WORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONWT/IFSC/2
15 January 2003
(03-0207)
Integrated Framework Steering Committee
REPORT ON THE MAINSTREAMING SEMINAR II
Integrating Trade Into Development Strategies:  The Role of Policy, Technical Assistance, and
Capacity Building
WTO, Geneva, 31 October –1 November 2002
Organized by the six core IF agencies:  IMF, ITC, UNCTAD,
UNDP, World Bank and WTO
Table of Contents
Page No:
I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ......................................................................................................2
II. CONCLUDING REMARKS ...................................................................................................4
III. BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................. ......7
IV. SESSIONS .................................................................................................................... .............8
A. OPENING SESSION ........................................................................................................................8
B. SESSION 1:  MAINSTREAMING TRADE IN NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES :
CONCEPTS , EXPERIENCES AND RESULTS ...................................................................................11
C. SESSION 2:  ENHANCING THE INTEGRATED FRAMEWORK MODEL .............................................12
D. SESSION 3:  MAINSTREAMING , COHERENCE IN POLICY -MAKING AND THE DOHA
DEVELOPMENT AGENDA ............................................................................................................13
V. ANNEX 1:  OPENING STATEMENT BY DR SUPACHAI, DIRECTOR-GENERAL
OF THE WTO..................................................................................................................... ....16
VI. ANNEX II: SEMI NAR PROGRA MME ..............................................................................19
VII. ANNEX III: LIST OF  PARTICIP ANTS..............................................................................23WT/IFSC/2
Page 2
I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1. The 2nd Integrated Framework Joint Agency  Seminar, "On Mainstreaming Trade Into
Development Strategies" was held on 31 October and 1 November 2002.  It built on the outcomes of
the 1st IF Seminar held in January 2001.  The seminar focused on the:
(a) key issues involved in the effective integration of trade and development polices,
drawing on experiences to date, including th ose under the Integrated Framework (IF);
(b) means of effectively managing the IF process to yield concrete benefits, drawing in
particular on country experiences;
(c) steps to improve coordination at the country level as well as between donors and
agencies;
(d) measures to secure the benefits of the Doha Development Agenda for LDCs by using
the Integrated Framework to support trade reform and complementary policymeasures.
2. On the margins of the seminar, informal side-meetings were organized for a number of LDCs
with their IF partners, on IF-process-related issues  specific to those individual countries.
3. The Director-General opened the meeting on behalf of the Heads of the six core Agencies of
the Integrated Framework:  IMF, ITC, UNCTAD, UNDP, the World Bank and the WTO.
4. In his opening statement the Director-General underlined several key points as follows:
(a) trade is an engine for growth and development;
(b) the IF, focussed on the LDCs, is the principal mechanism in the international
community, for mainstreaming  (integrating) trade into development plans and
strategies for poverty reduction;
(c)  trade policies do not stand alone – mutually  supportive companion policies are also
necessary;
(d) the second mainstreaming seminar needed to build on the results of the 1st Seminar.
Seminars and conferences needed to be cumulative in their outcomes in order toachieve substantial progress to the benefit of the recipient countries;
(e) trade-related Technical Assistance and Capacity Building needed to be better
coordinated and "scaled-up" to enable them generate appropriate supply-side
responses for the benefit of the least-developed countries;
(f)  the outcome of the 1
st and 2nd IF Mainstreaming Seminars needed to be relevant to
the main goals set by the international co mmunity.  In this context the Director-
General  drew attention to the outcomes of the Johannesburg World Summit onSustainable Development, the Millenni um Development Goals (MDGs), and the
Monterrey Summit on Financing for Development;
(g)  urgency underpinned  the ongoing Doha trade negotiations and work programme,
and it was vital that time lines are observed by the membership if the deadline for the
negotiations were to be achieved;  and,WT/IFSC/2
Page 3
(h) confidence that the IF had key contributions to make towards the successful
completion of the DDA as well as contributing to the attainment of the Millennium
Development Goals (MDGs), in particular for poverty alleviation.
5. Other speakers at the opening ceremony were Ambassador E Perez Motta (on behalf of
Minister Luis Ernesto Derbez, Minister of Trade,  Mexico);  Carole Brookins, Executive Director
(USA), World Bank;  and Mr Emmanuel Tumusiime-Mutebile, Governor, Bank of Uganda.
6. Speakers pointed to the need for greater institutional coherence within participant countries as
a prerequisite for country ownership.  Coherence was needed at the policy formulation stage given
that aspects of trade policy  were formulated by different ministries and agencies.  Coherence was also
needed in the absorption of capacity building since counterpart funding for projects needs to be
appropriately budgeted.  Several speakers also suggested that, within the context of the IF,
consideration should be given to ways in which inter-ministerial coordination might be supported.
7. A number of speakers emphasized that there are no "quick fixes". At the same time, it was
recognized that a number of capacity building measures could yield quick, measurable, and
significant results.  These include the development of sound trade statistics, information systems to
facilitate customs processes, market intelligence for exporters, and well structured training courses for
trade officials.  One speaker pointed to the relative lack of trade policy courses compared to trainingopportunities in areas such as macroeconomic management.
8. In  summing up the presentations made at Opening Session, the Director-General  noted that
speakers had:
• Re-affirmed  the value of the Integrated Framework for its use as the principal
mechanism for trade mainstreaming into deve lopment plans and strategies for poverty
reduction, and the contributions it  could make to the achievement of the MillenniumDevelopment Goals and support for LDCs and others in the implementation of the
Doha Development Agenda (DDA);
• Underlined the urgency of implementation an d follow-up to the results of the trade
diagnostics;
• Drawn attention to the necessity of the companion policies to trade policies;
• Noted the importance of real results and the benefits of open trade that have accrued
to Mexico and Uganda because of open trade policies, trade mainstreaming, and
measures taken for greater integration into the global economy;
• Underscored ownership as a necessary condition for a successful implementation and
follow-up in the Integrated Framework;
• Acknowledged the necessity also to involve the private sector.
9. The First Session was chaired by Mr Hon. T. Tahane (Minister for Finance, Development,
and Planning, Kingdom of Lesotho). The Session focussed on mainstreaming Trade in National
Development Strategies. Speakers were of the view that in the long term trade was important forgrowth, but trade liberalization in itself would not increase exports. Participants recognized the main
aspects of the Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSP) to be: 1) country driven, 2) developed with
broad participation and 3) as a dynamic process. Trade issues should be a priority in any national
development strategies, although LDCs in general had a number of others priorities as well. The
strengthening of the internal (domestic) process was considered an important issue; resources wereWT/IFSC/2
Page 4
available through trust funds for this purpose. Participants agreed that success of the IF process
depended on three basic factors: leadership and owne rship by LDC, support by external partners and
sharing of IF experience between LDCs. A debate about the relationship between poverty and
liberalization took place.
10. The Second Session was chaired by Mr Grant Taplin (former special IMF Representative to
the WTO and long-standing IMF participant in the IF).  The Session focussed on issues arising from
IF implementation, particularly issues of process  around the role of the Facilitator.  In the discussions,
it was felt that the facilitator should be present from the beginning of the process and should also play
an important role in the post-Round Table phase so as to assist with the follow-up.  The debate on
whether the IF is about re-directing existing funds or  raising additional funds was also raised.   A key
point made was  that mainstreaming trade into Development Plans was not only a matter for LDCs but
also for donors and agencies who should make trade needs a factor in deciding aid priorities andallocations.  Those charged with aid and those charged with trade should  work together.
11. The Third Session was chaired by WTO Deputy Dire ctor-General Dr. K. A. A Rana and later
by Mr. Chiedu Osakwe, WTO Director for Technical Cooperation.  The Session focussed on
Mainstreaming, Coherence in Policy-making and the Doha Development Agenda.  In introducing the
session, the full scope of the DDA was laid out. There was appreciation of the magnitude of the DDAwhich exceeded the scope of any one particular organization or group of countries.  In addition, the
scope of the technical cooperation and capacity building commitments were reviewed.  Attention was
drawn to paragraph 39 of the Doha Ministerial Declaration, which underscored the urgent necessity
for the effective coordinated delivery of technical assistance with bilateral donors, in the OECD
Development Assistance Committee and relevant international and regional intergovernmentalinstitutions, within a coherent policy framework and timetable.  Participants at this session gave
strong support to the consensus that for the firs t time the international community had developed
adequate models of coordination for trade capacity building, including through the Integrated
Framework and the JITAP.  Speakers  were of the view that notwithstanding the need for
improvement,  the Integrated Framework ha d become the principal mechanism for trade
mainstreaming.
12. Dr. Rajapatirana, Visiting Scholar at the Americ an Enterprise Institute for Public Research,
chaired the Concluding Session.    He presented Concluding Remarks, on his own responsibility, as
Chairman, of the key issues emphasised, views expressed, questions raised and recommendations
made in the course of the seminar.  Dr. Rajapatirana's  full statement is reproduced in Section II.
II. CONCLUDING REMARKS
13. We have had two full days of stimulating discussions on integrating trade into development
strategies with respect to policy, technical assistance and capacity building.  I want to thank all of you
for your excellent presentations during this sess ion and the valuable interventions from the floor.
14. First, there should not be any doubt whatsoever after these deliberations that the Integrated
Framework (IF) has now emerged as the  principal instrument  for bringing trade issues into thedevelopment strategies of the least developed countries (LDC).  This process is what we have called
“mainstreaming trade into country development strategies”.  This is the theme of this second seminar.
There is an emerging consensus that the international community has developed some  key models for
the coordination of activities for capacity building, among them are the IF and the JITAP.   The
Development Assistant Committee of the -OECD  is providing an important framework for improvedcoordination and for bringing together the trade and the development communities.WT/IFSC/2
Page 5
15. Second, the discussions have shown that trade mainstreaming itself has three aspects that are
noteworthy.  These are: (a) bringing together mi nistries of trade and finance to work towards
furthering the trade agenda within the country;  (b) connecting trade policies with complementary
policies such as macroeconomic and regulatory policies as well as institutional reforms that lead to
capacity building to create a competitive environment in the country;  and, (c) linking both domesticand foreign private sectors to work together to ge t the full benefits of integration  in the world
economy.  In this connection, several delegates emphasized the importance of putting in place
appropriate national implementing mechanisms to ensure country ownership,  and to encourage the
private sector, civil society and the academic community to engage in on-going policy dialogue.
Towards this end, the country case studies that have been examined, show that several countries have
created National Steering Committees and Technical Committees and Groups to provide forums for
continuing dialogue on trade issues during and following the undertaking of Diagnostic TradeIntegration Studies (DTIS).  These national structures have contributed signficantly to the
implementation of the Integrated Framework in those countries.
16. Third, the delegates stressed the importance of improving donor responses and coordination at
the country level.  This would mean creating appropriate coordination structures.  Donor coordination
at the country level has been attempted through the Development Forums as well as through themechanism of a lead facilitator for th e IF within the country.  But, more needs to be done in this area.
Participants consider that necessary action should be undertaken with urgency.
17. Fourth, it was acknowledged that the principle of country ownership was  a vital factor in
articulating a development strategy, and that trade policy formulation was an essential component of
any development strategy.  The Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers provided a useful  link in thepreparation process.  However, it has been pointed out that not all PRSPs would emphasize trade.
This situation posed a dilemma given that trade is such an essential element for poverty reduction. In
these circumstances, it was suggested that the DTIS should provide a “second bite of the apple” by
analyzing trade policies in order to demonstrate the importance of trade in any overall development
strategy so that trade would become an essential component of any PRSP once the analysis has beenestablished. It has also been stated that the PRSP is  a dynamic document that is reviewed on an annual
basis.  It is indeed consistent with country ownership to demonstrate the centrality of trade in
development strategies.  The implementation of the PRSP should take into account the analysis done
in the DTIS. Many have expressed the view that it is, therefore, necessary to develop appropriate
synergies between the PRSP and DTIS processes and to ensure better and synchronized timing of the
two processes.
18. Fifth, there is unanimous acknowledgement that the Regional Development Banks (RDBs)
will have a key role to play in integrating LDCs into the world economy through their contributions to
the work of the Integrated Framework.  The deliberations of the last two days and the presentations
and interventions during the seminar have indicated the important role that the RDBs could play in the
IF process.
19. Sixth, another issues that has emerged in the deliberations of the last two days is that while
capacity building needs to be supported by grant fundin g, it should not be the only source.  Countries
should make fiscal allocations for trade capacity building in national budgets and developing
countries, including LDCs can and should be urged to consider borrowing in order to build trade
capacity because it is an investment for growth.  Thus, capacity building can and should be supported
by lending institutions.
20. Seventh, as the Director-General of the Worl d Trade Organization Dr Supachai Panitchpakdi
stressed in his remarks at the opening of this seminar, the Integrated Framework can serve as an
important instrument to achieve the goals of the Millennium Development goals for the LDC by
providing support to the Least Developed Countrie s in the  Doha Development Agenda negotiations.
The IF would be an entirely appropriate instrument to ensure greater participation of the LDC in theWT/IFSC/2
Page 6
Doha negotiations, so that their interests can receive support from the donor community as well as
from the six core multilateral institutions.
21. Eighth, while participants agree that there are opportunities created by the IF to mainstream
trade into development strategies, nevertheless, it is recognized that there are still areas where
improvements are required  in order to realize the full potential  of the IF.  I believe that theframework for the pursuit of these goals have now largely been set.  The issues to be addressed are
related more to implementation rather than design or the framework  per se .
22. Ninth, LDCs' representatives expressed strong regrets that trade is the sector that benefits
least from funding institutions.  Most participants, if not all shared this view.  It is vital that the IF
leads to the availability of greater resources to undertake trade reforms, to bring about institutional
change and to build trade capacity for development.
23. Tenth, last, but not the least, many presentations emphasized the importance of instituting
policy reforms.  That was indeed the main message from the Mexican Minister of Trade to the
seminar noting the success that Mexico has achieved since it began it's reforms in the mid 1990s.  The
importance of appropriate complementary policies was noted by the Governor of the Central Bank of
Uganda, highlighting it as a key ingredient of the country’s success.  Of course, policy reforms are not
the only aspect of trade development.  In development forums other aspects of support for trade wouldbe emphasized, going beyond technical assistance, which is the focus of the IF.  This was the core
message from the United States Executive Director  at the World Bank.
24. Overall, several useful lessons can be drawn from this Second Seminar on Trade
Mainstreaming. There is still more room to make the IF process less bureaucratic to avoid the pitfalls
of the former IF which was more process driven than strategy driven.  The IF process can and shouldbe accelerated by speeding up the preparations of the DTIS.  This could be achieved by greater focus
in the DTIS by making it more of a strategic document than one that attempts to cover the trade issues
waterfront. It is of urgent necessity to clarify the process that follows a DTIS.  At present the process
seems somewhat ad hoc and less predictable.  The discussions initiated from the floor certainly gave
that impression.  There has to be greater clarity as to the role of the lead facilitator This should alsodepend on the country’s initiative, whether it wants to have one or not.  There is need to set up
appropriate criteria to judge the success of the IF. Some elements of the success were  mentioned in
the discussions.  These elements include the identification of an actionable and prioritized program for
policy reform, institutional change and trade capacity building.  There is a need to make resources
available and to increase  resources for implementing the actionable program.  It is useful to recall
that one of the reasons for the failure of the old IF was because it was an unfunded mandate,  without
resources.
25. In sum, I believe the participants in the points they have made and positions taken would like
to see several specific improvements in the Integrated Framework.  Participants have:
• stressed the necessity to make the IF less cumbersome to the LDCs and development partners;
• requested for a better synchronization of the IF with the preparation and implementation of the
PRSPs;
• the IF process, in the post-DTIS stage needs to be made more predictable than it is at present by
clarifying the distinct roles of the different stages and the different actors, particularly the bilateral
donors, the multilateral agencies, and the LDC beneficiary;
• Drawn attention to the role that RDBs can play in  providing support to the IF process in all its
facets of policy reform, institutional change and capacity building, and urged their involvement,particularly in the implementation stage;WT/IFSC/2
Page 7
• noted that trade capacity building must not only be financed by grants, but that LDCs could also
borrow to build capacity for a more rapid integrat ion into the multilateral trading system and the
global economy, given the critical importance of trade in poverty reduction;
• acknowledged that the IF could play an importa nt role to help LDC participate in the Doha
Development Agenda negotiations, hence drawing on the benefits of the open, rules-basedmultilateral trading system;
• requested for the provision of more resources to the IF, if it is to achieve the goals that all the
development partners and the countries have set for themselves. In this regard, participants urged
that the trade sector in least developed countries should receive greater support from the lending
institutions than is currently the case;
• taken the view that, although there are many variables that account for the economic performance
of a country, the success or failure of the IF will be judged by several measures, including bywhat it achieves on the ground, and through evidence that these economies will become more
competitive through policy reforms, instit utional change and trade capacity building.
III. BACKGROUND
26. If trade is to be a motor for growth and development, trade policy needs to be anchored in an
overall development policy framework.  Concre tely, this process of "mainstreaming" involves
establishing priority policy actions, supported by a plan of action which includes coherent and
coordinated delivery of trade-related technical assistance and capacity building.  Effective
mainstreaming requires addressing a significant "behind the border" agenda, given that policy actionin this area is likely to enhance the role trade can play in poverty reduction.  It also requires that a
sustainable domestic trade policy process be developed.  Mainstreaming efforts in developing and
least developed countries need to be complemented by improvements in market access, if trade is to
play its part in reducing poverty.
27. The need to better integrate trade and development policies has been underscored through a
variety of initiatives and through different fora.  Following the revisions made to its operation in the
year 2000, and its launch on a pilot project basis the year after, the Integrated Framework has become
a mechanism by which trade policies can be mainstreamed into development strategies for least-
developed countries.  The IF was endorsed by minist ers at Doha at the WTO's Ministerial Conference,
and is now under operation in 19 LDCs.  It is envisioned that the IF would be extended, on the basisof a review, to all LDCs, and that, furthermore, the trade integration diagnostics could be extended to
non-LDC low-income countries.  The Doha Development Agenda has underscored the importance of
consistency of action between trade and development communities, of improved market access
opportunities, and of  partnership between multilateral, bilateral and regional partners in support for
policy reform in least developed countries and developing countries.
28. With this background in mind, the second seminar on mainstreaming sought to build on the
outcomes of the first seminar on mainstreaming held in February 2001.  The objectives of the seminar
were:
• To explore the key issues  involved in  the effective integration of trade and
development polices, drawing on experiences to date, including those under the
Integrated Framework;WT/IFSC/2
Page 8
• to understand, on the basis of country experiences, how the IF process can be
effectively managed to yield concrete benefits;
• to examine how coordination can be achieved at the country level, and between
donors and agencies;
• to examine how the benefits of the Doha Development Agenda could be secured
through actions to support trade reform and complementary policy measures.
The seminar consisted of three sessions, bearing the following headings:
• Session I:  Mainstreaming Trade in National Development Strategies: Concepts,
Experiences and Results .  The first session could discuss some fundamental concepts
and approaches to mainstreaming trade into national development strategies and howthese have translated into policy action.
• Session II:  Enhancing the Integrated Framework Model :  This session could focus
on lessons learnt in the management of the IF process, and how these could beapplied in the process of extending the IF to all LDCs, and in the possible extension
of diagnostic trade integration studies to other low-income countries.
• Session III:  Mainstreaming , Coherence in Policy-Making, and the Doha
Development Agenda .  This session could address the question of developing
effective mechanisms for the delivery of coherent and coordinated trade-related
capacity building and technical assistance, the role of regional initiatives, and the
contribution of the private sector.
IV. SESSIONS
A. 
OPENING SESSION
29. The Seminar was opened by Dr Supachai Panitchpakdi, Director-General of the WTO.  Three
speakers made keynote addresses.  The following key points were raised:
Dr Supachai Panitchpakdi, Director-General:
• This  mainstreaming seminar is an important step in the collective efforts of agencies
to improve on coherence and coordination in technical cooperation and capacitybuilding activities;
• to ensure that trade works for growth and development, trade policy and trade priority
areas of action should be integrated into overall national development plans andstrategies for poverty reduction.  The Integrated Framework is the principal
mechanism for mainstreaming trade into development plans;
• implementation and follow-up to the diagnostic trade integration studies is the
challenge currently facing the IF process.  Implementation and follow-up need to be
better systematised and made more predictable;
• trade policies do not stand alone – there is need for mutually supportive companion
policies such as stable macroeconomic policies, pro-growth regulation andWT/IFSC/2
Page 9
competition policy, as well as investments in infrastructure, human resource
development, governance and the rule of law;
• there is need for better coordination and accountability amongst all stakeholders.  The
IF must be operated as a shared responsibility amongst donors, recipients and
multilateral agencies;
• major goals set by the international community should be taken into account.  These
include, inter alia , the results of the Johannesburg World Summit on Sustainable
Development, as well as the UN Millennium Development Goals;
• the Integrated Framework can contribute to the successful completion of the Doha
Development Agenda;
• in concluding the first session,  the Director-General stressed the following points:
(i) the importance of the Integrated Framework in light of  the contributions it can make 
to:
- trade mainstreaming;
- achievement of the Millennium Development Goals;
- support for the DDA;
(ii) the urgency of the implementation and fo llow-up to the results of the diagnostics;
(iii) the necessity of the companion policies to trade policies;(iv) the importance of real results and the benefits of open trade, as shown by the
examples of Mexico and Uganda;
(v) ownership by recipient countries;(vi) involvement of the private sector.WT/IFSC/2
Page 10
Ambassador Perez-Motta on behalf of Minister Luis Ernesto Derbez, Minister of Trade,
Mexico:
• Trade policy has to be approached through a broader context – it has to be part of a
series of macroeconomic policies such as the promotion of competition and
investment;
• Mexico is a good example of the benefits of trade mainstreaming and liberalisation.
Trade liberalisation in Mexico resulted in economic growth and market
diversification;
• developing and least developed countries need technical assistance in order to benefit
from trade liberalisation.  The Secretariat Technical Assistance Plan for 2003 is a
significant step in addressing the technical assistance and capacity building
commitments agreed in Doha.  WTO Members must continue their commitment to
increased technical assistance with measurable results.
Carole Brookins, Executive Director (USA), World Bank:
• Country ownership and demand is key to a country's successful participation in the
trading system;
• the success of the IF is crucial to achieving the Millennium Development Goals –
reducing poverty by half by 2015 will not happen without increased economic output,
productivity, investment and trade in developing countries;
• responsibility, accountability and results are three key pillars in the ongoing IF
process;
• there is need for responsibility  on countries themselves and on their development
partners.  Beneficiary countries need to take ownership of the IF process and to make
the necessary commitment to overcoming impediments to effective participation in
the trading system.  The private sector needs to be involved.  Development partners
have the responsibility of translating the diagnostics into effectively designedoperations of country strategies;
• all the six multilateral agencies, the donors and the LDCs are accountable for getting
results from the IF process.  Such accountability could be achieved by improving thediagnostic template to identify the prioritised needs of the different partners in a
country's trade structure and by determining who should be accountable forperformance.  There should be shared accountability in setting priorities, matching
the priorities with appropriate expertise and resources, and implementing targeted
operations to achieve specific, measurable trade outcomes;
• it is crucial that real results for real people are achieved in real time.  Achieving real
results is key to achieving success in the Doha Development Agenda. Concrete
projects need to be identified to overcome trade impediments and to establish trade
results in outputs, outcomes and impacts;
• the IF is a test case for the new post-Monterrey Partnership.  For those countries that
put the right policies and trade infrastructure in place, the multilateral agencies and
donors will respond by supporting these activities;WT/IFSC/2
Page 11
• the role of Finance Ministers is important.  Finance Ministries need to take advantage
of  the World Bank's trade supporting resources (both financial and institutional).
Emmanuel Tumusiime-Metebile, Governor, Bank of Uganda:
• Liberal trade policy is crucial to attaining sustained economic reform and trade policy
should therefore be accorded greater priority. In LDCs, trade policy reform is
generally the most crucial of all structural reforms.  Strengthening trade policy
capacities in LDCs should be a priority for the IF;
• research shows that lower trade barriers lead to faster growth in developing countries.
However, the benefits of open trade are not well understood among politicians or the
general public in LDCs.  Many politicians are hostile to any imports which competewith the domestic industry;
• to strengthen and deepen trade policy reform, reformers in LDCs must strive to
promote greater political and public understanding of the benefits of open tradepolicies;
• trade policy reform alone is not sufficient. There is need to improve regulatory
policies such as the banking system.  Reforms to the prudential regulation of the
banking industry are an essential complement to the liberalisation of financialmarkets.
B. 
SESSION 1:  MAINSTREAMING TRADE IN NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES :  CONCEPTS ,
EXPERIENCES AND RESULTS
30. The first Session focused on the economic and policy rationale for mainstreaming trade into
national developments plans and poverty reduction strategies.  It addressed the concept and value of
mainstreaming as well as the institutional mechanis ms used to mainstream trade.  Is the Poverty
Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP) an appropriate instrument for mainstreaming trade?  How can it be
made more effective?  What lessons on mainstreaming can be drawn from the experiences so far?
The Session also looked at the relationship between trade, growth and poverty in LDCs.  The Session
was chaired by the Honourable Minister Thahane, Minister for Finance, Development and Planning,
Kingdom of Lesotho.
Lead presentations were made by:
(i) Mr Charles Gore, UNCTAD;
(ii) Mr David Luke, UNDP;  and,(iii) Mrs Yvonne Tsikata, World Bank.
Key Points Raised
• Sustained economic growth is key to reducing poverty.  However rapid trade
liberalisation in the short term  may create dislocations and result in increasedpoverty.  Statistics show that poverty is increasing in those countries that have
liberalised their trade regimes. Noneth eless, trade should not be ignored –
international trade is vital for LDCs and export promotion is critical for povertyWT/IFSC/2
Page 12
reduction because it generates an increase in resources.  The development of trade
statistics and data is important;
• trade liberalization has reduced poverty but trade liberalisation on its own is not
sufficient.  Trade liberalisation must be complemented by other policies;
• in mainstreaming trade, there is a need to look beyond trade liberalization.  Technical
assistance and institutional and human capacity building (eg legislature, civil society)is equally important.  Empowerment of local institutions such as think tanks, the
media and research institutes are crucial for providing local ownership;
• it is important to note that the technical assistance and capacity building provided by
the WTO differs from that required under the IF. WTO technical assistance focuses
on the understanding and implementation of Agreements.  The technical assistance
required under the IF is much broader and should address issues of diversification,
export promotion and other supply side constraints.  Increased market access
opportunities alone would not increase LDCs' exports;
• there is a need to create an environment in LDCs that supports the private sector.  The
government is merely the facilitator.  Itis the private sector that exports. IF agencies
should involve the private sector.  Export development, trade facilitation andinvestment promotion should be refl ected in national budget plans;
• the Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP) is an important vehicle for
mainstreaming trade.  It is country driven and involves all trade stakeholders.  It isalso a key vehicle for supporting the UN Millennium Development Goals;
• strategic alliances need to be established between the private and public sectors as
well as among the ministries.  Trade should not be the responsibility of the Ministryof Trade alone.  In the course of the ongoing trade negotiations, alliances should also
be established amongst the LDCs themselves and between the LDCs and other
developing countries;
• in order for the IF to succeed, there is need for internal coherence; support by
development partners; and the sharing of experiences among the LDCs;
• the six IF Agencies should find a way of re-assessing the needs of the 5 IF Round
Table countries (Bangladesh, the Gambia, Haiti, Tanzania and Uganda).
C. 
SESSION 2:  ENHANCING THE INTEGRATED FRAMEWORK MODEL
31. The second session focused on ways of enhancing the IF model.  What practical lessons of
experience can be drawn upon to guide the process of  extending the IF model to other LDCs?  How
can the LDCs and donors form constructive partnerships to manage the IF process? The question of
the role of the lead donor/facilitator was addressed.  The session was chaired by Mr Grant Taplin,
Former Special IMF Representative to the WTO and long-standing IMF participant in the IntegratedFramework.
Lead presentations were made by:
(a) Mohammed Ould el Abed, Ministry of Economic Affairs and Development,
Mauritania;WT/IFSC/2
Page 13
(b) Andrea Nicolaj, European Commission;
(c) Stephen Brown, UNDP;  and,(d) Yvonne Tsikata, World Bank.
Key Points Raised
• The role of the facilitator is crucial at the beginning of the IF process.  The facilitator
can play an important role in defining mission objectives, the concept paper, as wellas in mobilising donors.  There is a need for developing terms of reference for the
facilitators;
• the facilitator can act as an interface, assisting in the dissemination of information as
well as in assisting national authorities in organising meetings;
• while significant, the role of the facilitator should not be overemphasised – the
beneficiary country should drive the process;
• beneficiary countries need to initiate dialogue with the donors who are resident in the
country.
• the concept of coordination is key.  Trade is only one aspect of aid coordination
activities;
• supply-side constraints need to be addressed if the IF is to be a "viable model for
LDCs' trade development" as mentioned in the Doha Declaration;
• capacity development has 6 facets; knowledge acquisition; institution building;
institutional environment and partnerships; policy environment; country commitment;
and results and accountability;
• donors need to acknowledge country conditions – need to acknowledge that every
country is unique.  Donors also have to build on local capacities by embarking on aprocess of dialogue with the country. An example would be finding out whether any
studies have already been undertaken. The use of local expertise should beencouraged;
• donors also have to mainstream.
D. 
SESSION 3:  MAINSTREAMING , COHERENCE IN POLICY -MAKING AND THE DOHA DEVELOPMENT
AGENDA
32. The third session addressed the question of developing effective mechanisms for the delivery
of coherent and coordinated trade-related capacity building and technical assistance, the role of
regional initiatives, and the contribution of the private sector.  It focused on how coherence and
coordination in policy making among development partners are central issues for improving the
effectiveness of development assistance, based on country ownership.  The Doha Declaration calls forimproved cooperation and coordination in the delivery of Trade Related Technical Assistance and
Capacity Building amongst multilateral institutions and bilateral donors, in order to maximize the
benefits that the multilateral trading system could offer to developing and Least Developed countries.
The session examined the parallel policy measures that are required to support trade policy reform, as
well as the role of the private sector and regional initiatives in supporting the integration of trade,WT/IFSC/2
Page 14
poverty reduction and development strategies.  Dr K A A Rana Deputy Director-General of the WTO
and Mr. Chiedu Osakwe, Director, WTO Technical Cooperation Division, chaired the session.
Lead presentations were made by:
(i) Richard Carey, OECD  (Coordinatio n of donor action in capacity building
partnerships;
(ii) Charlotte Heath, DFID, UK (Donor support for trade and poverty reduction);(iii) Peter Kalil and Juan Jose Taccone, (Inter-American Development Bank) Integration
and Regional Programmes Department;
(iv) Robert Anderson, WTO on "The role of regulatory policy in supporting trade
reforms";
(v) J Smadja, B arclay and J Crespo-Blanco, In ternational Trade Centre (ITC) on "Private
sector development as an instrument of poverty reduction";  and
(vi) Mohammed Ali Taslim, Chairman, Bangladesh Tariff Commission on "Private sector
responses to trade policy reforms".
33. Ambassador Toufiq Ali (Bangladesh), was the discussant at the wrap-up panel discussion and
Dr S Rajapatirana, in his personal capacity as Chair made some closing remarks (attached below).
Key Points Raised
• There is an emerging consensus that for the first time the international community,
has developed models of coordination for trade capacity building.  E.g. the IF, JITAPand DAC-OECD.  In this regard, the IF has become the principal mechanism for
trade mainstreaming;
• improving donor response and coordinating on the ground in individual countries is
vital.  This includes the creation of appropriate coronation structures;
• for the success of the IF process in individual countries, appropriate national
implementing mechanisms need to be put in place to ensure country ownership as
well as to encourage the private sector, the civil society and the research community
to engage in an ongoing policy dialogue;
• there is an urgent need to clarify the role of lead donor (facilitator)and to develop
appropriate guidelines on the process for LDC's;
• appropriate synergies should be generated to integrate different national processes;
• Regional Development Banks have a key role in trade integration;  they have a
contribution to make  to IF implementation;
• trade capacity building can be provided through grant funding, but there is also scope
for non-grant funding;WT/IFSC/2
Page 15
• LDC's should consider borrowing for trade capacity building because it is an
important investment for growth and development yield;
• it is regrettable that trade is the sector that benefits least from resource programme of
funding institutions;
• funding for trade capacity building should also be sourced from the national budget;
it is a worthwhile investment for trade and development dividends;
• the link and complementarity between regulatory reform, competition policy and
trade liberalization is important, particularly for developing and least-developed
countries;
• the effects of international cartels should be taken into consideration in efforts to
reduce poverty;  they are not insignificant;
• some LDCs do not have domestic competition policy legislation or regulatory
framework in place;
• there is merit in formulating a Competition Policy at the early stages of a country's
development to balance the interests of consumers vis-à-vis the interests of industry;
• LDCs' fuller participation in world trade would generate employment and reduce
poverty. Integration hinged on: Market Access; goods and services to export; andexport skills and export delivery;
• market access negotiated in the context of the DDA would be strengthened with
public-private sector partnership during the negotiation process, with the private
sector articulating and advocating their views to public sector negotiators;
• the IF could contribute to an expansion and diversification of the export base;
• in so far as export-led growth is an engine to reduce poverty in LDCs, projects
developed by ITC could assist in this regard;
• paradigm shift from import substitution to export oriented trade policy had an impact
on private producers in LDCs, such as Bangladesh.  Impact of further trade
liberalization, and phasing out of the MFA could have effects in particular for the
garment industry in some LDCs;
• there is a need for relaxed rules of origin  requirements to enhance market access for
LDCs;
• Preferential market access  could be granted to all LDCs by principal trading partners;
• improved market access was needed but was to be matched with adequate supply-side
response in LDCs.  Support to alleviate supply-side constraints is needed;
• IF should retain its distinct identity while exploring the complementarities with the
PRSP process.WT/IFSC/2
Page 16
V. ANNEX 1:  OPENING STATEMENT BY DR SUPACHAI, DIRECTOR-GENERAL OF
THE WTO
1. On behalf of the Integrated Framework Wo rking Group (IFWG), I am pleased to welcome
you all to this Second Seminar on mainstreaming trade into development plans and poverty reduction
strategies.  As you already know, this seminar is jointly  organized by the six (6) core agencies (IMF,
ITC, UNCTAD, UNDP, the World Bank, WTO), the 2 representatives of the Least-Developed
countries and the 2 representatives of the donor community.
2. It is yet another important step in our collective efforts to improve on coherence and
coordination in approaches, in policies, and in technical co-operation and capacity building activities.It provides us with the opportunity to focus on follow-up and implementation of policies, programmes
and projects to which we have agreed in the past.
3. The primary objectives of this Second Seminar on Trade Mainstreaming are to:
• Explore the key issues involved in the effective integration of trade and development
policies, drawing on experiences to date, including those under the Integrated
Framework;
• understand how the IF process can be more effectively managed to increase the
concrete benefits that it yields for least-developed countries;
• examine how coordination can be improved at the country level, in particular
amongst agencies, donors and beneficiaries;  and,
• examine how the benefits of the Doha Development Agenda (DDA) could be secured
through actions to support trade reform and complementary policy measures.
4. To provide some context to your discussions, let me underscore, what I see to be several
critical points.
5. First, we all know that trade is the engine fo r growth and development.  However, to ensure
that trade works for growth and development, trade policy and trade priority areas of action need to be
critically anchored either in overall national development plans and/or in strategies for poverty
reduction.  In the absence of the effective integration of trade into development planning and
strategies for poverty reduction, trade cannot work for development.
6. The Integrated Framework, focused on the LDCs, is the principal mechanism in the
international community today for mainstreaming  (integrating) trade into development plans and
strategies for poverty reduction.  The current challenge in the IF process is with implementation and
follow-up to the results of the diagnostic trade in tegration studies.  The quality of the diagnostic
studies have been welcomed and endorsed by all participants in the Integrated Framework SteeringCommittee.  With regard to follow-up, modest success has been achieved in countries like Cambodia.
In others, however, current experience suggests th at the follow-up process needs to be better
systematized and made more predictable.  I hope participants will accord attention to implementation
and follow-up, under the IF process, at this seminar.WT/IFSC/2
Page 17
7. Second, we need to be ever conscious of the fact that trade policies do not stand-alone.
Mutually supportive companion policies are also necessary.  The effectiveness of trade liberalization
and reform and the gains they yield are frequently dependent on associated and complementary
policies, such as stable macroeconomic policies, pro-growth regulation and competition policy,
investments in infrastructure, human resource development, governance and the rule of law.  Effectivetrade mainstreaming is, therefore, linked to the ability of countries to address "behind the border
agenda".  It also depends on developing and sustaining a domestic trade policy set within the overall
development policy of the country.  Furthermore, the efforts of agencies, donors, and the LDCs in
trade mainstreaming to the benefit of the LDCs, n eed to be linked to effective improvements in
market access to enable the LDCs to take advantage of appropriate supply-side responses that will be
stimulated through trade mainstreaming.  Impr ovements in market access, therefore, remain
indispensable.
8. Third, this Second seminar needs to build on the results of the First Seminar.  Several points
were identified which remain essential and should, inter alia , be the focus of this meeting.  For
example, participants in the conclusions at the First Seminar noted that trade should be mainstreamed
into development plans and strategies for poverty reduction because it is part of a pro-poor, pro-
growth and pro-development strategy.  Country owne rship is essential. Coordination amongst bilateral
donors, within and between multilateral and regional agencies, and partnerships between the
government and private sector require improvements.  The Integrated Framework must be operated as
a shared responsibility amongst donors, recipients and multilateral agencies.  The trade negotiating
capacity of the LDCs needs significant strengthening to  enable them to effectively participate in trade
negotiations.  The trade-related technical assistance and capacity building needs of LDCs must bebetter coordinated and "scaled-up" to enable them to generate appropriate supply-side responses and
to draw on the benefits and opportunities created by the rules-based trading system.  I would like to
urge participants to continue to focus on all these fundamental issues.
9. Fourth, we need to focus and relate the outcomes of our work, such as in this seminar, to the
main goals set by the international community.  The Johannesburg World Summit on SustainableDevelopment (WSSD) was attended by well over 100 He ads of State and/or Government.  It was my
first international meeting as Director-General of the WTO.  One point that was clearly made at the
Summit, amongst several others, was that we should relate our outcomes to already established
international goals and to seek to implement those go als, objectives and targets.  It is important that
we support the achievement of Millennium Deve lopment Goals (MDGs) and all the other important
UN Summits and International Conferences of the last decade.  They constitute part of the shared
responsibility of the international community.
10. Trade can make an important contribution to achieving the overarching Millennium
Development Goal of poverty reduction.  This is yet another reason why the effective implementation
of the Integrated Framework is vital, and why trade priority areas of action need to be reflected in
overall country development plans and strategies for poverty reduction.
11. This brings me to my fifth point namely, the urgency underpinning the on-going Doha trade
negotiations and work programme.  Let me use this opportunity to briefly report to you on the state-
of-play under the Doha Development Agenda.  The last meeting of the Trade Negotiations Committee
(TNC) took place on the 3
rd and 4th of this month.  Chairpersons of the various negotiating groups
reported on the status of the negotiations in the negotiating bodies.  The reports clearly showed that
we had made a reasonably good start.  However, it was also clear that much remained to be done andthat time is moving rapidly.  I expressed concern that the position of some delegations had not yet
been sufficiently clarified.  I would like to re-empha size several points that I made at the last meeting
of the TNC.  We have now entered a substantive phase of the negotiations and engagement.  It is only
by accelerating our work and by discussing concrete proposals can real progress be made across the
board.  Time frames and deadlines need to be adhered to, and a sense of the negotiations as a wholeneeds to be established, and not simply focusing on individual key deadlines.WT/IFSC/2
Page 18
12. There are key deadlines that need to be met in December.  These relate to deadlines on
implementation matters, special and differential treatment for developing countries, and a solution to
the problem of pharmaceuticals in those countries that lack sufficient manufacturing capacity.  In
March 2003, the system will be confronted with deadlin es  in the negotiations in agriculture, services,
non-agricultural market access and dispute settlement.  Individually, all these deadlines are important,but as I have stated, an overall sense of the negotiations needs to be established.
13. We must work to ensure that we successfully conclude the DDA Work Programme by the
deadline of 1 January 2005. I believe that the Integrated Framework has key contributions to make in
the successful completion of the Doha Development Agenda.  These contributions will need to be
based on two key areas:  (a) ensuring that trade is effectively mainstreamed into the development
plans and strategies for poverty reduction, so that trade works for the development of the LDCs and to
help reduce poverty;  and, (b) building the human and institutional capacity in the LDCs to enablethem to participate effectively and meaningfully in the multilateral trading system and the global
economy.  The next meeting of the TNC will be in December, this year.  I will continue to report to
members and agency heads in my meetings and consultations with them.
14. Let me conclude by expressing my wish for two productive days in this Second Seminar.  I
hope that you will emerge with concrete recommendations and outcomes that will enhance theimplementation of the Integrated Framework.WT/IFSC/2
Page 19
VI. ANNEX II: SEMINAR PROGRAMME
OPENING SESSION
Thursday 31 October
Chairperson: Director-General, WTO
09.00- 09.10 Welcome and introductory remarks;
Dr Supachai Panitchpakdi,  Direct or-General, World Trade Organisation.
09.10-09.25 Keynote address: delivered by Amb. E Perez-Motta on behalf of Minister
Luis Ernesto Derbez, Minister of Trade, Mexico.
"The Doha Development Agenda: the ro le of trade capacity building for
negotiations and trade integration ".
09.25-09.40 Keynote address:  Carole Brookins, Executive Director (USA), World Bank.
"A global architecture for trade and development ".
09.40-09.55 Keynote address:  Mr Emmanuel Tumusiime-Mutebile, Governor, Bank of
Uganda."The National Optic:  macroeconomic, regulatory and trade policy".
SESSION 1
Thursday 31 October
Mainstreaming Trade in National Development Strategies:
Concepts, Experiences and Results.
Chairman:  Hon. T Thahane
(Minister for Finance, Development, and Planning, Kingdom of Lesotho)
Main issues:
• What is the economic and policy rationale for mainstreaming trade into national
development plans and what are the mechanisms designed to achieve mainstreaming?
• What institutional mechanisms are used to mainstream trade into national
development strategies?
• What lessons on mainstreaming can be drawn from the experiences gathered by the
IF countries?
10.00-11.00 Mainstreaming trade in national development plans what have we learnt?
Hon. T Thahane, Minister for Finance, Development an Planning, Kingdom
of Lesotho.Keith Muhakanezi, Director for Economic Affairs, Uganda.
11.00-12.15 Effective integration of trade policy into development policy frameworks:
what have we learnt?WT/IFSC/2
Page 20
Charles Gore UNCTAD
David Luke UNDP
Yvonne Tsikata. World Bank
Chiedu Osakwe World Trade Organisation
12.15-13.00 Discussion
13.00-15.00 Lunch
SESSION 2
Enhancing the Integrated Framework Model
Chairperson:  Grant Taplin, Former Special IMF Representative to the WTO
and Long-Standing IMF Participant in the Integrated Framework
Main Issues:
• What practical lessons of experience can be drawn upon to guide the process of
extension of the IF to other LDCs ?
• How can LDCs and donors form constructive partnerships to manage the IF process?
• What issues would arise in extending concepts of the IF model to low-income
countries?
15.00-16.30. Management of the IF process:  partnerships between LDCs and IF 
facilitators.
Mohammed Ould el Abed,  Ministry of Economic Affairs and Development,
Mauritania.Andrea Nicolaj, European Commission.
16.45-18.00 Extending the IF to cover other LDCs, and the Diagnostic Trade Integration
Studies to Low-Income countries.  What are the parameters?  What are the
costs involved?  How can we draw on lessons learnt to date.
Stephen Browne, UNDP.
Yvonne Tsikata, World Bank
SESSION 3
Friday, 1 November
Mainstreaming, Coherence in Policy-Making and the Doha Development Agenda
Background:
The mandates that emerged from the Doha Ministerial Declaration provide major new
challenges.  Coherence and co-ordination in policy making among development partners are central
issues for improving the effectiveness of development assistance, based on country ownership.  The
Doha Declaration calls for improved co-operation an d co-ordination in the delivery of trade-related
technical assistance and capacity building amongst multilateral institutions and bilateral donors, inWT/IFSC/2
Page 21
order to maximise the benefits that the multilateral trading system could offer to developing and least-
developed countries.  Coherence is also important at the country level: if the benefits of trade
liberalisation are to be secured, trade policy needs to be part of a coherent policy package.
Main issues:
• How can coherence be achieved between the programs of bilateral partners and
multilateral agencies on technical cooperation and capacity building?
• What parallel policy measures are required to support trade policy reform?
• What is the role of regional initiatives in supporting the integration of trade and
development strategies.
• How can policy reform enable the private sector become an engine for growth and
poverty reduction.
Chairman:  Dr K A A Rana/Mr. Chiedu Osakwe
10.00–10.30 Coordination of donor action in capacity-building partnerships
Richard Carey, OECD.
10.30-11.00 Donor support for trade and poverty reduction
Charlotte Heath, DFID.
11.00-11.30 Regional integrated approaches to trade and development.
12.00-12.30 Supporting policy reform and trade integration: the role of Regional
Development Banks.
Peter Kalil and Juan Jose Taccone, Inter-American Development Bank.
13.00-15.00 Lunch.
Chairman:  Dr S  Rajapatirana
15.00-15.30 The role of regulatory policy in supporting trade reforms
Robert Anderson,  World Trade Organisation.
15.30-16.30 Private sector development as an instrument of poverty reduction.
J Samdja,  B Barclay, and  J Crespo-Blanco, International Trade Centre.
16.30-17.00 Private sector responses to trade policy reforms.
Mohammed Ali Taslim, Chairman, Bangladesh Tariff  Commission.
17.00-17.45 Wrap Up Panel Discussion.
Discussant: Amb Toufiq Ali, Bangladesh.
17.45-18.00 Chairman's closing remarks.WT/IFSC/2
Page 22
LIST OF DOCUMENTS
MAINSTREAMING SEMINAR II
31 OCTOBER – 1 NOVEMBER 2002
TITLE
Report on the Seminar by the Integrated Framework core agencies.
"The policy relevance of mainstreaming trade into countrydevelopment strategies: perspectives of least-developed countries".WT/LDC/SWG/IF/15/Rev.1
Implementing the Integrated Framework "IF" in Cambodia.
Diagnostic Trade Integration Study (DTIS) – Cambodia.
Diagnostic Trade Integration Study (DTIS) – Mauritania.
Diagnostic Trade Integration Study (DTIS) – Madagascar.
Diagnostic Trade Integration Study (DTIS) – Senegal.
Diagnostic Trade Integration Study (DTIS) – Yemen.
Trade Policy Review – Mauritania. WT/TPR/S/103
WT/TPR/G/103
WT/TPR/M/103
The extension of the Integrated Framework pilot phase: selection ofpilot countries and the calendarWT/IFSC/W/9
WEB SITES
www.wto.org
www.if.wto.orgwww.itd.org
www.unctad.org
www.intracen.org
www.worldbank.org
www.imf.orgWT/IFSC/2
Page 23
VII. ANNEX III: LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
I. List of Participants from Invited Countries
Bangladesh: Mr. Mohammad Shah Alam, Deputy Secretary, Economic Relations
Division, Ministry of Finance
Mr. Mohammad Ali Taslim, Chairman, Bangladesh Tariff Commission, 
Ministry of Commerce
Benin: M. Antoine S Agbadome, Directeur du Commerce Extérieur, Ministère de 
l'Industrie, du Commerce et de la Promotion de l'Emploi
Burkina Faso: M. Lancina Ki, Directeur Général de la Promotion du Secteur Privé,
Ministère du Commerce, de la Promotion de l'Entreprise et de l'Artisanat
Burundi: Mme Valérie Siniremera, Ministère du Commerce et de l'Industrie
M. Gervais Nkanagu, Directeur Général du Commerce et Président du
Comité de pilotage du Cadre Intégré
Comoros: M. Soalihy Hamadi, Directeur du Développement, Commissariat Général au 
Plan
Djibouti: M. Omar Ismael Abdourahman, Ca dre Ministère du Commerce, de l'Industrie
et de l'Artisanat
Ethiopia: Mr. Gashaw Debebe, Head, Foreig n Trade Department, Ministry of Trade
and Industry
Mr. Getachew Adem, Head of the Economic Policy and Planning
Department, Ministry of Fina nce and Economic Development
Gambia: Mr. Bai Ebrahim Jobe, Deputy Permanent Secretary, Department of State for 
Trade Industry and Employment
Guinea: M. Mohamed Saïd Fofana, Directeur National du Commerce et de la 
Concurrence, Ministère du Commerce, de l'Industrie et des PME
M. Madikaba Camara, Conseiller économique, Ministère de l'Economie et
des Finances
M. Ansoumane Berete, Chef, Division des Politiques et Accords 
Commerciaux, Ministère du commerce, de l'Industrie et des petites et 
moyennes entreprises
Haiti: M. Ljoassin Clermont, Ministère du Commerce et de l'Industrie
M. Lionel Desir, Ministère de la Planification et de la Coordination Externe
Madagascar: M. Marie José Dahy, Directeur Général du Commerce, Ministère du 
Commerce et de la ConsommationWT/IFSC/2
Page 24
Mme Christiane Leong Ho Yng, Directeur des Relations Commerciales 
Internationales et de la Coopération Régionale, Secrétariat d'Etat chargé de la
Promotion du Commerce Extérieur
Maldives: Ms.  Nuha Mohamed Riza, Assistan t Undersecretary, Ministry of Finance & 
Treasury
Mr. Fazeel Najeeb, Deputy Director, In ternational Cooperation, Ministry of 
Trade and Industries
Mali: Mme Niamoto Ba Sangare, Direct rice Nationale du Commerce et de la 
Concurrence, Ministère de l'Industrie du Commerce et des Transports
Mauritania: Mme Khadidiata BA, Cadre à la Direction de la Promotion du Commerce 
Extérieur, Ministère du Commerce, de l'Artisanat et du Tourisme
M. Mohamed Ould el Abed, Ministère des Affaires Economiques et du 
Développement
M. Habib Ould Hemeth, Premier conseiller
Nepal: Mr. Shyam Prasad Mainali, Joint-Secretary, Ministry of Finance
Mr. Purusottam Ojha, Joint Secretary, Ministry of Industry, Commerce and 
Supplies
Sao Tome & Principe: Dra Ana Paula Sequeira de Mene zes, Technician to the Ministry of Planning 
and Finance in charge for Trade Issues
M. Olinto Afonso das Neves, Technicien supérieur de la Direction du 
Commerce, Direction du Commerce et de l'Industrie et du Tourisme
Senegal: M. Cheikh Saadbouh Seck, Directeur du Commerce Extérieur, Président du 
Comité de pilotage du Cadre intégré pour le Sénégal
M. Sogué Diarisso, Directeur de la Prévision et de la Statistique, Ministère 
des PME et du Commerce
Tchad: M. Ahmat Mahamat Bachir, Directeur Général Adjoint, Ministère du Plan, du
Développement et de la Coopération
M. Oumar Abdalah Lebine, Directeur du Commerce et Responsible du Point 
Focal du Cadre Intégré, Ministère du Commerce, de l'Industrie et de l'Artisanat
Togo: M. Manamba Simfeyedjowa, Administrateur Civil en Chef, Chef de Division,
Direction du Commerce Extérieur, Ministère du Commerce, de l'Industrie des
Transports et du Développement de la Zone Franche
M. Mawussi Djossou Semondji, Chef de l'Unité de Coordination de la 
Stratégie de Réduction de la Pauvreté, Ministère de l'Economie, des Finances 
et des PrivatisationsWT/IFSC/2
Page 25
Uganda: Mr. P Elimu Elyetu, Ministry of Tourism, Trade and Industry
Mr. Keith Muhakanizi, Director of Economic Affairs, Ministry of Finance, 
Planning and Economic Development
Yemen: Mr. Abdulwli Abdullah Al-Agel, Ad viser to the Minister of Planning and 
Development, Member of IF Steering Committee, Ministry of Industry and 
Trade
Mr. Mohamed Abdulaziz Galeb, IF Focal Point, Ministry of Industry and 
Trade
II. List of IFWG Representatives
IMF: Hans Peter Lankes, Chief, Trade Policy Division, Policy Development &
Review Department
Alexei Kireyev, Senior Economist, IMF Office in GenevaNatasha Koliadina, Economist, Trade Policy Division, Policy Development &
Review Department
ITC: Hendrik Roelofsen, Di rector, Division of Technical Cooperation Coordination
Francesco Geoffroy, Senior Trade Prom otion Officer, Technical Cooperation
Division
UNCTAD: Marcel Namfua, Interregional Adviser, Office for LDCs, Landlocked and
Island Developing Countries
UNDP: Georges Chapelier, Senior Policy Adviser, UNCTAD/UNDP Global
Programme on Globalization, Liberalization and Sustainable HumanDevelopment
Patrice Chiwota, Policy Specialist, Bureau of Development Policy
World Bank: Uri Dadush, Director,  Trade Department
Ataman Aksoy, Economic Advisor, Economic Policy and Prospects GroupLeendert Solleveld, Economic Policy and Prospects Group
Yvonne M. Tsikata, Senior Economist, Economic Policy, Poverty Reduction
and Economic Management Network
Helena Tang, Economic Policy, Poverty Reduction and Economic
Management Network
Elwyn Grainger-Jones, Trade Economis t World Bank Office in GenevaWT/IFSC/2
Page 26
WTO: Chiedu Osakwe (Chairman), Dire ctor, Technical Cooperation Division
Annet Blank, Counsellor, Technical Cooperation DivisionMaika Oshikawa (Secretary), Economic Affairs Officer, Technical
Cooperation Division
Carlos Perez del Castillo, Economic Affairs Officer, Technical Cooperation
Division and Trade Policy Review Division
III. List of Speakers
Opening Session:
WTO: Dr. Supachai Panitchpakdi, Director-General;
Lesotho: Hon. Timothy Thahane, Minister of Finance, Ministry of Finance;
Mexico Ambassador Perez-Motta on behalf of Minister Luis Ernesto Derbez,
Minister of Trade, Mexico;
Uganda: Mr. Emmanuel Tumushme-Mutebile, Governor, Bank of Uganda;
United States: Mrs. Carole Brookins, Executive Director (USA), World Bank.
Concluding Remarks:
Mr.  Sarath Rajapatirana, Visiting Scholar, American Enterprise Institute.
Working Session:
Mr. Charles Gore, UNCTAD;
Mr. David Luke, UNDP;
Mrs. Yvonne Tsikata, World Bank;Mr. Mohammed Ould el Abed, Ministry of Ec onomic Affairs and Development, Mauritania;
Mr. Andrea Nicolaj, European Commission;
Mr. Stephen Brown, UNDP;
Mr. Richard Garey, OECD;
Mrs. Charlotte Heath, DFID, UK ;Mr. Peter Kalil, Inter-American Development Bank;
Mr. Juan Jose Taccone,  Inter-American Development Bank;
Mr. Robert Anderson, WTO;
Mr. J Smadja,  International Trade Centre,  ITC;
Mr. B. Barclay,  International Trade Centre,  ITC;Mr. J. Crespo-Blanco,  International Trade Centre,  ITC;
Mr. Mohammed Ali Taslim, Chairman, Bangladesh Tariff Commission ;WT/IFSC/2
Page 27
IV. List of Participants from Invited Secretariats
African Development Bank: Mr. John C hukwudi Anyanwu, Principal Research 
Economist, Development Research Division, African 
Development Bank
Arab Monetary Fund: Dr. Jamel Zarrouk, Chief of Regional and 
International Organizations Division, Arab Monetary 
Fund
EBRD: Dr. Steven Fries, Deputy Chief Economist, EBRD
ECA: Dr. Cornelius Mwalwanda, Senior Economic Affairs 
Officer, Economic and Social Policy Division, ECA
Mr. Diery Seck, Director, African Institute for 
Economic Development and Planning (IDEP)
ECE: Mr. Tom Butterly, WTO Liaison Officer, UNECE
Mr. Jean Kubler, Deputy Head, Global Trade 
Solutions Branch, Trade and Timber Division, 
UNECE
ECLAC: Mrs. Vivianne Dias Vent ura, Director, International 
Commerce and Integration Division, CEPAL
ESCAP: Dr. Ravi Ratnayake, Chief, Trade Policy Section, 
Trade and Investme nt Division, UNESCAP
ESCWA: Mr Mohamad Radwan, Team Leader of the WTO 
Issues, Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia
Forum Secretariat: Mrs. Mere Falemaka, Trade Policy Adviser, Trade 
and Investment Division, Forum Secretariat
IADB: Mr. Peter Kalil, Chief, Integration, Trade and Hemispheric
Issues Division, Integration and Regional Programs
 Department, Inter-American Development Bank
INTAL: Mr. Juan José Taccone, Director, IDB Institute for the
Integration of Latin America and the Caribbean(IDB/INTAL)
OAS: Ms. Gisela Vegara, OAS Trade Specialist, Organization of
the American States
__________