator of the LDC Group was welcomed. He said that there was also need for UNCTAD and WTO
cooperation in the implementation of the Brussels Programme of Action.  There were 43 or 44 action
plans submitted by LDCs for LDC-III and there was need for the Capitals to start these activities
through TA.  These action plans were prepared on the basis of need assessments. WTO hadparticipated in this process.
67. The representative of Uganda associated his delegation with the statement by Zambia on
behalf of LDCs. The TA Plan for 2003 was presented to the COMTD and LDCs were encouraged by
the intervention of the Director-General at the meeting. They had made comments and unlike previous
years had held extensive consultations in the drawing up of the plan. The Secretariat had taken into
account comments and the needs of the beneficiary countries.  As stated by Zambia, the TA plan
needed to be demand driven. He hoped that in the subsequent evolution of the TA plan the demanddriven element was maintained. He had some specific comments on the document
WT/COMTD/W/104/Add.1. Under Customs Valuation, there was a regional activity, scheduled in
Kenya, on the Customs Valuation Agreement for selected African Countries. The countries mentioned
were The Gambia, Lesotho, Nigeria and Ethiopia. Uganda wished to add itself to the list of
beneficiaries from this activity. Under SPS, there was an activity scheduled in Uganda on the"Application and Implementation of SPS Agreement in selected East African Countries".  He said that
East Africa had only three countries – he questioned the need to "select" in this short list of countries.
In the context of regional integration under the East African Community there was merit in including
all three East African countries as the beneficiaries.
68. The representative of the European Communities said that the needs driven approach to TA
had to be proved by actions taken for LDCs. He welcomed the priority and focus on LDCs reflected in
the TA Plan. There was a link to the IF and the needs assessments that were drawn up under its aegis.
The activities listed in the plan were to a large ex tent a solid basis to work on.  He acknowledged that
the assistance provided would only partly meet the needs of LDCs but this was dictated by the limited
resources available. The absorption capacity of LDCs was another issue. With regards to the 2002 TAWT/COMTD/LDC/M/30
Page 15
plan he sought information from the Secretariat on the implementation of the activities, and on lessons
or issues drawn from the implementation of national activities in the field.  The Secretariat had
mentioned that out of 70 activities, 54 had been delivered in LDCs. Were these 54 activities all in the
TA plan or did they include ad-hoc activities?
69. The representative of Sudan thanked the Secretariat for the WTO TA plan and expressed his
support to the statement by Zambia on behalf of LDCs. TA had to be demand-driven. He wished to
add certain elements as regards assistance to acceding LDCs. There was need for TA in the
preparation of the technical documents required in the accession Working Party such as ACC/4, 5 and
8. There was also assistance needed for streamlining the national legislative plan. The 2003 plan
offered limited assistance to Sudan in the above-mentioned areas. He mentioned the need for
collaboration and transfer of know-how from the WTO to Universities at the national level. This
could be part of a longer-term assistance strategy.   On coordination among agencies in the IF there
was need for further action. WTO needed to take the lead in this initiative.
70. The representative of Guinea endorsed the statement by Zambia on behalf of LDCs. She
thanked the Secretariat for its efforts in the drafting of the TA plan. She recognized that the COMTD
would be further considering the plan. Guinea had been consulted but there were certain areas where
their requests had not been taken into account. On negotiating techniques for francophone LDCs herdelegation had offered to host the activity in Conakry. On customs valuation, there were 2 activities
scheduled for Africa, one was in Burkina Faso and the other in Mauritius. These 2 activities could be
merged into one and the savings could be used for a negotiating technique activity in Guinea. On
Reference Centres she said that SITA was not functional and this had been drawn to the attention of
the Secretariat.  With regard to coordination with other organisations and in particular UNCTAD,experience had shown that this was beneficial. A recent activity on Agriculture which had been
organised by UNCTAD with WTO participation had achieved good results. She encouraged future
collaboration.
71. The Ambassador of Djibouti said that activities in sub-regional groupings should include all
countries in the sub-region. Uganda had mentioned the example of East Africa. Djibouti had also been
omitted from certain activities in the sub-regions that they were members of.  This was not just an
issue of language as many in Djibouti were bi-lingual.
72. The representative from the Secretariat said that on 11 November 2002, Members and
Observers in the COMTD would have another opportunity to revert to the proposed Plan for TA in
2003.  The views expressed by LDC Members had been constructive.  On behalf of the Secretariat, he
welcomed the comments and thanked Zambia, who s poke on behalf of the LDCs for his statement, in
which LDCs had reaffirmed that the Secretariat was moving in the right direction. The WTO hadconsulted extensively, but in a compilation in excess of 400 activities, there were some anomalies and
he thanked Uganda for drawing attention to a couple  of them.  He would contact delegates bilaterally
and look at some of the anomalies that had arisen in the compilation.
73. In response to the question by Zambia, on whether WTO had consulted with UNCTAD and
ITC with regard to the proposed 2003 Plan, he confirmed that on the 30 October 2002, Dr Supachaihad convened a Heads of Agency meeting with UNCTAD Secretary General Mr Ricupero, and ITC
Executive Director,  Mr Belisle.  In paragra ph 46(b), of the TA Plan (WT/COMTD/104/Rev.1), the
Heads of Agency had committed themselves "to a strategic partnership", to work together in
implementing the 2003 Plan.  At the operational level, WTO and UNCTAD had been working closely
together.  For instance, WTO and UNCTAD Secretariat staff had developed a joint and coordinatedprogramme on trade and investment.  Staff of the tw o organizations were also in touch in areas of
research.  The WTO Secretariat was collaborating with colleagues in other organisations on SPS
matters.WT/COMTD/LDC/M/30
Page 16
74.  On the delivery rate/implementation of activities to the LDCs he said that the full details
would be presented to the COMTD on 11 November 2002.  There were 70 activities planned for
LDCs in 2002 and 115 national activities for LDCs in 2003.  Out of the 70 programmes for 2002, 54
had been implemented.  There had been some slippage for a variety of reasons. In some areas it had
not been possible to deliver, due to a domestic situation.  In some other cases there had beencancellations by the LDC beneficiary themselves; in some others it had made sense to combine
activities into a regional activity;  and in some other areas, like Accessions, some of the activities had
not been delivered because the work of the accession Working Party had not sufficiently advanced to
a stage to warrant such delivery.  In sum, there would be a good rate of implementation to LDCs,
though there would also be scope for further improvement.  He noted the guidance given by the
representative from Sudan with regard to Working Party documents and work with universities.  The
WTO Training Institute would be reporting to the COMTD on activities with universities.
75.  He stated that the set of questions on agency coordination would be taken up in the
discussions on the Integrated Framework. Guinea had raised questions about negotiation skills for
Francophone African countries.  Several specific activities that focussed on negotiation skills had
been scheduled and more activities could be looked into.  On 18 October 2002, staff from the WTO
Secretariat had made a presentation to Members with UNCTAD, ITC, and the OECD, on the range ofcapacity building tools that had been recently developed for effective trade negotiations.  The tools
were ready to be taken to the field. Several trade policy courses had also been programmed for
different regions of Africa.  Negotiation skills were integral to the Annex I courses - the courses
annexed to the 2002 Plan.  These "Doha Development Agenda Training Programme for Senior
Government Officials" courses focussed on both the negotiation skills, as well as the issues arising inthe negotiations. There were two Annex 1 courses fo r Africa.  One of these scheduled in October
2002 had been postponed, because of the situation in Côte d'Ivoire. He noted Guinea's request and
willingness to host regional activities for Francopho ne countries and would revert back later to the
delegate.
76.  On the points made by Zambia, he agreed that WTO assistance dealt with implementation of
WTO obligations.  TA to provide tools to identify the development impact would have to be delivered
in coordination with other agencies.  This was also the focus of the IF Diagnostic Trade Integration
Studies.  ITC was writing specialized sectoral studie s, and looking at the development impact of WTO
rules, not only for government but also for the private sector.  A significant part of the WTO budget
was for the ITC, so what ITC did was really with the same objective. Formulating long-term capacity
was a key focus of the Integrated Framework. A feedback on the 2003 Plan was that the coverage was
good, with regard to all the developing countries.  He welcomed all the points made that theSecretariat would continue to take into account in the delivery of TA.
77. Another member of the Secretariat said that the materials of the Reference Centre would
progressively be upgraded starting with those that had been established in 1997-98.  The WTO
management had decided that this would be a one-off replacement of hardware. In 2003, 12 reference
centres would be replaced and this was reflected  in the TA Plan (WT/COMTD/W/104/Add.1).  On
software and internet connectivity, SITA had connected 158 airports in the world, particularly in
LDCs and developing countries. WTO would assist 27 countries in 2003 with internet connections.  If
in Conakry the problem concerned the WTO installed computer equipment, there were solutions. If
the freight were expensive WTO would have the material replaced directly in the country and would
pay the invoice.  Financial assistance would be given to replace that hardware or software.  Trainingand seminars on WTO databases and online resources was a priority in the establishment of Reference
Centres.
78. The representative of Tanzania said that the venue of a regional activity on page 10 of the TA
plan WT/COMTD/W/104/Add.1 was to be confirmed.  She said that Tanzania would like to host the
activity if it was for the Africa region.WT/COMTD/LDC/M/30
Page 17
79. The representative of The Gambia sought clarification on the issues raised regarding the
Reference Centres.  There could be problems of hardware but there were also problems with
connectivity.  For example, in a country like The Gambia – the reference centre was not operational
due to the fact that the telecommunications system/company was having problems with SITA so they
were not willing to connect the reference centre through SITA.  He wondered what the WTO could doto help restore connectivity problems that a Member state could face?
80. The Secretariat said that the experience in some LDCs was that the suppliers of internet
access were often monopolies. Sometimes they were very expensive and the service provided was
slow. Hardware could be replaced but unfortunately the internet connection played a vital role in the
country receiving the material.  WTO could offer advice but this was also linked to the available
service suppliers in the country.  If there was more than one supplier Ministries often sought
connection with the better supplier – even if it was more expensive, in order to maintain a permanentconnection with the WTO through the Reference Centre.  It was very difficult to give countries more
than the connection through SITA though not all countries could use the SITA system.  The supplier
had to be local and the technical facility was given through the airports when it was possible.
81. The Ambassador of Djibouti took note of the Secretariat's explanation. There was a lack of
knowledge on how the Reference Centres worked. An effort was needed to have the Centres fully
operational and well maintained.
82. The Chairman stated that there had been constructive and concrete discussion of the TA to
LDCs to be delivered by the WTO on a priority basis. He proposed that the Sub-Committee take note
of the statements made.
83. It was so agreed.
-  Integrated Framework Status Report
84. In regard to the Integrated Framework (IF), the Chairman said that the LDC Work
Programme recognized that the Sub-Committee in monitoring this element of the Work Programme
would be guided by the work in other bodies, namely the Integrated Framework Steering Committee
(IFSC) and the Integrated Framework Working Group (IFWG). A joint IF Seminar on Mainstreamingwas held at the WTO on 31 October – 1 November 2002.  Many of the issues discussed at the
Seminar had a direct bearing on the implementation of the IF. Ministers in Paragraph 43 of the Doha
Declaration, while endorsing the IF as a viable model for LDCs trade development, had also urged
development partners to significantly increase their contributions to the IF Trust Fund (IFTF).
Ministers had urged core IF Agencies in coordination with development partners to explore
enhancement with the objective of addressing supply side constraints and extending the IF to all
LDCs.  He invited the WTO Secretariat, in its capacity as Chair of the IFWG, to brief Members on theIF joint seminar as well as the IFWG meeting held on the 17-18 October 2002.
85. The Secretariat, in its capacity as Chair of the IFWG said that the WTO TA Plan could be
pictured as an element or box in the middle of a bigge r picture. The IF was a part of it. Another part of
that picture was the JITAP, a key element of WTO TA. The Plan was also linked to the Regional
Development Banks, and with the UN Regional Ec onomic Commissions. The network of MOUs that
were worked out with several key agencies, was another part of that Plan. Finally, another link to the
TA Plan, was the joint WTO/OECD database.
86.  He said that the IF had gone beyond the three pilots Cambodia, Madagascar and Mauritania,
and was extended to 11 other LDCs. Of the pilots, Cambodia was a success but there was still more to
be done.  In Mauritania, the Diagnostic Trade Integration Study (DTIS) had been concluded.  A donorRound Table meeting would be held on 16-17 November 2002, in Nouakchott. He invited agencies asWT/COMTD/LDC/M/30
Page 18
well as donors to participate in the Mauritania Round Table, to ensure that it succeeded.  The third
pilot was Madagascar, where work on the IF had been temporarily suspended because of domestic
circumstances.  Work had just resumed recently. With regard to the three pilots, a decent report could
be made though a lot depended on the meeting in Mauritania.  Beyond the three pilots, the IF was
under extension to Burundi, Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Guinea, Lesotho, Malawi, Mali, Nepal,Senegal and Yemen.  There were also some new requests from Angola, Lao PDR, Maldives, and
Zambia. These requests were under consideration.
87.  He reported that a communiqué had been circulated following the IF Heads of Agencies
meeting of February 2002 and hosted by Mr Wolfenson of the World Bank ( WT/IFSC/1.).  He said
that the next meeting of the IF Heads of Agenci es would be in June/July 2003. Mr Kohler, Managing
Director of the IMF, had agreed to host the meeting and Dr Supachai would Chair the meeting. Dr
Supachai would be consulting with stakeholders incl uding LDCs with regard to their inputs for the
third meeting of IF Heads of Agency.  It would be  a unique meeting, as not just the six Heads of
Agencies but also two representatives of the LDCs , and two representatives of the donors, Canada and
the European Commission would be pr esent at the appropriate levels.
88. He said that terms of reference were being worked on for the IF evaluation. The agencies plus
the representatives of the LDCs (Zambia and Nepal) , and the representatives of the Donors (European
Commission and Canada) would consider the terms of reference.  It was hoped that the review would
kick off early 2003. He reported that in case the IFWG met outside Geneva, steps had been taken to
ensure LDC participation including through the fundin g of LDC representatives.  At the last meeting
in Washington D.C,  LDCs were represented by Nepal and Zambia at the Ambassadorial Level.
89. He stated that the IF Steering Committee was part of the governance structure of the IF and
had met a few times in 2002.  There would be a further meeting of the IFSC in December 2002. The
reports of the IFSC were circulated.  The Steering Committee had given oversight and policy
direction.
90. He said that the second IF Mainstreaming Seminar held on 31 October – 1 November 2002
had been successful.  There were some points of convergence.  This included a) the pace ofimplementation of the results of the DTIS was slow  and needed to be accelerated; b) ownership was
important. While there was scope for external intervention by donors and agencies, recipient countries
had a key role to play and were driving the process;  c) the IF as a mechanism for mainstreaming trade
into development plans and PRSPs had a contribution to make in support of the Millennium
Development Goals, focussing in particular on poverty reduction and in support of the Doha
Development Agenda; d) the IF also needed to work in association with other agencies, and the
private sector. The key role and contribution of regional Development Banks, was also emphasised.
The Report on the Seminar would be circulated (WT/IFSC/2).
91. The representative of Zambia on behalf of LDCs thanked the Secretariat for the IF Seminar
which had been a success. He encouraged the Secretariat to hold similar seminars in Capitals where
there was need to advance the appreciation and understanding of mainstreaming trade. He thanked
donors for their funding of the IFTF and encouraged agencies to increase the number of IFbeneficiaries.
92. Speaking on behalf of Zambia, he said that between 23-25 October 2002, during Zambia's
Trade Policy Review (TPR), trading partners had posed the question "does Zambia require more
information on mainstreaming of trade from the WTO Secretariat?"  This was because the
Government's TPR report had indicated that mainstreaming of trade would depend on Zambia'sjoining the IF pilot scheme.  Several trading partners  were of the view that Zambia need not wait for
the IF. The Seminar had also made a modest contribution to Zambia's understanding of
mainstreaming trade. Zambia's mainstreaming of trade was being funded and managed by the USAIDWT/COMTD/LDC/M/30
Page 19
at a bilateral level. He conveyed his delegation's appreciation to the US for funding the mainstreaming
of trade through the IF. He wondered whether it was not possible to combine the USAID assistance
with the IF pilot assistance as was the case with Mali. Mali, like Zambia, was getting assistance from
the US at the bilateral level but was at the same time a beneficiary of the IF pilot scheme. Zambia was
of the view that it should also be admitted as a pilot. He sought confirmation from the Secretariat on
this.
93. The representative of Guinea thanked the Secretariat and expressed appreciation on the
acceleration of the IF. Efforts were being made by the Agencies participating in the IF, the donors –
bilateral or multilateral – and also by the countries themselves. Guinea had made efforts in the capital
and had already received the delegation from the World Bank, from 16-20 September 2002. All
stakeholders would be brought into the process and the second or main mission was scheduled from
the 9–20 December 2002. A seminar in Conakry had been organized by ITC, in October 2002, forFrench speaking countries participating in the IF.  At the IF Seminar on Mainstreaming organized by
the WTO an official from the Finance Ministry participated together with two officials from the Trade
Ministry. Capital based officials were active and Guinea understood that the IF would assist it in its
poverty reduction efforts. She thanked donors, both bilateral and multilateral, and once again sought
their support in this exercise.
94. The Ambassador of Djibouti expressed satisfaction with the progress made under the IF and
with IF seminar held in October/November 2002.  He said that concrete steps were being taken and
that at the end of November 2002 there would be a mission to Djibouti to assess what had been done
in the field. The IF would help countries in the long term and was an essential element for LDCs'
overall development. He sought support to ensure tangible results over the long term.
95. The representative of Madagascar thanked the Secretariat for its report on the IF.  She
updated the Sub-Committee on activities under the IF in Madagascar. As a pilot country, activities
had been put on the backburner because of the situation in the country during the first six months of
the scheme. A state of normalcy was returning and the government had informed participating
organizations of its readiness to resume activities in the IF.  The World Bank was in agreement torevise the DTIS of Madagascar and to strengthen it s participation in the world market as a strategy to
reduce poverty after consultation with all those participating in the IF, including the donors.
Madagascar had decided to revisit the DTIS and inform all stakeholders in the public sector, private
sector and civil society of the benefits of the IF.  Once the DTIS was endorsed it would be included in
a strategic paper for poverty reduction, which would be finalized towards the end of 2002.  During
meetings the representative of the World Bank had responded favourably to Madagascar's request that
it act as a Facilitator in Madagascar in order to help the country mobilize the public and funds forfinancing identified projects.  In the Capital a pilot group had been set up that would be revised in
light of the changes that had occurred in the Minist ries participating in the IF.  She thanked the WTO
Secretariat for having organized the IF Seminar that was a timely initiative of benefit to those in
capitals.
96. The WTO Secretariat, in its role as Chair of the IFWG thanked LDC partners for their
constructive comments. In response he said that Zambia's request was currently under review by the
IFWG and at the last meeting in Washington D.C, Ambassador Bowa had stated the reasons why
Zambia should be a part of the IF extension.  On behalf of the Agencies the World Bank had prepared
a technical paper based on these parameters and th e IFWG would reconsider Zambia's application
together with others at a later stage.  The US, USAID in particular, had undertaken great many of IFrelated activities, within the framework of the IF. These activities would contribute significantly to the
mainstreaming work, when the IF was extended to Zambia.
97. He confirmed that the World Bank had agreed to be the lead facilitator in Madagascar. This
was a significant development.  On behalf of the Agencies and the IFWG he extended his appreciationWT/COMTD/LDC/M/30
Page 20
to colleagues from Madagascar for their understanding as they had gone through a challenging period.
Djibouti had restated the consensus that the IF, in  spite of scope for further improvement, was the
principle mechanism, for trade mainstreaming.  Th e IF was a mechanism to connect the DTIS to the
PRSPs.  And these development plans were then presented to Consultative Group meetings and in
some cases, like Mauritania, to donor Round Table meetings.
98.  He reported that in advance of the Mauritania Round Table on 16/17 November 2002, the
IFWG had approved a series of activities for Mauritania, totalling US$192,000 for trade
mainstreaming. These activities focused on specific areas.  The resources approved for Mauritania out
of the IFTF would help contribute to the outcom e of the donor round table.  The IF process was
rolling, it had to be accelerated, and he thanked LDCs for their strong support and encouragement in
this regard.
99. The Chairman said that the discussions and briefing on the implementation of the IF in the
Sub-Committee would be an element of the end-of-the year report to be compiled and considered in
the COMTD. He proposed that the Sub-Committee take note of the statements and reports made.
100. It was so agreed.
101. The Chairman recalled that the Sub-Committee was mandated in paragraph 11 of the WTO
Work Programme for LDCs to report each year to the COMTD on its monitoring and review of
technical assistance for LDCs.  The discussions in this meeting would be an element of the end of
year report compiled and considered in the COMTD.  Also, for the information of Members, he stated
that, as mandated in paragraph 43, the Director-General was preparing an interim report on LDC
issues in consultation with other Integrated Framework Heads of Agency, which would be presented
to the General Council at its meeting in December 2002.
C. OTHER BUSINESS
102. The Chairman proposed that the Sub-Committee meet for its 31st Session on 24 January 2003.
103. It was so agreed.
104. In the absence of any other business, the meeting was adjourned.
__________