RESTRICTEDWORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONWT/COMTD/LDC/M/18
17 January 2000
(00-0173)
Sub-Committee on Least-Developed Countries
Eighteenth Session
NOTE ON THE MEETING OF 19 NOVEMBER 1999
Chair:  Ambassador Benedikt Jónsson (Iceland)
I. ADOPTION OF AGENDA
1. The Sub-Committee adopted the proposed agenda contained in document WTO/AIR/1210.  It
was noted that no items were to be raised under Item D, "Other Business".
II. FOLLOW-UP TO THE HIGH-LEVEL MEETING ON LEAST-DEVELOPED
COUNTRIES
- Oral progress report on the Implementation of the Integrated Framework
2. The Chairman said that, as indicated in the Airgram, the meeting would concentrate on the
Integrated Framework for trade-related technical as sistance to least-developed countries (LDCs).  At
the last meeting, Members had underlined the importance of continuous monitoring by the
Sub-Committee of the Integrated Framework.  He had therefore proposed that the Sub-Committee
hold an additional meeting before the Seattle Ministerial Conference, so that delegations could be
informed about the latest developments and continue to monitor progress.  One reason for choosing
the date of the meeting so close to the Seattle Ministerial Conference had been for the Sub-Committee
to be able to consider what had happened at as  many round-table meetings as possible.  He had,
however, been informed that unfortunately some of  the round-tables scheduled to take place before
the meeting had been postponed.  Nevertheless, tw o round-tables had been held.  Another reason for
the choice of date had been for the Sub-Committee to be informed about developments in the
Inter-Agency process.  The six core Agencies involved in the Integrated Framework had held an
Inter-Agency meeting on 16 and 17 November 1999.
3. Mr. Osakwe, Co-ordinator of the WTO's work with the LDCs, said that he would focus on
two issues:  first, to provide information about th e round-tables and, second, to brief delegations about
the results of the meeting of the Inter-Agency Working Group.  Regarding the round-table meetings
he said that the round-table for The Gambia had been postponed to 23 and 24 November, and would
be held in Geneva.  The Bangladesh round-table had also been re-scheduled to take place on
22 January 2000.  The official report from the Tanzania round-table was available with the
Administrative Unit and could be obtained upon request.
4. Mr. Osakwe continued by saying that the report of the WTO Director-General on the
follow-up to the 1997 High-Level Meeting on LDCs would shortly be circulated.1  Paragraph 13 of
                                                     
1 "The High-Level Meeting on Integrated Initiatives for Least-Developed Countries' Trade
Development – Report by the Director-General on Follow-up to the High-Level Meeting", document
WT/MIN(99)/7 of 19 November 1999.WT/COMTD/LDC/M/18
Page 2
that report referred to the round-tables;  annexed to the report was a chart containing information such
as the date when needs assessments were completed and submitted, their document reference
numbers, the integrated responses by the six core Agencies, pre-informal round-table consultations,
consultations in connection with WTO Trade-Policy Reviews and consultations within the framework
of launch workshops.
5. Mr. Osakwe identified some of the results of the meeting of the Inter-Agency Working Group
on 16 and 17 November in Geneva.2  The Group had identified a number of policy issues arising from
the round-tables already held.  These policy issues, enumerated in paragraph 3(i)-(vii) of the report by
the six Agencies, were of a systemic nature, cutting across the round-table meetings and the
preparatory consultations held, and taking account of concerns and criticisms raised by Members,
including the results of the informal consultations of the Sub-Committee held on 28 July 1999.3  One
issue discussed was how to assess the results of round-table meetings.  The Group had seen a need toidentify a set of factors, on the basis of which the results of round-tables could be assessed.  Those
could be found in paragraph 4(a)-(i) of docume nt WT/COMTD/LDC/6.  Another issue arising from
the meeting was the report of the WTO Director-General on the follow-up to the High-Level Meeting.
That report had been drafted by the WTO Secretariat and, in keeping with transparency and coherence
in working with the other five core Agencies, comm ents by these Agencies had been incorporated into
the report.  The report had four components:  Market Access, Trade-Policy Reviews, Information
Technology and the part on the Integrated Framework which had been shared with the other five
Agencies.
6. Mr. Osakwe noted that, in the three years following the High-Level Meeting, the Integrated
Framework had come under criticism, and recommendations had been made for its improvement.  Atthe recent Inter-Agency Meeting, the six Agencies had decided to set out terms of reference on the
basis of which the review mandated under paragraph 6 of the Integrated Framework document
4 would
be conducted, and the steps for conducting that review exercise.  Elements to be included in the
review were:
(a) identifying perceptions of the objectives of the Integrated Framework: views of
involved parties;
(b) evaluation of the Integrated Framework with regard in particular to:
(i) the process of the Integrated Framework;
(ii) the output;
(iii) the implementation of integrated responses;
(iv) pledges, indications of assistance, new money;
(v) the impact of the Integrated Framework and the relevance and role of trade in
overall development strategy of LDCs.
                                                     
2 "Integrated Framework for Trade-Related Assistance to Least-Developed Countries. – Report of the
18th Inter-Agency Working Group Meeting, Geneva 16 and 17 November 1999", contained in document
WT/COMTD/LDC/6 of 24 November 1999.
3 The Chairman's report on the 28 July 1999 informal consultations was attached to document
WT/COMTD/LDC/M/17.
4 "An Integrated Framework for Trade-Related Technical Assistance, including for Human and
Institutional Capacity-Building, to Support Least-Developed Countries in Their Trade and Trade-RelatedActivities", WT/LDC/HL/1/Rev.1 of 23 October 1997.WT/COMTD/LDC/M/18
Page 3
(c) a review of trade-related assistance: institution-building, building human and
enterprise capacity and infrastructure;
(d) policy considerations: mainstreaming, enlargement of the Integrated Framework, the
trade and macro-economic policy environment;
(e) the administration of the Integrated Framework; and
(f) recommendations for the future.
7. Mr. Osakwe stressed that the impact of the Integrated Framework was a concern for many
WTO Members who were of the view that, even if the process itself was good, the real impact on the
LDCs had to be known.  It had therefore been  made part of the review.  Speaking of the
administration of the Integrated Framework, he recalled that the day-to-day administration of the
Integrated Framework was carried out by the Administrative Unit, physically located at the ITC;  ITC
thus bore a significant burden for the functioning of the Administrative Unit and had expressedseveral concerns to the other Agencies.  Even though the willingness of the ITC remained clear,
reliable and unambiguous, it was labouring under several constraints and the six Agencies had
decided that that also would constitute a term of the review.  The final part of the report of the
Inter-Agency meeting related to the steps of the review of the Integrated Framework.  In this
connection, the Inter-Agency Working Group had reached a conclusion which in his view had mettwo requirements:  first, to provide sufficient safeguards for the inclusion of the views of all parties
involved, including those of WTO Members and the six core Agencies;  second, to ensure that
whatever emerged from the review process would be balanced.  The steps defined by the
Inter-Agency Working Group could be found in paragraph 14(i)-(v) of the Inter-Agency report, which
stated that the World Bank would select a compet ent individual of high authority to provide the
Inter-Agency Working Group with a draft evaluation of the Integrated Framework.  That draft
evaluation would not be written in a vacuum, as the evaluator would work in consultation with
members of the Inter-Agency Working Group, LDC governments and their development partners.
Thus, all stakeholders of the Integrated Framework.  After an initial draft had been provided, the
Inter-Agency Working Group would consider and comment on it at a meeting in New York on21-22 March 2000.  Subsequently, the representatives of the Inter-Agency Working Group would
bring the report back to their respective Agencies for internal review of the draft.  The fourth step was
for the Heads of the six core Agencies to meet to consider the draft evaluation.  When the report had
been adopted by the Heads of the six Agencies it would be forwarded to the General Council of the
WTO as well as to the governing bodies of the other five core Agencies.  The Inter-Agency Working
Group had agreed that it would be desirable to conclude the review as early as possible and the six
Agencies were aiming to have it concluded by the end of April 2000.
8. The Chairman said that he found it interesting to hear that things were moving and he hoped
that all stakeholders would learn from the difficulties encountered in order to make the process
smoother in the future.
9. The representative of the World Bank said that he wished to bring to the attention of
delegations the work done by the Administrative Unit to pull together a compact and informative
tabulation of progress in the various LDCs, as attached to the report by the Director-General to the
Seattle Ministerial Meeting.  He thought that all Agencies were enthusiastic about the Integrated
Framework and looked forward to continued work in line with the report they had agreed on.  The
World Bank had recently incorporated the Integrated Framework into its normal business procedures
for LDCs.  He sought information about perspectives  on the process so far from the LDCs themselves.
He wished to get a deeper appreciation of the amount of work that had been done in the countries
which had moved forward so that the six Agencies could both note the excellent work done andWT/COMTD/LDC/M/18
Page 4
condition their responses and support for those countries to a better recognition of the effort made and
the challenges faced as they saw them.
10. The representative of the International Trade Centre said that he wished to reconfirm ITC's
commitment to the Integrated Framework process.  ITC had been active as one of the six core
Agencies and the principal support Agency for the Administrative Unit.  At the current stage in theIntegrated Framework process, as preparations for trade-related round-tables were progressing in
growing numbers of LDCs, ITC was allocating staff and financial resources through its Global Trust
Fund to meet requests for assistance coming from concerned LDCs' focal points.  ITC was also
finalizing arrangements for additional substantial resources that would be allocated to support
preparations in LDCs which were just beginning active participation in the Integrated Framework
initiative.
11. The representative of the International Monetary Fund reiterated that the IMF fully supported
the aims of the Integrated Framework to increase the benefits that LDCs derived from trade-related
technical assistance in order to enhance their trade opportunities and to enable them to respond more
readily to market demands and to integrate them more fully into the multilateral trading system.  The
Fund had been an active participant in the Integr ated Framework initiative and continued to stand
ready to assist the LDCs in their reform efforts and would work closely with the Inter-AgencyWorking Group.
12. The representative of UNCTAD said that he hoped that UNCTAD could make its
contribution to the efficient functioning of the Inter-Agency Working Group for the benefit of the
LDCs.  UNCTAD reiterated its commitment to delivering within the Integrated Framework in terms
of responding to the needs of the LDCs.  There wa s impatience on the part of the LDCs in terms of
the Integrated Framework delivery, as seen from the number of requests received from LDCs to assist
them by providing substantive technical support in preparing for round-tables. UNCTAD would
always respond positively to the extent that resources were available.
13. The representative of Japan said that she had attended several informal pre-round-table
consultations.  What had been remarkable throughout those meetings was the serious sense of
commitment of the recipient countries.  It went in line with the concept of "ownership" in which her
Government believed that the developing count ries should take the initiative for their own
development and commit themselves to it.  Her Government therefore valued highly such an
endeavour expressed by the recipient countries and wished to continue to support those efforts.  In
fact, her Government had recently made contributions to some of the projects proposed within the
scheme for Haiti, at the round-table held a few weeks earlier.  However, the general progress of the
Integrated Framework seemed to be somewhat slow .  Since the High-Level Meeting in 1997, only a
few countries had held either an informal or formal meeting.  In this connection, her delegation
wished to be informed of ongoing preparations of projects for the countries which were not planning
to hold a meeting in an immediate future.  Her Go vernment also wished to be informed of the way
that core agencies coordinated among themselves on preparation and implementation of projects.
Lastly, a very important issue had been raised by Mr. Osakwe on how to assess the results of theround-tables.  Her delegation was of the view that the value of pledges made at the round-tables
would not necessarily determine the result of the round-table meeting, as her delegation viewed
round-tables not only as a forum for pledges but also, and more importantly, a forum where recipient
countries, international agencies and donor countries discussed effective development strategies for
the recipient country concerned.  Furthermore, her delegation believed that "the post round-tablephase" was as important as the round-table meeting as it was the crucial period during which a close
dialogue between the recipient country and its development partners should be encouraged to
continue.  Further commitment on the part of the development partners could be consolidated as a
result of such a dialogue.WT/COMTD/LDC/M/18
Page 5
14. The representative of Lesotho referred to the consultations with LDCs in the review of the
Integrated Framework and asked if there was any provision to revisit the needs assessment that had
been submitted by LDC Members.  His delegation was of the opinion that some of the issues raised in
those needs assessments might no longer be valid.  To increase "ownership" it was important that
there was close cooperation between all Members to ensure that the needs assessments were still validso that whatever programmes came out of the initiative were not misdirected or based on assumptions
that were no longer valid.
15. Mr. Osakwe said that the needs assessments would be reviewed in the multi-year
programmes.  However, he had noted the statement by the representative of Lesotho.  This would be
communicated to the evaluator when he began his process of consultations with LDC governments
and with the Inter-Agency Working Group.
16. The representative of Haiti said that previous interventions had given an impression that
everything in the Integrated Framework functioned perfectly.  However, things were very different in
the field.  He had just come back from Haiti where a sectoral round-table on trade had been held.  At
the government level, everything that had been asked for had been done for the round-table to be a
success.  It had also been a success at the broader national level.  The Prime Minister had opened the
meeting, the Trade Minister had chaired it, the Minister of Planning and Cooperation, the CentralBank, and all ministries concerned with trade issues had been present.  Even more surprising was the
presence of a large number of representatives of the private sector, where the Chamber of Commerce
throughout the country, not only from the capital, had been present.  The aim had been for a meeting
of around forty people;  in reality about a hundred had come to show the interest they attached.  The
press had covered the event.  Everything had gone well until the point when, on the second day, thedevelopment partners were invited to give substantive responses to the programme presented by the
Government: i.e. the multi-year programme placed in  the framework of cooperation within the public
sector and between the public sector and the private sector that the Government had been asked to
prepare.
17. The representative of Haiti continued by saying  that preparation for the round-table in Haiti
had also been an occasion for the six Agencies to coordinate among themselves.  He recalled that, at
previous meetings of the Sub-Committee, he had complained about the lack of coordination among
the six Agencies.  He was now in a position to say that everything had been done to ensure
coordination among the Agencies.  The Agency which he had previously complained about most had
been the Agency which had given the most positive response during the round-table, i.e. the
World Bank, whose behaviour had been exemplary during the entire round-table.  It was one of, if not
the only, Agency to have given a clear and precise response.  The World Bank had already called amission to begin work on an export insurance project.  The World Bank, together with the European
Communities and Japan had addressed one of the most critical issues when they had spoken about the
problem of infrastructure to foster trade.  The World Bank had undertaken to continue to establish the
necessary infrastructure in cooperation with the Government.  It was currently no more than promises,
but it was a good beginning.
18. On the other hand, statements in Geneva by his Government's main bilateral partners had not
been reflected by commitments in Port-au-Prince.  That had been something of a frustration for his
Trade Minister.  His Minister would raise that problem at Seattle and Haiti's partners should be
prepared as he believed that his Minister would stand firm in his position with regard to the "comedy"
he been forced into by the international community.
5
                                                     
5 The statement by Haiti at the Seattle Ministerial Conference can be found in document
WT/MIN(99)/ST/79.  Attention is particularly drawn to paragraphs 4-6 of the statement.WT/COMTD/LDC/M/18
Page 6
19. In spite of the difficulties faced by his country, the Government had not spared any effort.  It
had received valuable support from the ITC and the Administrative Unit.  By contrast, the UNDP,
despite its good work in the run-up, had to his surprise  not been an ideal facilitator at the round-table.
His Minister would state things frankly.  His Government had undertaken all the preparatory work,
but when it came to the realization of promises very few of the partners had been present at themeeting even though they were represented in the capital.  There were even certain delegations in
Geneva which, just shortly before, had claimed to have transmitted all information to their capitals
and which had said that there would be concrete pledges, which finally had not even been represented
at the round-table in Port-au-Prince.  His Go vernment was therefore somewhat frustrated.
20. The representative of Haiti stated his concern on hearing that the round-table for Bangladesh
had been postponed.  Delegations had to realize that something was not working as it should.  If one
only considered the Integrated Framework on paper, it worked perfectly.  However, in the light of theHaitian experience, it really had to be reconsidered whether the Integrated Framework was a project
worth continuing.  If not, it should be completely abandoned so that LDC governments did not
continue to look ridiculous.  His Government, having done all that was demanded, currently felt
ridiculed by the international community.  His Government had undertaken enormous commitments,
and those who knew the situation of Haiti knew the constraints under which it was working.  The
Government had made super-human efforts to carry out the round-table successfully.  The document
had been ready and there had been no complaints about it.  It contained projects representing the
priorities of the Government;  however, no funds had been pledged for them.  When he was in Haiti
he had thought that it was because of the political situation of his country that its development
partners did not participate.  Other factors proved that that was not the case.  Bangladesh, which was a"pet country" for donors apparently had to postpone the holding of its round-table as well.  The
Gambia should have held its round-table even before Haiti, but it was scheduled for
24 November 1999.  That situation gave rise to c oncern.  He did not wish to disappoint those who
believed that everything was going well, but something was not working properly.  The evaluation,
with the assistance of the Inter-Agency Work ing Group, sounded perfect on paper.  However, he
wished to see that the LDCs who were said to be the "owners" of the process were asked for their
opinions.  The LDCs should be able to feel that they were the owners of the process and that they
received the answers they merited.  If LDCs made all necessary efforts to prepare for the holding of a
round-table, received the support of the Administrative Unit and the six Agencies, and could still not
manage to find funding for prioritized projects, the Integrated Framework should be scrapped.  If the
means did not exist, it was no longer necessary to create a coordination mechanism for the LDCs;  to
demand that it should be coordinated by one of the WTO Deputy Directors-General;  to demand freemarket access for LDCs' exports; and to say that there was a willingness to integrate the LDCs into
the multilateral trading system.  That comedy should cease and delegations should concentrate on
what was achievable.  The situation was serious.  It had taken time to arrive at the current situation.  A
justified discontent was growing, unfortunately mostly within the WTO, but it was the WTO which
had initiated the experience in Singapore and the other Agencies had joined in.  His Government wasready to make yet another effort, but there had to be an effort on the part of the bilateral partners as
well to take the LDCs seriously.
21. He noted that, in the Sub-Committee, it was constantly reiterated that it was the LDCs who
were the owners of the process and who were responsible for the projects.  However, in a UNDP
report, whether it was reflecting the views of the UNDP or the person writing the report, it had beenstated that the projects had to be owned by thos e who financed them.  He asked how LDCs should
interpret that.  It was first stated that the LDCs should be responsible for their own development and
that their Governments should present their development strategies, and then that the Government was
not in charge but rather those who financed the projects.  There seemed to be a problem there.  It was
strange to hear, in the middle of all talk about the responsibility of the LDCs, that one of the coreAgencies said that the responsibility was with the financing party.  The situation had to be clarified.
He said that, with his intervention, he had wished to take stock of what had happened so far andWT/COMTD/LDC/M/18
Page 7
highlight his delegation's concern.  His Government had lived up to its responsibilities.  The ball was
in the court of the Government's development partners, who had to give a response.
22. The representative of Tanzania said that her Government had been actively preparing the
ground for the implementation of the Integrated Framework.  Last month, her Government had
organized a pre-round-table meeting with the assist ance of the World Bank.  At that meeting, gaps
had been identified which would require intervention by the international Agencies and support from
the donor community.  Much remained to be done in  moving the process forward in preparation for
the round-table which was planned to take place during the World Bank Consultative Group meeting
for Tanzania in May 2000.  In order for that to materialize, her Government needed support.  This had
been requested from UNCTAD and her Government believed that UNCTAD would be coming
forward to assist with technical and substantia l back-stopping.  At the round-table meeting of
May 2000 her Government expected to receive financial pledges from the donors who supported theIntegrated Framework.  Her delegation welcomed that the six core Agencies were planning to carry
out a review of the Integrated Framework and it s operations as envisaged at the 1997 High-Level
Meeting, and hoped that it would contribute significantly to its revitalization.  However, her
delegation was of the opinion that the review should be undertaken by an independent review team as
opposed to an individual consultant.  Since after the review, the report would be made available to the
governing bodies of the core Agencies, an inde pendent team, including one of the LDCs, would
ensure a more objective look at the operational problems experienced in the implementation of the
Integrated Framework.  It would give a more balanced review with respect to how to make the
Integrated Framework more effective in addressing  trade-related technical cooperation.  The views of
the LDCs' governments and their development partners should be sought in the course of the reviewas foreseen in the Integrated Framework document.
23. The representative of Djibouti said that he wished to share a positive experience of the six
Agencies.  He thanked Mr. Bélisle of the ITC for the technical assistance provided in September 1999
to launch the first phase of the round-table process.  ITC had offered a high-level expert, in the person
of Mr. Geoffroy, who he had followed to Djibouti in September to inform the Government and theother concerned institutions in Djibouti.  It was a positive experience as they had informed the
Government, the private sector and the six agencies in Djibouti about the importance of future
preparatory work for the holding of a round-table.  He hoped that that would lead to a positive result
in the future.  The essential was that all sectors concerned knew how to coordinate and how to put in
place a common process.  He hoped that after the Third Ministerial Conference, his Government
would already have prepared a draft document for th e round-table.  He was grateful for what had been
done by the UN agencies represented in Djibouti; i.e. the UNDP, the World Bank, IMF, as well as therepresentative of the European Communities, which had shown a willingness to assist the
Government in the preparations of a transparent document reflecting the views of all.
24. The representative of the European Communities said that his delegation was encouraged by
the efforts made to translate into operational conclusions what many delegations had been looking for
at the meetings of last summer on improving the Integrated Framework.  His delegation's firstimpression of the report of the Inter-Agency meeting was positive.  However, there was also scope for
analyzing what the interventions by the LDCs ha d brought into the discussion.  They showed that
there was a continuous need to evaluate and to se e how the basic idea of the Integrated Framework,
which all seemed to agree upon, could be made to work in the best possible way.  In the report of the
Inter-Agency Working Group, there was a list of factors that could be relevant in the factualassessment of the results of the round-table.  His delegation was of the view that the points (a) to (i) in
paragraph 4 were points worth taking into account in the preparation of the round-tables and not only
at their assessment.  Two preparatory meetings for round-tables had been held in Geneva which some
had considered as pure pledging meetings.  His delegation had claimed that they should be something
more than pledging meetings and that they should include positive coherence and other elements.  IfWT/COMTD/LDC/M/18
Page 8
that was done, it might bring expectations more into  line with the results of the round-tables in the
end.
25. Regarding Part C of the report, on "mainstreaming", he noted that there seemed to be
differences among the Agencies.  However, his delegation had the impression that it had already been
agreed that one Agency (normally UNDP or the World Bank) would take the lead and bring the trade-related aspects into their respective meetings.   What had been stated indicated that there now seemed
to be an ongoing discussion.  Some enlightenm ent on where things stood would be useful for
delegations after the long discussions held on taking trade out of the World Bank and UNDP meetings
and now putting it back in.  He asked what the actual state of play was.  His delegation was of the
opinion that the review, mentioned in Part F of the report, was a good start and wished to be kept
informed about how the review was proceeding.  On a first reading the date seemed ambitious,
something his delegation welcomed.  The review should be carried out as quickly as possible and hisdelegation would be disappointed if, once the deadline of April 2000 had been set, that date would not
be held.  It would be useful to have the results from the review as soon as possible.  Finally, his
delegation sought information about what assistance and financing the ITC would need from the other
Agencies for the Administrative Unit, as stated in Part G of the report.  Delegations did not wish to
see problems in the daily running of the Administrative Unit because, if the Administrative Unit didnot function, the rest of the Integrated Fr amework would not function properly either.
26. The representative of Uganda said that it was encouraging, as seen from the report of the
Inter-Agency Working Group, that there seemed to be coordination and a meeting of minds.
However, in order to be translated into real action, that cooperation had to percolate down to the
country-level.  In that respect, Part C on "mains treaming" became critical.  His Government had
already held a round-table in the margins of a World Bank Consultative Group meeting.  His
Government had aimed at ensuring that in considering the policy framework paper, trade would be
mainstreamed, not only by the agencies, but also by the Government itself.  While that was the
objective, there was also a danger that had to be taken into account:  trade could easily get side-lined
when issues such as the global aspects of finance and macroeconomic stability were dealt with.  Howto use the round-table mechanism to produce the appropriate results had to be carefully examined.  He
was encouraged by what the World Bank had said about integrating the Inte grated Framework into its
country programmes.  He hoped the same was true for the UNDP, as the country level was critical.
His delegation was looking forward to see that issue taken up in the evaluation report.  As his
delegation was one of those which had emphasized the importance of an evaluation, he wished to
ensure that the outcome of the evaluation would feed back into an improvement of the Integrated
Framework.  He therefore welcomed the elements mentioned in paragraph 13 of the report of theInter-Agency Working Group as elements of focus for the evaluation as well as the steps to be taken.
It was important that the views of the LDCs, the recipients themselves, be taken into account at
various stages of the evaluation.  The evaluation should be developed as part of a capacity building
exercise.  That tied into what had been said by the representative of Japan.  The post-round-table
processes had to be considered in terms of their impact on trade assistance and capacity building at thenational level.  The Integrated Framework should also be seen in the context of other relevant
programmes carried out by the Agencies, such as the JITAP, for those to be synchronized.  He took
note of the experience of the representative of Haiti, who had raised important issues which merited
attention.
27. The representative of Lesotho said that he wish ed to underscore the issue of post round-table
follow-up, which had been highlighted by the representatives of Japan and Uganda.  The experience
of his Government was that organizing the round-table was the easy part, while the difficult part was
to follow-up on the pledges and the process.  A structure should therefore be created to assist LDC
Members to follow-up on the outcome of the round-table at the country level to ensure that whatever
projects came out of the round-table were implemented as agreed.  The structure should also ensurethat the link between the Governments' cooperating partners and the Agencies was maintained.  WhatWT/COMTD/LDC/M/18
Page 9
normally happened was that, immediately after a round-table conference, the Agencies that had
helped coordinate the round-table disappeared from the scene.  The LDC Members were then left with
the task of following up on whatever came out of the round-table.  As most LDCs had supply-side
problems, it was not easy for them to do that and as a result, the positive outcome of a round-table
was not fully realized.  It was therefore important that the content was maintained throughout theprocess, especially after the round-table meeting.
28. The representative of Bangladesh said that the experience of Haiti had not been as
encouraging as was be expected.  However, despit e the Haitian experience, his Government planned
to go ahead.  Unfortunately, the round-table for Bangladesh, which had initially been scheduled for
25 November 1999 had been postponed at the last moment, but he did not have full information as to
why.6  His Government's experience in the run-up to the round-table had not been as pleasant as it had
expected it to be in the sense that the responses from the Agencies had not been as warm, quick andspontaneous as expected.  Even if it was understandable that they had their own difficulties of
coordination, his Government was ready whereas the Agencies were not.  However, his Government's
respect for the Agencies had not been lessened because of that.  The multi-year program document
prepared by professionals in his capital on instructions and information given by the mission in
Geneva, the WTO, the ITC and others was already on the Internet.  In light of the postponement of theround-table for Bangladesh, his Government felt that interested donors and Agencies might look at the
projects in the document that also gave a brief outline of things that needed to be done.  Rather than to
wait for the round-table meeting to take place, donors, development partners and friends could pick
their item from the menu in the document and go ah ead to finance or implement it.  There was no
legally binding obligation to go through a round-ta ble before acting.  His Government was ready to
begin action.  The document was available on the Web, with the Administrative Unit and at his
mission and could be supplied upon request.  His Government remained committed to the fulfilment
of its side of the responsibilities in the round-table process.
29. Mrs. Bartoli of the WTO Secretariat, who had attended the Haiti Round-Table, said that she
found the report by the representative of Haiti complete and precise.  In her own back-to-office report
she had tried to underline three types of coordination by which the effectiveness of the Integrated
Framework was to be judged, i.e. coordination among the six multilateral Agencies, among LDCs
governments, and among other development partne rs.  Coordination among agencies had functioned
well for Haiti and the other round-tables, as well as coordination within the different parts of the LDC
government.  In fact, an effort should be made by  the LDC government during the preparation of the
multi-year programme to clarify and agree on a coherent trade policy.  That had been well done in
Haiti, Tanzania and Uganda, which were the three round-tables she knew best.  It was also done in themulti-year programme for Bangladesh.  In addition, the coordination between the Government and the
private sector was important in the LDCs.  That  had been achieved in Haiti, Tanzania, and
Bangladesh.  The partnership between the government and the private sector, which was created
during the preparatory process of the Integrated Framework had been underlined as a lasting success
in the conclusions of the Round-Table of Haiti.  Two of the three types of coordination had thusfunctioned well in Haiti, but the third type, coordination among bilateral donors - i.e. between the
trade representatives in Geneva and the development representative normally participating at the local
Round-Tables - had not been successful.  She agreed with the representative of the European Union
that pledges were not the only criteria for the success of a Round-Table, but she assumed that he did
not mean that pledges were not an important criteria.  Coordination among bilateral donors must beimproved: it had to be ensured that what was said in Geneva about trade-related assistance as a
development priority, was also reflected in the donors' capitals and in their missions in the LDCs.
30. Mr. Osakwe said that he and his colleagues in the Inter-Agency Working Group were grateful
for the warm reception that the report they had circulated had received.  Several points had been
                                                     
6 Rescheduled for 22 January 2000.WT/COMTD/LDC/M/18
Page 10
raised by Members which would be taken into account, including the comment by the representative
of Uganda that, in the consultations to be undertaken by the evaluator producing the first draft of the
evaluation, explicit account should be taken of the views expressed by LDC governments.  That point
was also mentioned in the report and the Inter-Ag ency Working Group would ensure that that would
be done.
31. Members had raised seven specific policy issues.  The first concerned pledges, of which
Mrs. Bartoli had already spoken.  Japan and the European Communities had "implored" the
Sub-Committee to remember that pledges, were not the only criteria for assessing the results of
round-tables.  The Inter-Agency Working Group agr eed.  That was why pledges were only one out of
seven variables identified for the assessment.  Second, the representative of Lesotho had mentioned
that as most needs assessments had been completed about two years earlier, they had to be updated
and revised.  They would be reviewed in the contex t of the multi-year programmes and some sort of
revision would need to be taken into account in th e course of the review exercise.  The third point,
raised by the representative of Haiti, was that th ere was something in the Integrated Framework that
was not functioning.  He did not wish to make any comment which would prejudice the review at that
moment.  As had been said in the beginning, the Integrated Framework should be reviewed in its
entirety.  The comment that the pledges might not be functioning had been noted, and was consideredas the view of an important LDC Member that would be taken up in the review process.  The report of
the review should be objective and meaningful for Members.  Fourth, the representative of Tanzania
had expressed the opinion that the review should be conducted by an independent team.  The
Inter-Agency Working Group had considered all options, including having an independent reviewer.
However, it was an Inter-Agency institutional exercise  in which the institutional sensitivities of all the
Agencies involved had to be respected.  The Integrated Framework operated within the context of an
intergovernmental exercise.  What was critical was that the results of the evaluation exercise were
balanced.  He was confident that the steps for the review detailed in paragraph 14 of the report of the
Inter-Agency Working Group would lead to balanced results.  Fifth, a point about mainstreaming had
been raised by the representative of Uganda.  There were round-tables which took place in the contextof World Bank Consultative Group meetings or UNDP Round-Tables.  The point made by the
representative of Uganda was that mainstreaming had value and benefits, but what was critical was
that trade was central even in those round-tables.  Sixth, the representative of the European
Communities had mentioned the running of the Administrative Unit.  The Administrative Unit was
the daily motor for the operation of the Integrated Framework.  It was physically located at the ITC,
which had borne and continued to bear a disproportionate burden with regard to the space and
resources it invested.  That had created real difficulties.  This would also be the subject of review.The seventh and final point related to evaluation.  He was pleased that the steps outlined for the
review in the report of the Inter-Agency Working Group had been welcomed by the Members of the
Sub-Committee.  The Inter-Agency Working Group would pursue it with vigour.  The ambitious
deadline for the review had been set in light of the urgency and priority Members had attached to it.
The Integrated Framework had existed for only about  two years.  These two years had constituted a
learning period.  The Agencies were trying to develop an institutional rhythm, reflexes and standard
operating procedures.  There was confidence that they would get there, but what was most important
was that Members were unanimous in considering the Integrated Framework a good idea that should
be better implemented.  The Agencies were all deeply committed to that.
32. The representative of Lesotho posed a question with regard to the proposal to enlarge the
Core Group of Agencies.  His delegation appreciated the concerns raised with regard to undertaking a
possible enlargement.  However, it was of the view that there was an urgent need to consider
including some other intergovernmental organizations with active trade-related technical cooperation
activities.  One example was that the LDCs were seeking enhanced market access while even if LDCs
were to get full market access the following day, it would still be difficult for them to take fulladvantage of it because of the nature of their exports.  Most LDC exports did not contain any value-
added.  It was therefore important to ensure that most LDC exports had some value-added and thatWT/COMTD/LDC/M/18
Page 11
there was a certain degree of product diversification.  LDCs would otherwise not be able to take full
advantage of the market access opportunities sought.  That brought him to the organizations which
were helping LDCs in that regard, one of them being UNIDO.  For the initiative to be meaningful,
there had to be a wider approach to the problems of LDCs.  Even if capacity problems were addressed
from the administrative side, there would still be problems on the other side.  If an initiative was tohave any impact, supply-side constraints had to be given the urgent consideration they deserved.  His
delegation was aware that this might pose some administrative coordination problems, but it was
worth considering if LDCs were to benefit fu lly from the Integrated Framework initiative.
33. Mr. Tulloch of the WTO Secretariat, said that he had listened carefully to all the remarks
made and wished to add a couple of things from the point of view of a director who was in charge of a
division which was supposed to overview all the development efforts in the WTO but which was not
directly in charge of the day-to-day running of the Integrated Framework.  When he came to themeeting, he had been prepared to say that, although the Integrated Framework had been a slow
process in getting started, the fact that a number of round-table meetings were about to be held or
which had been held showed that things were beginning to go well.  He hoped that that was still the
case.  He had taken good note of the highly critical remarks made by the representative of Haiti.  He
could well understand his disappointment and frustration after seeing all the work that he and hisGovernment had put into the preparation of the round-table.  The full title of the "Integrated
Framework for Trade-Related Technical Assistance, including for Human and Institutional
Capacity-Building, to Support LDCs in Their Trade and Trade-Related Activities" was worth
recalling.  As had been stated by the representative of Lesotho, the capacity-building exercise was a
key to the whole effort and the focus should be on it in the coming year, both when conductingexercises under the Integrated Framework and when  reviewing its operation.  It had been said many
times in the Sub-Committee that the results of the Integrated Framework was not the round-table
meetings, the round-tables were merely a stage on the way.  The round-tables had to result in practical
projects on the ground.  That was the success by which it should be judged.  The Inter-Agency
Working Group had looked honestly at the process.  There was a need to continue that follow-up.The outcomes of round-tables, including the projects that might result from them, had to be carefully
monitored.  The representative of Japan had raised the question of what was happening in relation to
planned round-table meetings and LDCs which had not yet held round-tables.  A first stage round-
table had been held for Tanzania which was to be completed at a Consultative Group meeting in
May 2000.  Delegations had received a report on the Haiti round-table by the representative of Haiti.
The Government of The Gambia would hold a round-table, assisted mainly by the UNDP, on 23 and
24 November 1999 in Geneva.  The round-table for Bangladesh had been postponed untilJanuary 2000.  The Government of Mauritania planned to hold a pre-round-table workshop (assises de
commerce) on 10-12 January 2000 in Nouakchott, a nd was planning the holding of a round-table in
March 2000.  Other countries such as Malawi, Zambia, Guinea, Mali and Burundi were also preparing
for round-tables to be held in the first part of the year 2000.  Full information on the present state of
round-table planning could be found on the Integrated Framework Website which was continuouslyupdated.
7  He assured the representative of Haiti that his comments had been taken note of by the
Secretariat.
34. The Chairman said that since the Sub-Committee had to keep the Committee on Trade and
Development and the General Council informed about developments in the Sub-Committee, he
suggested that he would write a letter to the Chairperson of the Committee on Trade and Developmentto be forwarded to the Chairman of the General Council, to which he would attach the
Director-General's report on the Integrated Framewor k.  He would also mention the main points raised
during the discussion and Members would receive a copy of the letter.
35. It was so agreed.
                                                     
7 http://www.ldcs.orgWT/COMTD/LDC/M/18
Page 12
36. The Chairman continued by saying that he believed that the information-sharing aspect of the
discussion was important.  However, he thought that the Sub-Committee could be somewhat more
creative.  In the Sub-Committee, delegations had followed the Integrated Framework quite closely for
a long time.  Many delegations, representing LDCs, development partners of the LDCs and others had
pointed out problems with the implementation of the Integrated Framework.  Difficulties had alsobeen mentioned in various oral and written reports by the Secretariat.  He therefore asked delegations
if they would find it useful for the Sub-Committee to submit a paper to the Inter-Agency Working
Group, stating concerns raised and suggesting possible ways to improve the functioning of the
Integrated Framework.  If delegations agreed, he suggested that the Sub-Committee ask the
Secretariat to make a compilation of concerns rais ed and improvements suggested for consideration at
the following meeting.
37. It was so agreed and the Sub-Committee took note
 of the statements made.
III. REPORT BY THE SECRETARIAT REGARDING THE COMPILATION OF
EXISTING MARKET ACCESS INFORMATION
38. The Chairman said that the meeting had been ca lled essentially to discuss progress in the
Integrated Framework.  However, he had found it ap propriate to also draw delegations attention to the
document containing the compilation of existing information on market access barriers facing LDCs
exports.  As delegations would recall, the Secretariat had provided delegations whose country name
appeared in the tables with copies of the tables for verification and updating.  The deadline for
submitting changes to the Secretariat had been set to first November 1999.  However, some
delegations had asked for more time and flexibility had been offered.  The Sub-Committee had, at itslast meeting, asked the Secretariat to circulate a final version of the tables.  It had now been issued as
document WT/COMTD/LDC/W/16.  The Sub-Committee had also asked the Secretariat to write a
short note summarizing and giving an overview of the data compiled.  Work on this note was still in
progress.  In addition, delegations had only received the tables a couple of days ago.  He therefore
suggested that the issue be taken up for thorough discussion at the following meeting of the Sub-Committee and that the Secretariat be asked to circulate the summary note in good time for that
meeting.
39. It was so agreed.
__________