RESTRICTEDWORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONWT/COMTD/M/32
17 May 2001
(01-2528)
Committee on Trade and Development
Thirty-Second Session
NOTE ON THE MEETING OF 16 FEBRUARY 2001
Chairman:  H. E. Mr. Ransford Smith (Jamaica)
A. ADOPTION OF THE DRAFT AGENDA
1. The Chairman said that the draft agenda for the meeting, contained in airgram
WTO/AIR/1473 of 22 January, was adopted with the following modifications.  A request for observer
status from the Organisation Internationale de la Francophonie was taken up under Item B,
sub-item (III).  Item C on Notifications under the Enabling Clause was divided into three sub-items:(I) Central Aftrican Economic and Monetary Union, (II) Generalized System of Preferences –
Notifications by Canada and Norway, and ( III) Proposed reform of Japan's GSP Scheme.
2. The Chairman indicated that he would be making announcements under "Other Business" on
a forthcoming CTD seminar on electronic commerce and on plans for an internship scheme for
missions in Geneva.
3. The Chairman also indicated that he had a request from Ambassador Jonsson, Chairman of
the Sub-Committee on Least-Developed Countries (SCLDC), to make a brief statement on the
Integrated Framework (IF).  Since Ambassador Jonsson had other commitments, the Chairman
proposed to hear from Ambassador Jonsson following the adoption of the agenda.  It was so agreed.
B. STATEMENT BY CHAIRMAN OF SUB-COMMITTEE ON LEAST-DEVELOPED
COUNTRIES
4. The Chairman of the Sub-Committee on Least-Developed Countries said that, pursuant to the
decision taken at the 23rd Session of the SCLDC on 12 February 2001, the proposal on an Integrated
Framework Pilot Scheme, together with the reco mmendations contained in the proposal, had been
adopted.  He highlighted the four elements of the proposal for the pilot scheme. First, the  pilot
scheme would initiate the work on mainstreaming a trade integration chapter into countrydevelopment and poverty reduction strategies.  The IF would be the mechanism to assist the trade
integration process within the policy framework of the World Bank Poverty Reduction Strategy
papers.  This was one of the key elements highlighted in the 6 July decision of Heads of IF Core
Agencies.  The pilot scheme would focus first on those LDCs which had demonstrated a clear choice
and commitment to mainstream trade.  Once positive results were achieved, consideration would begiven, no later than at the WTO 4
th Ministerial Conference, to extend the initiative to other LDCs.
Second, the pilot scheme had established an IF Trust Fund which was indispensable for the purposes
of implementation.  The establishment of the IF Trust Fund was also consistent with one of the key
objectives of the core agencies, namely, to transform the IF from an unfounded into a funded
mandate.  Third, the pilot scheme would elaborate a coordinated, sequenced and prioritisedprogramme of technical assistance within the PRS policy framework.  This programme of trade-
related technical assistance and trade-related capaci ty building would include infrastructural needs, toWT/COMTD/M/32
Page 2
be considered at either World Bank consultative groups or United Nations on Development
Programme round tables.  The decision made clear th at the trust fund would fund technical assistance
exceptionally.  Finally, the pilot scheme would establish an IF Steering Committee and at the same
time strengthen the existing inter-agency working group.  The steering committee would comprise all
stakeholders.  Members were keen to ensure that the composition of the IF steering committee wouldimprove coordination, ownership, responsibility and involvement of all stakeholders.  The decision
would provide support to the six core agencies, partic ularly with regard to the joint statement issued
on 6 July 2000.  This decision on the IF Pilot Scheme represented the first concrete step in
implementing the joint statement.  More importantly , the IF had now been placed on a footing where
all parties, donors, LDCs, agencies and others had shared responsibilities.  After a long period in
which no progress had been made on the IF, the Chairman expressed his own sense of relief that
negotiations amongst donors, LDCs and agencies had made this decision possible, which he believedwould deliver benefits to the most vulnerable Members.  Although there was more work to be done on
the implementation of the pilot scheme, he hoped that others would share the satisfaction felt by
himself and other members of the SCLDC on its adoption.  He was confident that this was a major
step forward, including in a WTO confiden ce building in the preparation for the 4
th Ministerial
Meeting of the WTO.
C. REQUEST FOR ATTENDANCE OF AD HOC OBSERVERS
1. Request for attendance for ad hoc observers
5. The Chairman recalled that at previous sessions of the Committee on Trade and
Development (CTD) it had been agreed to invite the following intergovernmental organizations on an
ad hoc, meeting-by-meeting basis: the Arab Ma ghreb Union (AMU);  the Economic Community of
West African States (ECOWAS);  the Economic C ooperation Organisation (ECO);  the Inter-Arab
Investment Guarantee Corporation;  the Islamic Development Bank (IDB);  the Organisation of
African Unity (OAU);  Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC);  the South Centre;  the South
Pacific Forum;  the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP); the West African Economicand Monetary Union (WAEMU);  and the World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO).  He
proposed that  these organisations be invited to the next formal meeting of the CTD.  This was agreed.
2. Further Consideration of request for observer status by League of Arab States, the
Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), and the Gulf Organization
for Industrial Consulting
6. The Chairman recalled that the CTD had three outstanding request for observer status from
the League of Arab States, from OPEC and from the Gulf Organization for Industrial Consulting.  He
also noted that, pending the outcome of the General Council process, these would be on an ad hoc
basis.  Following the previous meeting of the CT D, a request for further information from OPEC in
support of its request had been made and copies of the response, received the previous day, were in
the room.  He asked whether the CTD was in a position to make a decision on these requests.
7. The representative of Egypt welcomed the requests and supported the granting of ad hoc
observer status pending decisions in the General Council.  He also supported the request for observer
status from the Organisation Internationale de la Francophonie (the next sub-item), but wanted the
same status to be given to the four organizations together.
8. The representative of Israel regretted that it was not in a position to agree to the request from
the League of Arab States.WT/COMTD/M/32
Page 3
9. The representative of the United States supported the requests for ad hoc observer status for
the Gulf Organization for Industrial Consulting, and was interested in the systemic approach in  the
General Council on this issue.
10. The representative of Senegal was delighted to support the request for observer status from
the Organisation Internationale de la Francophonie.  Only institutional dialogue was capable of
solving the difficulties facing developing countries.  The Organisation Internationale de la
Francophonie had underscored the importance of exchange of experiences in its collaboration with the
Commonwealth on a seminar.  This is why the Organisation Internationale de la Francophonie was
not indifferent to the work of the WTO, especially the CTD which affected half of the world.
Granting observer status would also demonstrate the WTO's interest in promoting institutional
dialogue.
11. The representative of Gabon also supported the request for observer status from the
Organisation Internationale de la Francophonie.  This organization brought together some
50 countries and had Gabon's full support.
12. The representative of Cuba looked with favour on the various requests for observer status
from the various organizations from developing country that wished to participate in the CTD.  The
League of Arab States, from OPEC and from the Gulf Organization for Industrial Consulting should
be given permanent observer status and not merely ad hoc observer status.
13. The representative of Bangladesh supported its support to all four organizations on an ad hoc
basis, and hoped that the General Council would soon resolve the broader question of observer status.
14. The representative of Indonesia supported observer status the League of Arab States, from
OPEC and from the Gulf Organization for Industrial Consulting as well as the Organisation
Internationale de la Francophonie on an ad hoc basis.
15. The representative of the European Communities had an open mind about the pending
requests and was sure the discussion would continue.  The EC also supported observer status for the
Organisation Internationale de la Francophonie which did a lot of pragmatic, useful work in areas of
concern to the CTD.  No links should be made to other pending requests for observership.
16. As a member of the Organisation Internationale de la Francophonie, the representative of
Canada supported its request for observership in the CTD.  Canada also asked that this request not be
linked to other pending requests.
17. The representative of the United States, obtainin g instructions later in the meeting, indicated
that it had no problems with observer status for the Organisation Internationale de la Francophonie.
She noted that this was to be a separate sub-item.
18. The Chairman noted that the CTD was not in position to take a decision at this time on
observer status for the League of Arab States, from OPEC and from the Gulf Organization for
Industrial Consulting, on which Egypt had indicated a desire to treat all three together.
3. Request for Observer Status from the Organisation Internationale de la Francophonie
19. The Chairman said that the CTD had a request for observer status in the CTD from the
Organisation Internationale de la Francophonie.  A copy of the request and supporting information
was available in the room.  It was understood that this request would be for ad hoc observer status
until the general question of observer status was resolved in the General Council.WT/COMTD/M/32
Page 4
20. The Chairman said that, during discussions on the previous sub-item no Member had spoken
against observer status for the Organisation Internationale de la Francophonie.  Several delegations
had also indicated that this should not be considered along with the previous pending requests, but
Egypt had indicated that all four requests at this meeting under sub-items 2 and 3 should be treated
together.  In this situation, the CTD was not in  a position to agree to observer status for the
Organisation Internationale de la Francophonie at the present meeting.
21. The representative of Egypt said that he could support observer status for all four
organizations, but wanted to consider all four as a package.  The representative expected that all four
would be considered together as "further consideration of pending requests" under the second sub-
item at the next CTD.
D. NOTIFICATIONS UNDER THE ENABLING CLAUSE
1. Central African Economic and Monetary Community
22. The Chairman said that delegations had before them a notification (WT/COMTD/N/13) by
the parties of the Central African Economic and Monetary Community and a copy of the
corresponding treaty (WT/COMTD/24).
23. The representative of Gabon said that she wished to remind Members of the background to
the creation of the Central African Economic and Monetary Community (CEMAC).  The Community
had been created on 24 June 1999 in Malabo, Equatorial Guinea during the conference of heads of
state.  It replaced the former Customs and Econom ic Union of Central Africa (UDEAC), which had
existed since 1964.  Since its independence in 1960, the Central African countries of Cameroon,
Central African Republic, Congo, Gabon and Chad had decided to organize their economiccooperation within an institution for regional integration.  Their Heads of State had signed the Treaty
of Brazzaville on 8 December 1964 which created the UDEAC.  On 22-23 November 1972, these
states had signed two economic cooperation treaties, one among themselves and another with France,
thereby agreeing to a common currency, the CFA Franc, which was the means of financial
cooperation in Africa.  While monetary cooperation had functioned to the satisfaction of participatingmember states, it had not generated wider economic cooperation.  The overall results of more than
30 years of cooperation within the UDEAC unfortunately seemed modest.  Most of the participating
countries had actually tried to advance their national interests to the detriment of those of the union.
The Republic of Equatorial Guinea joined the UDEAC in 1984 and its economic development had
since then been more dynamic.  Equatorial Guinea, which was a former Spanish colony, had changedcurrency to become a member of the CFA Franc region and had officially become a bilingual country.
Both French and Spanish were currently officially spoken.
24. The achievements of UDEAC, such as the long experience of monetary cooperation was an
important inheritance for the Economic and Monetary Union of Central Africa and the charter of the
Community reflected this.  However, in contrast to the UDEAC, CEMAC had integrated the concept
of economic and social development, whereas the UDEAC had basically been focused on economic
and customs matters.  CEMAC currently comprise d six member states:  Cameron, Central African
Republic, Congo, Gabon, Equatorial Guinea and Chad.  Of these six countries, four were
least-developed countries and five of the six were Members of the WTO, the exception being
Equatorial Guinea.  The CEMAC Treaty set the Community the important task of promoting
harmonious cooperation of its member states within the framework of economic and monetary union.
In both of these domains, the members aimed at going from a situation of cooperation to a unionwhich would further the integration process.  The objective of the Central African Economic Union
was the convergence of economic and political performances; enhanced competitiveness of economic
and financial activities through harmonization of the rules governing their functioning; the promotionWT/COMTD/M/32
Page 5
of a business-friendly legal environment; the creation of single markets through free movement of
persons, capital, goods and services; and also by coordinating national sectoral policies.  The aim of
the Central African Monetary Union was to consolidate the means of monetary cooperation which
existed since several decades among the member states.  The monetary union was based on the
following principles:  the recognition of a common monetary unit, the CFA Franc, which was thelegal tender throughout the territories of the member states and whose issue and management had
been confined to a joint autonomous emission inst itution, the Bank of Central African States (BEAC).
The aim of the single monetary and exchange policy was price stability without prejudice to the
imperatives linked to the defence of the currency  and the general policies elaborated in the Union.
25. In addition, the CEMAC Treaty provided fo r two institutions: th e Community Court of
Justice and the Community Parliament.  A system of multilateral surveillance had also been
considered which would verify the conformity of larger orientations of economic policy on the onehand and watch over the coherence of national policies with the common monetary policy on the
other.  The CEMAC represented a community of over 30 million consumers and whose principal
bodies in hierarchical order were: the Conference of Heads of State, which held its first meeting
on 24-25 June 1999 in Malabo, the Council of Ministers charged with the economic union, the
Ministerial Committee responsible for the monetary union, the Executive Secretariat in charge ofgeneral coordination, the Inter-State Committee whose task is to assist the Executive Secretariat in
preparing dossiers to be brought up to the Council of Ministers, the Bank of Central African States,
the Banking Commission and the specialized bodies of the two unions.
26. The Community as it was structured was a complete institution designed to promote and
diffuse ideals, acts and other commitments which could facilitate central African integration.  In termsof the activities carried out during the year 2000, on 5 October 2000 a protocol of cooperation with
the WTO had been signed.  That protocol aimed at putting in place a programme of capacity building
for the officials from CEMAC member states as well as from the Executive Secretariat to enhance the
use of the WTO Agreements.  To date, the Common External Tariff , the Generalized Preferential
Tariff, the Value Added Tax and enterprise/company taxes had been harmonized.  In addition, thecommunity investment charter which had been adopted by the Council of Ministers in December
1999, constituted a first-choice instrument for pr omoting investment in the CEMAC area.  The
dissemination and the implementation of the community recommendation on competition as well the
establishment of a regional stock exchange would be envisioned in the immediate future.  CEMAC
worked in close collaboration with various other institutions such as the European Communities and
the ACP group of countries.  The distribution of CEMAC bodies in the region was as follows:  the
Executive Secretariat of CEMAC was located at Bangui, Central African Republic; the Court ofJustice was located at N'djamena, Chad; the Parliament would be located to Malabo, Equatorial
Guinea on establishment; and the Banking Commission would be located at Libreville, Gabon.
27. The CEMAC currently attempted to focus on economic and social development of the
countries within its area.  The region had been faced with a fair number of distortions linked to
situations of conflict and other disturbances/difficulties which meant that the Community still haddifficulties achieving its objectives.  However, the governments of the region hoped to establish
lasting peace in the area in order to develop better relations with their neighbours and with the world.
28. The representative of Kenya said that he welcomed the notification of the Central African
Economic and Monetary Union under the Enabling Clause.  As Members might recall, at the
31st Session of the CTD, the East African Community had also been notified by the representative of
Tanzania.  He thanked Members for the understanding they had shown at that time and hoped that
they would also show understanding towards th e CEMAC.  The African sub-regional integration
agreements were in line with the Abuja Treaty which encouraged sub-regional trading integration
arrangements as building blocks towards the eventual establishment of the African Economic
Community.WT/COMTD/M/32
Page 6
29. The representative of the Organization of African Unity and Economic Community said that
her delegation wished to support the notification of the Central African Economic Community and
Monetary Union Treaty as it had been tabled by the representative of Gabon under the Enabling
Clause.  The OAU and the African Economic Community attached importance to the liberalization
and integration in the African sub-region as building blocks for the overall integration on thecontinent.  In establishing the African Economic Community over the next 30 years, it was important
that the building blocks did work.  The establishment of CEMAC was a positive tool for the
acceleration of economic development in Africa.
30. The representative of Sri Lanka said that she sought information as to whether the English
version or an English translation of the CEMAC Treaty was available.
31. The Chairman said that the Secretariat was working on a translation which would soon be
made available.
32. The representative of Gabon said that she wished to remind delegations that the CEMAC
Treaty was part of the Abuja Treaty.  Her delegation would try to obtain a copy as rapidly as possible
from Bangui, but it could take up to a month.  Bo th English and Spanish versions also existed.
33. The Director of the Development Division thanked the representative of Gabon for the offer
to make copies of the Treaty available in English and Spanish.  To have access to the official
translations would be ideal, both for delegations and the WTO Secretariat.
34. The representative of the ACP Secretariat said that he supported the notification by CEMAC
of their regional arrangement.  The ACP group was working hard to normalize and regularize their
trade with the European Communities to make it WTO compatible.  To that end, the ACP group of
countries had agreed to negotiate economic partnership agreements or new trade arrangements whichwould come into force by 1 January 2008.  Other tr ade provisions of the former Lomé Convention,
including the commodities protocol, would continue to apply in the interim period.  The ACP group
of countries and the European Communities had requested a WTO waiver for the arrangements over
the interim period.  He welcomed the notification of CEMAC which could serve as a building block
to negotiate with the European Communities and other regions of the world in a WTO compatibleway.
35. The Chairman said that the CTD appeared to be in a position to take note of the notification.
It was so agreed.
2. Notifications by Canada and Norway on their GSP Schemes
36. The Chairman said that delegations had before them a notification by Canada concerning its
GSP Scheme (Document WT/COMTD/N/15 of 7 December 2000), and a complete notification by
Norway on its GSP scheme as currently applied (WT/COMTD/N/6/Add.2 of 18 January 2001).  Thenotification by Canada was a modification of Cana da's GSP scheme in favour of LDCs which had
entered into force on 1 September 2000.
37. The representative of Canada said that her delegation was pleased to announce officially the
notification of improvements to the Canadian GSP in favour of LDCs.  The measures reflected
Canada's continued commitment to help the poorest countries join the global economy.  The newmeasures removed duties on goods from LDCs under 570 tariff items, making LDC exports eligible
for duty-free treatment on close to 90 per cent of all Canadian tariff items.  The measures were also in
support of WTO Director-General Mike Moore's pack age of measures for LDCs and were part of a
wider effort by the Canadian government and other governments to build confidence in the
rules-based Global Trading system and to support a new round of trade negotiations.  The CanadianWT/COMTD/M/32
Page 7
government had also been active in providing tech nical assistance and capacity building to help LDCs
build capacity for exports and would continue to be so.  In that regard, her government had been
active with respect to the Integrated Framework and was a founding partner of the reinvigorated
Integrated Framework pilot scheme.
38. The representative of Zambia said that he had noticed that the LDC group coordinator was
absent and therefore he wished to thank the representative of Canada on behalf of the LDC group.
39. The representative of Sri Lanka said that the liberalization of rules of origin for the LDCs was
a good move in the right direction.  However, the Canadian government was going to liberalize the
present rules of origin criteria from 40 per cent to 20 per cent.  To have a value added of 20 per cent
did not make a contribution to an economy.  The profit of value-added in the production sometimes
was 20 per cent.  The proposal would therefore not help the countries.  Even when products were
brought from one country to the other to be repackaged, the 20 per cent criteria could be met.  With a40 per cent limit, more value-added was possible.  Her government was concerned as companies in
her country, which were the beneficiaries of GSP preferences in certain countries, could be negatively
affected.
40. The representative of Canada said that he wished to clarify that his government had not
reduced the 40 per cent criterion.  Those 40 per cent could previously be cumulated across all LDCs
and Canada.  What had been changed, was that LD Cs also could use inputs from other developing
countries.  If an LDC used an input from a developing country, the Government of Canada allowed
that LDC to include that in the content of the 40 per cent up to half, i.e. up to 20 per cent.  The idea
was to allow LDCs which were sourcing from other developing countries, a greater opportunity to
take advantage of access into the Canadian market.  He stressed that the change did not meanreducing the level but opening up the ability fo r LDCs to do some sourcing from developing
countries.
41. The representative of Sri Lanka said that a particular input could be imported into an LDC
which in turn only had to add 20 per cent value-added to the product.  There could be instances where
the LDCs could import a finished product and by only changing the packaging they would have met
the 20 per cent value-added criteria.
42. The representative of Canada said his delegation would provide additional details on how the
calculations of origin were made.
43. The representative of Zambia said that his delegation had understood the rules of origin
criteria the way the representative of Canada had explained them.  While he still supported Canada, he
said that the point made by the representative of Sri Lanka was an interesting one.  He said he wished
to inform delegations that his delegation was working on a proposal regarding market access and rulesof origin which would soon be communicated to other WTO Members.
44. The Chairman said that the would deal with the procedural aspects of the notification under
the next item.  Members also had before them a complete by Norway on its GSP scheme as currently
applied (WT/COMTD/N/6/Add.2).
45. The representative of Norway said that, since its establishment in 1971, the Norwegian GSP
scheme had been enlarged a number of times.  Changes had been made both to the list of products
entitled to preferential tariff treatment, the list of beneficiary countries and the rules of origin.  The
objective of the revisions had been to make the Norwegian market more accessible to exports from
developing countries and especially the LDCs.  Norway's latest notification distributed in document
WT/COMTD/N/6/Add.2 showed the consolidated a nd revised version of the Norwegian GSP scheme
and contained an overview of the countries covered by the scheme, the different products entitled toWT/COMTD/M/32
Page 8
preferential tariff treatment and the provisions of rules of origin.  For instance, since 1995 all GSP
imports of products originating in LDCs were entitled to duty- and quota-free access with the
exception of flour, grain and feeding stuffs.  In 1998, the Norwegian government had implemented a
revised regulation on rules of origin, harmonized w ith the rules applied by the European Communities
and Switzerland.  That amendment also opened for bi lateral cumulation of origin products originating
in Norway.  The regulation provided for future diagonal cumulation of origin with products
originating in the European Communities and Switzerland on a reciprocal basis.  The three parties had
recently signed an agreement to that end which would be implemented in the spring of 2001.  The
consolidated version of the GSP scheme had recently been sent to all Norwegian embassies.  The
Embassies had been instructed to approach the authorities in a number of beneficiary countries where
the GSP scheme is not yet operational.  The aim was to inform them about the scheme in order to
ensure that preferential tariff treatment would effectively be granted.  His government hoped that theinitiative would increase the actual utility of the scheme.
46. The representative of Zambia said that his delegation wished to thank the Government of
Norway for their continued support.
47. The Committee took note of the notifications.
3. Communication from Japan on the Proposed Reform of its GSP Scheme in Favour of
Least-Developed Countries
48. The Chairman said that the Committee had received a Communication from Japan on a
Proposed Reform of its GSP Scheme in Favour of Least-Developed Countries
(Document WT/COMTD/29 and WT /LDC/SWG/IF/12 of 6 February 2001).  There were no
comments on the communication.
49. The Chairman asked if there were any other points under item D.
50. The representative of the United States said that her delegation had notified additional GSP
preferences for more than 1800 products lines for Africa, including a number of LDCs.  The
notification had been made to the Committee on Trad e and Development.  She wished to confirm with
the Secretariat that that notification had been received.
51. A representative of the Secretariat confirmed that the notification had been received and that
it would be circulated to Members.
52. The representative of the United States said that her delegation's notification related to all
designated African countries under the African Growth and Opportunity Act with respect to the GSP
section.
53. The representative of Zambia said that his delegation wished to thank the Government of
Japan as well as the Government of the United States.  He subsequently noted that his expression of
gratitude for the measures did not cover the hope expressed in the Japanese document that the
measures would help confidence building and the a launch of a new round.  This was a matter which
he would have to refer to his capital.
54. The Chairman asked whether any other Member wished to make any announcement under the
Enabling Clause or under the 1999 waiver of measures  in favour of LDCs.  There were no requests to
make any such announcement.WT/COMTD/M/32
Page 9
E. REPORT BY THE CHAIRMAN ON SEMINAR ON TECHNOLOGY, TRADE AND
DEVELOPMENT
55. The Chairman said that on Wednesday, 14 February, a Seminar on Technology, Trade and
Development was organized under the auspices of the CTD.  Given the importance of the issue and
the quality of the discussions it was regrettable that more Members had not taken the opportunity toattend.  He said delegations had before them in the room a report on the seminar prepared under his
own authority.  (The report is attached in the Annex).
56. The representative of Zambia said that the seminar on technology, trade and development had
resulted from a proposal of his delegation.  He therefore thanked all involved, especially UNCTAD
which had provided both a panellist and a chairman.  That type of cooperation between WTO and
UNCTAD was important and should continue in other areas.  He supported the Chairman's report, on
the understanding that the report was without prejudice to what other Members who had attended theseminar had to say.  He said that in the view of his delegation, the seminar had been successful.  He
said that the ability to create new technologies and to acquire and successfully adapt technologies
from both external and internal sources were critical  determinants of a country's ability to compete
successfully.  Technology was not confined to product and process technology, but included
organisational knowledge.  Access to technology was not easy and there were obstacles.  There was a
place for policies at all levels for promoting transfer of technology, and the WTO Agreement had to
be part of those policies.  The TRIPS Agreement, in particular, dealt with technology issues and had
important implications on transfer of technology to developing countries.  He particularly shared the
Chairman's regret for the sparsely attended seminar and he hoped that attendance would be better in
the future.
57. The representative of Egypt said that his delegation wished to thank the delegation of Zambia
for taking the initiative to call for a seminar on th e issue of technology, trade and development.  The
level of participation in the seminar by delegations from both developed and developing countries had
been disappointing.  However, that had not prevented lively and informative discussions, particularly
during the second half of the seminar when the structure of the session allowed for interactionbetween the floor and the panelists.  He welcomed the report of the Chairman on the deliberations of
the seminar and wished to share with the Committee some of the points and conclusions his
delegations had noted during the three sessions.  First, technology remained the most important
vehicle for development.  It was a crucial fact or, today more than ever, in determining the
competitiveness of developing countries in an increasingly globalized world.  Second, transnational
corporations had no general interest in the transfer of technology.  Hence, openness to foreign direct
investment would not guarantee by itself such a transfer.  Rather, it would allow Transnational
Corporations (TNCs) acquire locational assets and establish international production networks.
Reference had been made during the seminar to recent studies that had found that FDI had a weak
technology spillover effect, and in some cases a negati ve one as it affected the ability of local firms to
build their capacity to compete.  Third, there was a significant difference between transfer of
technology and diffusion of technology.  The former took place between TNCs and their affiliates andinvolved purchase of equipment, while the latter involved transfer of k nowledge and know-how and
was more likely to occur between foreign affiliates and local firms.  Those linkages between local
suppliers and TNCs affiliates constituted the main channel for the diffusion of know-how as well as
the human factor represented by employment.  Fourth, developing countries should not seek the mere
use of technology and its applications.  Rather, ownership of technology held the key for thosecountries to apply it in order to develop products, manufacture others and ultimately develop new
technologies.  Fifth, as the study presented by the OECD revealed, although the share of high-tech
exports of east Asian countries in the total exports increased, a number of characteristics such as over-
dependence on imported components, inputs, imported equipments and foreign research and
development rendered them vulnerable, as had been demonstrated by the crises these countriesendured in 1997.  Sixth, governments' policies were crucial in ensuring that developing countriesWT/COMTD/M/32
Page 10
technological capabilities were developed.  That was not a fast process, but rather one that would
yield results on the medium term.  It required a number of factors to be put in place.  Governments
should have the flexibility to apply policies that ensured that the appropriate investments were
attracted to the market.  That would be primarily in the areas where domestic enterprises and research
and development efforts would benefit from the existence of and linkages with foreign investment.Governments needed to maintain their policy options  to adopt such an approach.  There was a need to
set incentives for foreign direct investment to contribute to the development of domestic human
capital.  Those should not take the form of competition among developing countries, not even
between developing and developed countries.  In that regard, it had been mentioned during the
seminar that the bargaining power of developing countries in relation to TNCs was diminishing,
especially as most of the markets were currently open to foreign direct investment.  To overcome that
there was a need for an internationally orchestrated effort.  Some ideas had been mentioned during theseminar and they had to be followed up.  The WTO Agreements clearly dealt with transfer of
technology issues in the same way as they dealt with the special and differential treatment provisions,
namely, through best-endeavour clauses.  Even in the one article where there was a clear commitment,
Article 66.2 of the TRIPS Agreement, developing countries were still waiting for its full
implementation.  Finally, the transfer of technology was a cross-cutting issue in WTO Agreements,which had to be treated horizontally.  One of the ways to do so, as mentioned in the seminar, was to
consider a working group to examine what bearing do WTO Agreements had on technology policy
options for developing countries.
58. The representative of Switzerland said that, as had been highlighted by the informative
presentations, technology was a core component to upgrade and develop an economy.  The panellists
had managed to explain well the issues surrounding technology and technology transfer and how
complex it was to successfully integrate a new technology into the existing structures of an economy.
It was rather unlikely that simply handing over a new technology or attracting foreign direct
investment in the high-tech field guaranteed a sustained and improved performance for a whole
economy.  As it had been shown, the absorption capacity of an economy was critical and as well asthe existing level of technology education policies, and so on.  It had been good to hear concrete
examples in from organisations such as UNIDO and UNEP, concerning efforts ongoing in the
international community to support technology transfers as well as efforts on a bilateral basis, for
instance also by his government which had, as an example, a programme of setting up so-called
cleaner production centres in various countries li ke Brazil, Morocco, Vietnam and India.  It was
important that delegates in Geneva were aware of such efforts which took place in the context of
trade-related technical assistance even though they might not always be directly linked to a particulararticle in a WTO Agreement.  Delegates also needed to be aware that there were other fora which
treated the question of technology.  The participation at the seminar of WTO Members had to be
deplored as it had been rather unsatisfactory.  While there was no doubt that it was, in theory, useful
to organize such a seminar, it would seem necessary to reflect whether there was really a demand for
such types of activities in Geneva.  There were time constraints for the delegates and it might benecessary to consider reducing the number of seminars and other events despite their potential
usefulness, not least in order not to waste the scare resources of the WTO Secretariat.
59. The representative of Uruguay said that his delegation thanked the Zambian delegation for
having taken the initiative to the technology seminar.  The seminar had given delegations an
opportunity to review the various multilateral norms , and discuss the transfer of technology and its
consequences for developing countries and for the least-developed countries.  He underscored the low
level of participation from both developed as well as developing countries.  The seminar had also
given the opportunity to learn about the important work being done by other international
organizations such as UNCTAD and UNIDO among ot hers.  His delegation was concerned over the
fact that the multilateral standards and norms whic h had to do with transfer of technology within the
WTO Agreements were a dead letter.  They had not been implemented and what was worse, nothing
seemed to be done about it.  The fact that the multilateral norms of technology transfer had ceased toWT/COMTD/M/32
Page 11
be binding had to be a source of institutional concern to the WTO whose norms and standards within
the multilateral trading system were supposed to be binding.  His said that his delegation wished to
stress, as had also been made manifest during the seminar, that transfer of technology was
fundamental to any development policy aimed at inserting developing countries into international
trade.  There were clear concerns that provisions for technology transfer had not been observed at themultilateral level while there existed initiatives at the bilateral and regional levels which made
technology transfer possible.  He emphasised that technical assistance should not be confused with
technology transfer.  That concern had been reflected in paragraph 7 of the draft report of the seminar.
The report reflected the suggestions and comments made by delegations participating at the seminar.
However, it would be appropriate if, in paragraph 5 on the multilateral norms of technology transfer
in the WTO Agreements on TRIPS, Subsidies and Services, the Articles dealing with technology
transfer could be specified as they had been mentioned by the Secretariat itself when the item hadbeen introduced.
60. The representative of Canada said that she thanked her colleague from Zambia for having
initiated the holding of the seminar.  The discussions during the seminar had been important and rich
despite the low attendance.  The report provided by the Chairman accurately reflected the items
covered during the discussions.  However, the report might have been enriched by a few examples ofthe types of technology transfer initiatives which were ongoing.  She said that her delegation was
grateful for having had the opportunity to bring in a senior speaker from the National Research
Council of Canada who had made specific comments and had provided extensive details about
technology transfer programmes in which Canada had been involved in partnership with developing
and LDC countries in the past 30 years.  Although the discussions had brought out some of theweaknesses of the multilateral system in terms of actually delivering on technology transfer, it had
also pointed to a number of interesting ongoing initiatives.
61. The representative of Trinidad and Tobago said that she wished to thank the delegation of
Zambia for having initiated the seminar.  The speakers at the seminar had been good and her
delegation regretted the low level of participation which did nevertheless not hamper the quality andthe richness of the exchange and debate.  The seminar had highlighted the importance of technology
as a key element of the trade and development process.  The point had been brought out with the fact
that technical assistance and the transfer of technology were not synonyms and that one could not be a
substitute for each other.  It was also clear that the WTO Agreements did contain provisions for
transfer of technology, but these seemed to be honour ed more in the breach than the observance.  The
seminar had focused too much on the South-East Asian countries.  Her delegation had therefore been
pleased to hear the interventions by the National Research Council of Canada and by therepresentative of the Brazilian Ministry of Science and Technology.  She suggested that if similar
seminars were held in the future, an attempt shou ld be made to broaden their reach to take into
account examples involving the broader WTO Membership.  She concluded by saying that the
Chairman's draft report seemed to be a good one, and added that her delegation supported the call for
a working group on transfer of technology in the WTO.
62. The representative of the European Communities said that his delegation thanked the
Chairman for the report which seemed to be accurate from what had been said by representatives of
other delegations.  Regarding attendance he said that his delegation had been among those who had
had a real problem of scheduling on the day of the seminar.  That was the reason why his delegation
had only been briefly represented.  The solution might not be to have fewer seminars but to try tomake ends meet by looking closely at the dates c hosen and at the conflicting requirements imposed on
delegations.  He said that this did not excuse non-attendance of the seminar but added that a member
of his delegation also had a medical problem which prevented him from attending the seminar.  He
said the Chairman's report made a number of important points which his delegation was pleased to see
reflected.  The first part dealing with appropriate policies to encourage foreign direct investment andaccompanying technology transfer made the right points.  His delegation was pleased that the keyWT/COMTD/M/32
Page 12
policy choices mentioned did not refer to the question of whether a country should choose mandatory
requirements on trade-related investment measures, as that  particular discussion seemed to belong to
a bygone era.  Referring to point five of the report, where mention was made of certain specific WTO
Agreements, he said there was space for a further discussion on those issues in the WTO, whether in
the TRIPS Council, the Committee on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures, or in the GATScontext.  His delegation would be happy to follow up the discussion in all three fora.  The intention of
the seminar had precisely been to give new impetus and a broader vision of the development angle of
the discussions in the various bodies which dealt more concretely with those issues.
63. The representative of Cuba said that the seminar had been good, although only few
delegations had been present.  The dates of seminars had to be carefully chosen to increase the
number of participants.  Many officials had said that developing countries should have better
technology as the difference between a developing and a developed country was large in that respectand the gap was increasing daily.  If a true contribution to development was to be made, the problem
should be looked at carefully and solutions should be sought, holding conferences on technology and
looking at the transfer of technology even from the trade point of view.  He noted that references had
been made to the transfer of technology on commercial terms.  However, when firms made
investments, they were often not ready to transf er technology.  There were sometimes governmental
obstacles which meant that some countries were unable to benefit from technology available on the
market, and this was harmful to development at the world-wide level.  For that reason, his delegation
agreed that with the statement made by the representative of Uruguay to the effect that the WTO
provisions concerning transfer of technology remained a dead letter.  There was a need to change the
situation and to make a contribution to the dissemi nation of technology.  His government agreed with
the statement made by the representative of Trinidad and Tobago that a working group of transfer of
technology was needed.  This question had been raised at Seattle and was still of relevance.  The
possibility of establishing such a working group needed to be examined.
64. The representative of Indonesia said that his delegation shared the concerns regarding the
unsatisfactory participation of WTO Members.  The panellists had elaborated on areas of concern to
developing countries, especially with respect to strengthening developing countries capacities in the
global market.  He wished to stress certain issues reiterated during the seminar.  His delegation agreed
that transfer of technology was an urgent and important element in order to increase the capacity of
developing countries to compete in the global market.  Developing countries wished to see concrete
implementation of transfer of technology as soon as possible.  One panellist had said that
globalisation presented developing countries with more challenges than opportunities.  The seminar
had brought out the fact that developing countries should see more opportunities to enhance thetransfer of technology in order to increase their capacity.  He said that the seminar's discussions on
government policies for investment and technical assistance had been interesting.  His delegation
hoped that the WTO and other organizations dealing with technical cooperation could provide more
assistance in strengthening the capacities of developing countries to produce more competitive
products for the global market.
65. The representative of the United States said that her delegation had attended many of the
sessions of the seminar.  She highlighted that emphasised that the chief responsibility of her
delegation was to attend the WTO meetings, whether informal or formal.  When there was a clash
between a need to attend a meeting and a seminar, the seminar would get secondary consideration.
However, her delegation had attended the seminar and had found it enlightening, in particular whenshe heard colleagues speak and advance certain interesting positions.  The seminar had helped her
delegation to better understand positions that were presented in the deliberative meetings of the WTO.
She said paragraph five of the report could be clearer, so as to bring out that it reflected suggestions
offered by certain speakers, rather than a general consensus at the seminar or from the panel.  While it
was mentioned in the first tiret in paragraph five stated that "some speakers noted", that type ofarticulation had been lost in the subsequent tirets.  The text therefore sounded too conclusive towardsWT/COMTD/M/32
Page 13
the end of the report.  Attendance was something delegations had to deal with when it came to
seminars, especially when the seminar had been requested by certain delegations that had vested
interest in the topic discussed.
66. The representative of Kenya said that the representative of the European Communities and a
number of other delegations had referred to the problem of the schedule of meetings.  He remarked
that if the delegation of the European Communities had a problem, then smaller missions like his
would need divine intervention to cope.  He said there had been a large number of meetings on that
particular day, including a meeting at UNCTAD on a similar topic.  However, he did understand the
predicaments facing the WTO Secretariat in scheduling meetings, but, as there were seminars on the
CTD work-programme for the current year, he asked the Secretariat to schedule them in a way which
maximized participation, especially of developing country delegations.
67. The representative of the Philippines said that he had attempted to put a few minutes aside to
attend the seminar.  He shared the same observations as those made by the representatives of Egypt
and Paraguay.  The documentation on the South-East Asian experience had not consisted of analytical
or motivational studies but trends-analysis which tended to static and experiential.  They were
therefore of limited value in guiding LDCs and other developing countries as to what their objectives
should be in order to benefit from access and transfer of technology, nor did they indicate how WTOnorms could assist those countries.  What mattered with respect to technology was not think-tanks but
large transnational corporations.  The value of the seminar would therefore have been enhanced if
analytical work had been presented on motivation and marketing strategies for transnational
corporations to share their technological know-how  with developing countries.  The seminar was
fortunately only a beginning and his delegation did encourage another seminar of this kind as therewas a sincere interest in the issues of technology transfer and access to technology. both of which
could be realised through the commercial transactions of transnational corporations, hopefully with
support from the WTO TRIPS and Services Agreements.
68. The Chairman suggested that the Committee took note of the report.  The discussion would be
recorded in the minutes of the meeting and the report would be annexed thereto.  He said, that, as had
been mentioned, the seminar was only a start.  He suggested that his successor, Ambassador Irumba,
might wish to undertake consultations on how the Committee might further the work that had been
started on the subject of technology.
69. The representative of the United States said that her delegation was not clear as to what the
Chairman had meant by the work that had been started on the subject and what his successor might be
taking up.  At the ongoing meeting, her delegation had only commented on the report of the seminar.
Other delegations had, in addition to their comments on the report, made suggestions with respect toother work and other proposals made in the WTO.  She reiterated that her delegation had found the
seminar informative, but she was concerned by the closing remarks by the Chairman about further
work and what he suggested in terms of consultations by his successor.
70. The Chairman said that he had not suggested any specific follow-up.  Some delegations had
suggested that further seminars might be needed.  Informal consultations would have to be carried out
in order to determine if there was any further work that might be carried out, seminars to be held or
how the Committee might wish move forward on the i ssue.  He had suggested nothing more than that
incoming chairman might wish to hold consultations.  If delegations could not agree to any further
work, he presumed that no further work would be carried out.  However, if delegations were in a
position to agree on follow-up, it would be possible to continue work on the issue.
71. It was so agreed.WT/COMTD/M/32
Page 14
F. FINANCING FOR DEVELOPMENT – INPUT BY THE WTO TO UNITED NATIONS
HIGH-LEVEL CONSULTATION IN 2001
72. The Chairman recalled that, at its meeting on 17 July, the General Council decided that the
contact point for an input to the UN High-Level Event on Financing for Development planned to take
place in March 2002, was to be the Committee on Trade and Development (CTD).  It was also agreedthat the CTD Chairman be in contact with the Preparatory Committee.
73. As Members were aware, the manner in which the UN had structured the preparatory process
for the High-Level Event had been to establish six working groups:  Domestic Financial Resources;
FDI and other private flows;  International Trade; International Financial Cooperation through, inter
alia, ODA; External Debt;  and Systemic Issues;  enhancing coherence and consistency of the
international monetary, financial and trading systems in support of development.  A report by the
UN Secretary-General had been prepared for the Preparatory Committee which was holding a secondmeeting in New York.  A briefing on this work was given to the CTD at its previous meeting in
November 2000 by Mr. Tulloch and Mr. Eglin, the Directors of the two Divisions most closely
concerned.
74. At the previous meeting of the CTD in November, Members agreed to revert at this meeting
to the  question as to how to make a useful input by WTO Members into the preparatory process.  Forthis purpose Members had held two informal meetings of the CTD on 19 January and
9 February 2001 for which Members had an informal paper by the Secretariat to stimulate the
discussions.  At the informal meeting of 9 February, Members asked the Secretariat to prepare a short
statement which could constitute the WTO Members' political input into the event.  This draft was
distributed to Members on Wednesday, 14 February and was available in the room.
75. Although this was the first time the CTD had seen this document, the Chairman hoped that
Members would be able to approve it.  To move the process forward, he proposed that Members move
into informal mode to consider the draft.  If at all feasible, a redraft could be made available later in
the day for further consideration.  Members also had to decide whether or not Members wished to
forward the Secretariat paper to the Preparatory Committee, perhaps attached to the political input.This was only touched on by a few delegations at the previous meeting, so it would be of use if other
delegations could also give their views on this question.
76. [Informal mode.  Statements.]
77. The Chairman said there had been useful discussions on the CTDs possible input.  But,
clearly, more time was needed to consider this and consult with capitals.  He suggested that Members
needed to resume informal discussions.  The Secr etariat was to consult with the incoming Chairman
and Members on a suitable time for such a meeting and procedures for adoption of the report.  He saidMembers should also expect at that time to decide on whether or not to attach the Secretariat paper to
the political input.
78. At the November meeting of the CTD, the Chairman also proposed to invite the Co-Chairs of
the Preparatory Committee at an appropriate moment to address this Committee on the progress of the
High-Level Event and discuss with Members.  In view of the stage of drafting of the input, he said itmight be advisable to wait until Members had advanced their own thinking.
79. It was so agreed.WT/COMTD/M/32
Page 15
G. TECHNICAL COOPERATION: CONSIDERATION OF A STRATEGY FOR TECHNICAL
ASSISTANCE IN THE WTO, REPORT BY THE WTO SECRETARIAT
80. The Chairman recalled that an earlier draft of document WT/COMTD/W/78 had been
discussed at an informal meeting on 17 October 2000 a nd subsequently at the previous sessions of the
CTD in informal mode.  The Secretariat had revised the draft in the light of comments made and thedocument entitled "A Strategy for Technical Assistance in WTO" was now before Members for their
consideration.  He called on Mr. Léger, Director , Technical Cooperation Division to introduce the
document.  He added that Mr. Mercier, Director , Training Division and Mr. Osakwe, Head of the
Secretariat Working Group on Least-Developed C ountries and the Integrated Framework, were
present at the meeting to answer questions.
81. The Director of the Technical Cooperation Division, Mr. Jean-Maurice Léger, said that he
wished to identify only the major changes in the do cument.  These were the result of written and oral
comments on the earlier version.  Regarding the first section, what had previously been under the
three separate headings of "Definitions", "Princ iples" and "Objectives" had been consolidated and
simplified under the heading of "Definitions and Objectives".  Sub-section B on "Setting Priorities"
under Section III on "Implementation Modalities" had been revised to concentrate on priorities
per se .  References to high and low priorities had been deleted, meaning that what has been left out
were not priorities.  The Sub-section on "Organizing Technical Assistance Activities" had been
revised to state more clearly that the demand-driven approach began with national needs and that the
regional focus or sub-regional perspective resulted from national needs and not vice-versa.  Another
major change related to the order of the sections.  The entire Sub-section on "Organizing Technical
Assistance Activities" had been moved before the Sub-section on "Modes and Instruments ofDelivery" to show a more logical sequence of steps undertaken.  In addition, the issue of  "Internal
Coordination" in WTO of technical assistance had been added to the Sub-section on "Organizing
Technical Assistance Activities" as a number of delegations had raised that issue.  The Sub-section D
on "Modes and Instruments of Delivery" had been reduced substantially and the details previously in
the chapter had been moved to Annex 2.  A fifth change related to the title of Sub-section E which hadbeen renamed "Cooperation with Other Institutions (including bilateral donors)" to include a reference
to bilateral donors.  That resulted from the fact that a document and a CD-Rom on "Sources of trade-
related technical assistance" had been made available to Members last year.  That information had
been collected following a letter from the Director-General Mike Moore to all international
organizations as well as to Members and other instit utions providing technical assistance.  Section V
on "Financing Technical Assistance" had been revise d in view of the comments received to focus on
the need for an adequate regular budget supplemented by volontary contributions and financing frommultilateral institutions rather than identifying a short-fall in the regular budget which was the
situation currently experienced.  Another request by delegations had been to introduce references to
the Integrated Framework, JITAP and the three-month trade-policy course offered by the Training
Division which had all been incorporated.  Finally, a new Annex 3 had been added which listed
WTO's comparative advantage in the area of technical assistance.
82. The representative of the United States said that her delegation supported the notion that the
WTO should devise a technical assistance strategy.  However, she said that her delegation was of the
view that it should be concentrated on ensuring that the current technical assistance was being
delivered effectively.  The paper covered many aspects of implementation modalities and monitoring
of technical assistance reasonably well.  There seemed to be lower attention paid to donor countrieswho provided assistance compared to the emphasis on bringing technical cooperation into the regular
budget.  She said that her delegation did not support that.  As had been evident in last falls Budget
Committee discussions, some increases for the WTO technical assistance had been approved.
However, it had been clear that there was no consensus to bring bilateral technical assistance
expenditures on budget.  Her delegation could not agree with the proposition in the paper on thatWT/COMTD/M/32
Page 16
matter.  There were other examples, such as in the U.N. system, where bilateral donations were
handled in an effective way to ensure that technical assistance was delivered effectively.
83. The representative of Switzerland said that the changes had substantially improved the
document.  In-depth, reflection had been added and there was no doubt that the strategy could be put
into practice.  She said that her delegation wished to mention the efforts made to include the necessarycoordination between the WTO and other international organizations and also among the different
divisions within the WTO Secretariat.  Her delegation particularly welcomed the fact that the
document covered activities of several divisions of the WTO Secretariat.  Technical assistance was
often considered a right of developing countries.  Her government was convinced that technical
assistance was necessary, but irrespective of the effort made, it would serve no purpose without the
involvement of the beneficiary countries.  They were responsible for evaluating their needs and the
impact of any assistance depended on the developing countries themselves.  Her delegation thereforeencouraged the Secretariat to promote an interactive process as suggested in paragraph 9.
84. She continued by saying that her delegation also was pleased with the efforts of the
Secretariat to set priorities in order to establish a realistic and practical program.  Her delegation
supported the priorities among the beneficiary countries suggested by the Secretariat.  However, she
had two remarks in that respect.  The first concerned the Training Division.  Her delegation wonderedif it would not be possible for it to tailor its prio rities to the technical assistance needs identified.
Even if short-term technical assistance was always available to LDCs, African countries and other
targeted countries, it could not substitute for the three-month trade policy courses.  Paragraph 21
which stated that all beneficiaries would have access to training at least once during a two-year
period, should be considered in a flexible manner in order to give special attention to the LDCs,African countries, non-resident Members and small economies.  That would constitute a coherent
approach with established priorities in light of the needs identified.  That would also make it possible
to strengthen links of solidarity in favour of the least favoured countries.  However, that should be
done without reducing the access to the three-months trade policy courses for other beneficiaries.  In
the longer run, the solution was therefore to substantially increase the capacity of the WTO Secretariatto carry out training.  Despite the tribulations of the Budget Committee which had taken place last
year, her delegation remained convinced that the WTO training capacity had to be doubled.  Given the
lack of resources, priorities had to be defined in terms of the services that the WTO technical
assistance could provide.  If technical assistance was necessary for NGOs, civil society, the private
sector, negotiators or for the training of trainers they all demanded different types of services.
Priorities therefore had to be established.  The primary role of the WTO Secretariat was to address
government officials in the beneficiary countries.  Another issue which was not the direct subject ofthe strategy, but which could have direct implications for the practical implementation of technical
assistance was the division of tasks and responsibilities within the Secretariat.  Four divisions or
separate units were currently providing technical assistance or were directly involved with the
questions of trade and development: the Development Division, Technical Cooperation Division,
Training Division and the Secretariat Working Group on the Integrated Framework and LDC Issues.
These entities were currently placed under the supervision of three different members of the higher
level WTO administration.  That was a situation which did not favour the application of a coherent
technical assistance strategy, in particular when it came to choosing among competing projects
according to the priorities defined in the strategy document.  Such decisions should be made by one
and the same person provided with the adequate power, for example at the level of adeputy director-general.  This person should not only be the head of those four sections of the
Secretariat mentioned but should also have the power to take all relevant decisions with respect to the
administration of the technical assistance strategy.
85. The representative of Canada said that her delegation had noted that points taken on board in
the revised version of the technical cooperation strategy included the demand-driven approach, the
setting of priorities, the relationship with other processes including the Integrated Framework, theWT/COMTD/M/32
Page 17
development of multi-year plans, inclusiveness, the private sector, civil society and training
institutions and her delegation was grateful for that.  However, rather than always providing on-sight
training, distance education should receive the appropriate attention.  Her delegation seconded the
comments made by the representative of Switzerland regarding the coherent administration within the
WTO Secretariat of the various aspects of technical assistance and training.
86. The representative of Norway said that his delegation was among those Members which had
underlined the need to have a clear strategy in place for WTO's technical cooperation activities.  The
strategy paper prepared by the Secretariat was based on several years of experience.  The services of
the WTO Secretariat had been in great demand and appreciated.  However, the resources of the
Secretariat had been limited and subject to ad hoc  financing.  He said that his delegation was in
general agreement with most of the points included in the proposed strategy and he appreciated that
the Committee on Trade and Development had an opportunity to discuss it.  He said that, in the viewof his delegation, WTO's technical assistance activities should be funded through the regular budget
instead of having to rely heavily on voluntary contributions as was the current situation.  Predictable
and stable financing was a prerequisite for good planning and thus for the quality of the granted
assistance.  His delegation would continue its efforts to reach consensus on the proposal to secure
financing through the regular budget.  In light of the limited financial and human resources availablefor WTO's technical assistance activities, setting priorities and drawing up a list of beneficiary
countries was necessary.  His delegation agreed that the different categories of countries mentioned in
paragraph 6 should be eligible for assistance.  However, his delegation wished to see a clearer priority
being given to LDCs in paragraph 20.  Paragraph 27 stated that "any new Agreement being concluded
in the WTO should be accompanied by a framework to be put in place to support its implementation".His delegation agreed that the implementation of new Agreements would be facilitated if associated
technical assistance requirements of individual c ountries were identified.  However, whether that
should be done through inclusion of technical assistance requirements in the regular WTO budget,
specific references in individual agreements, the draw ing up of a list of required assistance in relation
to each agreement or a combination of those approaches was a question that should be left toMembers to agree upon in upcoming negotiations.  It was essential to foster WTO's collaboration with
other organizations.  A coherent approach had to be ensured, areas of competence and
complementarity identified, joint projects defined and executed and duplication avoided.  He called on
the Secretariat to explain paragraph 39 where it was stated that the WTO should have as objective to
become more focussed on specialized activities for which it had a comparative advantage over other
organizations.  In light of the limited financial resources available, his delegation expected that the
technical assistance activities of the WTO were already clearly focussed on its particular sphere ofcompetence.  He asked how the limited resources could be put to an even better use.  He said that his
delegation supported the comments and proposals made concerning the need for better internal
coherence within the WTO Secretariat.
87. The representative of Australia said that her delegation appreciated efforts to bring improved
management and planning into the WTO's technical assistance activities.  The emphasis on improved
consultations both between line divisions and the Technical Cooperation Division, and also between
the WTO and other multilateral and bilateral donors was welcomed.  Section V on "Financing
Technical Assistance" continued the call to have an adequate regular budget allocated to WTO
technical cooperation activities.  Whilst her delegation agreed that, today, lack of a sufficiently
sizeable and stable funding base had detracted from the ability of the WTO to schedule and delivertechnical assistance most effectively, her delegation noted that some additional resources were agreed
to during the budget deliberations last year and she hoped to see the Secretariat demonstrate the
positive impact of that increase prior to more funds being allocated.
88. The representative of Zambia said that his delegation sought clarification as to the place of the
special needs of the LDCs in the strategy and how it envisaged to address those.WT/COMTD/M/32
Page 18
89. The representative of Philippines said that WTO technical assistance activities were carried
out with limited funds.  There were complex demands on WTO technical assistance, not only from a
bifurcation of the developing countries into less-developed countries, small economies, poor and
heavily indebted countries, but also from the point of view of the development objectives, which
never should be forgotten in the Committee on Trade and Development and the WTO.  As far as thedefinition of objectives was concerned, it was not only dealing with the competencies in the WTO but
also with the fuller integration of countries in the multilateral trading system, looking at broader
developmental requirements, capacity building and complementary support to the needs identified by
the recipients, in the context of their economic situation.  That framework was a challenge to any
technical assistance strategy.  However, his delegation did not see a problem with the setting of
priorities, nor with the definition of national needs.  It was also useful to consider the needs in terms
of groups of countries or economies, regions or sub-regions as well as in terms of thematic approacheslike e-commerce or information and communication technologies.  The expectations of developing
countries were being raised without any prospect of increases in the budgetary allocations, being
internal or external, to technical cooperation activities.  The technical assistance strategy should be
one of networking and outsourcing, which for thos e who were in the business of technical assistance
and in other agencies in Geneva, had been quite successful in spreading the benefits of technicalassistance.  That was especially true in the area of market opportunities when based on the context
and the economic situation in different parts of the world.  The experts in Geneva might not have full
knowledge about local situations in other parts of the world.  Whatever the amount of needs analysis,
it could never replace physical presence and observation of the dynamics of development, growth and
trade in a particular region.  He said that his delegation therefore was concerned by some assumptionsin the section on outsourcing, particularly paragraph 63 which, among other things, stated that it was
the responsibility of WTO Secretariat to educate beneficiaries on WTO Agreements.  While he was
well aware of the fact that WTO experts in Geneva were most knowledgeable about the legal and
prescriptive provisions of any agreement, he  questioned what those experts knew about the
development implications and the difficulties that those Agreements imposed on some of the WTOMembers.  Sub-item (ii) of paragraph 63 stated that "part of the bigger picture in WTO technical
cooperation is to establish a relationship with its Members;  extensive sub-contracting would rob the
organization of such an opportunity".  He asked how the WTO Secretariat which already had the
expertise could be robbed of it by extensive sub-contracting when the WTO Secretariat had training
programmes which the Secretariat controlled.  Sub-item (iii) of paragraph 63 stated that in certain
areas, such as agriculture and services, where th ere were on-going negotiations, outsourcing might be
more difficult to organize on any significant scale because of the lack of outside expertise.  One of theprincipal reasons for outsourcing was to allow enhanced expertise to be developed outside the WTO
Secretariat, in order to multiply the understanding of the WTO.  Furthermore, sub-item (iii) of
paragraph 63 also stated that country officials often wished to be advised on their commitments and
obligations by WTO professionals who were directly involved in the on-going negotiations and who
knew how national policy objectives and constraints could be accommodated in country schedules.He said that in his view that was too presumptuous.  He regretted not having been able to participate
in the consultations on that issue as it was an issue of interest to him.  Paragraphs 62 and 63 were
unfair, to the point of being unnecessary.
90. The representative of the European Communities said that his delegation liked the paper as it
stood and only had a few minor comments.  The main question was what the Committee on Trade and
Development intended to do with the paper.  An endorsement by the Committee was a minimalist
option while his delegation suggested that the issue was important enough to be brought to the
attention of the General Council, preferably in May 2001 in order for the General Council to confirm
the orientation given in the paper in its various components including the activities undertaken in the
Committees and in the Integrated Framework.  Technical assistance was an important component ofthe confidence building efforts.  The strategy paper could provide a basis for future work in that
respect.  His delegation also endorsed comments made by other delegations in terms of the internal
coordination of the Secretariat.WT/COMTD/M/32
Page 19
91. The representative of Turkey said that his delegation found the strategy useful for the future
organization of the technical assistance activities of the WTO.  He said that his delegation's concern
related to the priorities set out in the strategy.  His delegations supported giving high priority to the
integration of the LDCs into the multilateral trading system.  The plan seemed to address the
requirements of LDCs, African countries, small economies and economies in transition.  However,developing countries which were not in those categories needed technical assistance as well.  The
right of other developing countries to receive technical assistance also had to be taken into account.
In addition, an assessment of the outcome of the t echnical assistance activities in receiving countries
would be appropriate.  That assessment should include the particular benefits gained by those
countries with respect to their participation in the multilateral trading system.  Such an approach
would not only increase their level of participation in international trade but also entail a better
planning of WTO technical assistance activities.  He said that his delegation believed that the existinglevel of cooperation between regional organizations should be sustained and further improved if there
was a need.  The infrastructure of those organizations might be complementary to the existing
expertise of the WTO Secretariat.  Since countries of the same region faced similar difficulties and
had similar problems, cooperation with regional organizations would be helpful in focussing on those
issues of particular regional concern.
92. The representative of Mexico said that the stra tegy paper should be weighed in the light of all
that had been discussed over the last two years with respect to the regular budget, consistency and
coherence.  It was an urgent exercise.  As had been mentioned by the representative of the European
Communities, the General Council had to give it direction.  If comments were still made, the
Secretariat could respond to some of them.  Other comments could be made in relation to certain partsof the strategy document and they should first be taken up with the Member making the comment in
order for the strategy to be adopted at another meeting of the Committee on Trade and Development.
It was a unique document.  No other organization had a strategy for technical assistance programmes
and activities.  In the interest of confidence building and the work ahead, the Committee on Trade and
Development should be in a position to adopt the document.
93. Mr. Léger, Director, Technical Cooperation Di vision said that a number of delegations had
indicated that the internal coherence in the WTO was not transparent as staff working on issues
related to development worked under different Deputy-Directors General, that the issue of technical
assistance was divided in four different divisions and that a Technical Cooperation Audit recently had
been created with responsibility for the evaluation of technical assistance.  He said that he undertook
to relate delegations' preoccupations to the Direct or-General as the Director-General had the final
word on how to organize the WTO Secretariat.  In response to the comment made by therepresentative of Norway regarding the last sentence of paragraph 39, he said that there had been a
shift over the last five years in the type of requests the WTO Secretariat received from developing
countries, LDCs and economies in transition.  When the WTO Secretariat was established in 1995
there had been a demand for general seminars as people then wished to learn what the WTO was all
about.  They had requested general descriptions of each of the Agreements, and information aboutMembers' benefits and rights.  As Members had had to implement the Agreements with fixed
deadlines, Members had become more interested in  in-depth seminars on specific Agreements.  That
was also the reason why there had been a shift within the WTO Secretariat from the Technical
Cooperation Division undertaking close to 70 per cent of all technical missions at one time to the
current situation where only about one third of all technical cooperation missions were being carriedout by the Technical Cooperation Division and about two-thirds of the missions by other
WTO divisions.  The beneficiaries of technical cooperation activities requested WTO specialists to
come to their countries to speak about agriculture,  rules or intellectual property for example.  By
concentrating activities in the areas of the WTO Secretariat's comparative advantage, listed in
Annex 3 of the Strategy, the WTO Secretariat was using its resources more efficiently than before.An example of that was outsourcing.  It was a fact  that the WTO Secretariat had signed memoranda of
understanding with a number of regional organizatio ns.  ESCAP, for example, had organized a three-WT/COMTD/M/32
Page 20
week trade-policy course last year.  That meant that ESCAP not only had made the physical
arrangements but had also been responsible for identifying participants and making travel
arrangements.  In the course of 2001, the process had been taken yet a step further as ESCAP would
be responsible for lecturing on macroeconomics and the general functioning of the WTO during the
first two days of the two-week trade-policy course.  However, there was a limit to what the WTOSecretariat could expect representatives of ESCAP to do on specific Agreements of the WTO.
94. He continued by referring to the issue of financing mentioned by the representative of
Australia who had sought information regarding what the WTO Secretariat was going to do with the
budgetary increase it had received.  At the last informal meeting of the Committee on Trade and
Development the WTO Secretariat had received the mandate, in principle, to implement the objectives
set out in the strategy.  That was what the Secretariat had been doing.  He intended to come back to
the Committee on Trade and Development in May 2001 with a detailed programme of technicalassistance based on requests received and also based on the fact that many of the voluntary
contributions received were earmarked.  The earmarking might not coincide exactly with the requests
received.  That was therefore an additional difficulty faced by the WTO Secretariat.  The
representative of Zambia had asked what the Secretariat did for the LDCs.  The current procedure was
that when the Technical Cooperation Division or the Secretariat Working Group on Least-DevelopedCountries and the Integrated Framework received a voluntary contribution that was ear-marked for
LDCs it meant that the contribution could not be used for other developing countries or economies in
transition.  The approaches used in the Technical Cooperation Division and in the Secretariat Working
Group on Least-Developed Countries and the Integrated Framework were similar as they basically
followed the strategy.  In May, delegations would be presented with the programme for Asia and the
Pacific, Latin America and the Caribbean, the Middle East, Africa and the Central and Eastern
European countries based on the demands resulting from the questionnaire mailed to all developing
countries and economies in transition in July 2000 and to which 50 per cent had responded.  Ad hoc
requests would be dealt with as mentioned in the strategy.  A positive aspect that comments on the
strategy paper were still being received was that the revised strategy to be presented in May 2001could then be compared with the three-year plan for 2001-2003 based on the proposed strategy.
Delegations would thus be able to judge whether the strategy made sense in practice before further
action is taken by the Committee.
95. He went on to say that paragraph 62 and 63 on outsourcing reflected the fact that the WTO
Secretariat was trying to decentralize and outsource part of its technical cooperation activities while
remaining the master of the process and especially  keeping control of the technical aspects of the
Agreements.  The Secretariat rarely received refusals, although it happened, when it informedbeneficiaries that a consultant would be sent rather than a WTO Secretariat employee.  With respect to
what had been said by the representative of the United States on the current draft of the strategy he
indicated that the word "in-budget" had been deleted and replaced by "an adequate regular budget".
He had thought that that might satisfy the concern raised by the delegation of the United States.  At
the last meeting of the Committee on Trade and Development the representative of the United Stateshad asked for the two paragraphs on financing be completely removed.  The Secretariat thought that it
was not realistic to have a strategy on technical assistance without a mention of financing, but had
tried to accommodate the concern by referring to an adequate regular budget supplemented by
voluntary contributions plus financing from multilateral organizations and to delete the word
"in-budget".
96. Mr. Mercier, Director, Training Division said that he would attempt to respond to the remarks
made by the representative of Switzerland which had been supported by the representative of Norway,
with respect to the priorities in the WTO Secretaria t training activities.  What had been suggested was
to give higher priority to LDCs in the training courses at the same time as maintaining the access for
the other countries.  Although it was a desirable proposal, it was impossible in practice.  If additionalfellowships were granted to a larger number of LDCs, it would mean that other developing countriesWT/COMTD/M/32
Page 21
and economies in transition would receive less than the one fellowship every two years that each of
them were currently receiving.  The fact that developing countries and economies in transition
received so few fellowships had already been considered deplorable by most delegations.  It was
desirable that, in the future with an expanded capacity, the request could be responded to.  However,
in the present context, difficulties would be created for other beneficiaries if the LDCs were to receiveadditional preference.  There was already a large representation of LDCs in each trade policy course.
That even included LDCs which had not begun the accession process, which were not observers, and
which therefore did not even have a WTO status.  In that sense the LDCs were already treated
favourably.  At the moment, there were between 145-150 countries and customs territories which
were regularly invited to the courses and only 144 fellowships available in any two-year cycle.
Additional fellowships per year had been made avai lable as of the current year because the study-tour
in Europe had been taken out of the trade policy course in order to compensate for the lack ofadditional funds in last year's budget.  An important activity of the trade policy course had thus been
deleted from the programme in order to create more fellowships within the same budget.  He took
note of the remarks made and said that although he sympathized with the hope expressed, the
Secretariat was not in a position to implement the suggestion on LDCs without hurting other Members
in the process.  That was why paragraph 21 had been inserted into the strategy paper to balance thepriorities set in paragraph 20 as the same priorities as were set for the WTO technical cooperation
activities in general could not be applied to the training courses.
97. The representative of the Philippines said that, as his delegation had been the one to raise the
issue of outsourcing mentioned in paragraphs 62 and 63, he felt that the initial response of Mr. Léger
had shown that the Secretariat had the same objective as the delegation of the Philippines.
98. The Chairman said that a number of comments had been made and it appeared that the
document on "A Strategy for Technical Assistance in the WTO" as contained in WT/COMTD/W/78
needed some minor revisions to take the views expressed into account.  He asked the Secretariat to
make those changes for the document to be presented to the Committee on Trade and Development at
its next meeting with the hope that it could then be adopted.
99. The representative of the United States said that her delegation's readiness to adopt the
strategy paper depended on how issue of the budget was reflected.
100. The Chairman said that it was his understanding that that was one of the issues that the
WTO Secretariat would consider in making the revisions.  He said that the situation was promising.
After long discussions on the technical cooperation strategy, the Committee on Trade and
Development might be in a position to take positive action on the document by its next meeting.
H. CONSIDERATION OF "IMPLEMENTATION OF SPECIAL AND DIFFERENTIAL
TREATMENT  PROVISIONS IN WTO AGREEMENTS AND DECISIONS
(WT/COMTD/W/77 AND CORR.1)
101. The Chairman recalled that this item was first introduced at the 31st Session of the CTD which
began on 27 October and continued on 8 November 2000.  It was felt that Members may have more to
say on this theme and it was agreed to keep the item on the agenda for the present meeting.
102. The representative of the United States said that the note prepared by the Secretariat was
useful, and that the paper could benefit from a further exposition of how the GSP programme did
benefit recipients.  She said that reading the paper left one with the impression that there was no
benefit stemming from GSP programmes, and that therefore more information was desirable, as thiswould also help donor countries to assess the effectiveness of preferences given.  Information on
south-south trade and more information on the effect of technical assistance was also desirable.WT/COMTD/M/32
Page 22
103. The representative of Zambia said that his delegation had been preparing written comments
on the document, and hoped to provide this information at the next meeting.
104. The Director of the Development Division, said that the document WT/COMTD/W/77 stood
as it was.  The constant monitoring of special and differential treatment was one of the fundamental
tasks of the CTD, and the Secretariat had the duty to update information already collated and tosupplement this with whatever additional information members saw as desirable.  He proposed that a
new document be prepared which would take up some  of the issues mentioned by Members.  He said
that the Secretariat was also required to prepare a document on the participation of developing
countries in international trade, and that the issue of preferences could also be discussed in this
context.  He said that one operational problem was that there was a dearth of information on the
structure of preferential schemes, and that what information was present was rather piecemeal.  He
said that the technical assistance components of sp ecial and differential treatment could be looked at
in further detail.  A third element was to look at proposals made in negotiating bodies such as the
committee on agriculture regarding special and differential treatment.
105. The Chairman proposed that the CTD taken note of the Secretariat document, and that the
CTD revert to this agenda item later in 2001.
106. It was so agreed.
I. CTD  WORK PROGRAMME FOR 2001 (WT/COMTD/W/81/REV.1)
107. The Chairman recalled that Members had held a brief discussion on the CTD's work
programme at the 31st Session, and that Members had agreed to revert to this at the current meeting.
He said the Draft Work Programme for 2001 was contained in document WT/COMTD/W/81/Rev.1.He understood that there might be some date changes, and he invited the Director of the WTO
Development Division to comment.
108. The Director of the Development Division said that there were a number of changes related to
the decision to hold the Ministerial Conference in November 2001.  The first change related to
Geneva Week, not strictly a CTD activity but supported by the Development Division, which couldnot now be held in October for various reasons; and it was now proposed to advance this to the week
of 8 October 2001.  This would also allow participants to attend the General Council and the Services
Council.  The WTO was also looking at the possibility of the participation of ministers in Geneva
Week.  He also indicated that the Secretariat would be seeking financial contributions to make
Geneva Week feasible.  The Secretariat was grateful to Sweden for the support in the previous year
and to other countries for the first Geneva Week.  The overall cost was approximately SFR 500,000.
109. The second change in the meeting schedule re lated to the need to hold the final annual
meeting of the CTD before 11 October instead of 19 October in order to adopt the annual report and
other matters that had been planned for the meeting originally scheduled for 19 October 2001.  The
new date would be advised.
110. On the question of seminars, there was a planned seminar on 9 May and the suitability of that
date was being checked.  He also asked for suggestions on topics that should be addressed as well asthe names of agencies or individuals who might be able to present studies of the successful
development of e-business in developing countries or of tools that may help in its development.
111. Finally, in connexion with Geneva Week, it had been planned to have a seminar on policies
and strategies for trade and development.  It would now seem that it might be more appropriate toWT/COMTD/M/32
Page 23
hold this after the Ministerial Meeting, perhaps in early December.  Members would be advised of a
more concrete proposal.
112. The representative of Mexico asked if the CTD scheduled for 19 October was moved to 11 or
12 October, when the final CTD for the year would be held.
113. The Director of the Development Division explained that, since the deadline for submission
of reports of WO bodies to the Ministerial Meeting had been set as 11 October, the annual report of
the CTD for 2001 would have to be adopted before then.  The next meeting would most likely slip to
2002.
114. The representative of Norway asked about the proposal to have presentations from other
agencies to make presentations to the CTD.  Norway thought these could usefully be pooled, if not
this year, then in the future, especially during the discussion on technical cooperation, avoiding
duplication of the discussions.
115. The Director of the Development Division said  this was a useful suggestion which would be
taken into account in future planning.
116. The Chairman said that, in the light of the information provided, it would be necessary to
prepare a new draft work programme for discussion at the CTD in May.
117. The Chairman also informed the CTD about informal consultations on possible work on small
economies.  The CTD had been discussing this issues on the basis of the mandate contained in
paragraph 6 of the Geneva Ministerial Declaration which noted Ministers' deep concern over the
marginalization of LDCs and certain small economies.  So far, the work had been on the basis of
submissions by Members and discussions in the CTD.   At the previous meeting of the CTD, he had
undertaken to hold consultations at the request of a delegation on issues relating to small economies.These consultations had been held the previous day.  At the consultations there was a large measure of
support for the idea that further work should be done in the CTD.  It was initially proposed that this
further work should undertaken by way of a work programme.  Some Members could not agree with
the proposal for a work programme at this time.  The main concern expressed was that this would
entail creation of a new category of developing countries.  For their part, Members seeking furtherwork on small economies maintained that their objectiv e was only to identify trade-related issues that
were of concern to small economies given certain special constraints that they faced.  In light of this
inability of some Members to support a work programme a modified proposal was made for a study
by the Secretariat.  While many Members were supportive of this, it was also clear that others would
wish more information and greater clarity regarding the nature of the proposed study to facilitate
consideration of and a decision on the matter.  As a result, the Chairman therefore propose to request
the Secretariat to draw up terms of reference for a possible study on trade-related constraints on smalleconomies and that further consultations be held on the proposal for a study when the terms of
reference became available.  Any Member was free to submit any new documentation relating to any
issue affecting small economies.  He asked if this was acceptable.
118. The representative of the United States found the chair's suggestion acceptable, but noted that
the United States considered that the discussions in small economies in the CTD had been based on
submissions by delegations, but did not believe that it was clear that there was a mandate to conduct
work in the CTD to be found in the Geneva Declaration.  There was a reference to the chronic debt
problem of those referenced above including LDCs and the rest of the paragraph referred to initiatives
for LDCs.
119. The representative of St Lucia took a different view of the Geneva Declaration from that of
the United States.WT/COMTD/M/32
Page 24
120. It was agreed to ask the Secretariat to draw up terms of reference for a possible study on
trade-related constraints on small economies.  Further consultations would be held on the proposal for
a study when the terms of reference became available.
J. MARKET ACCESS FOR EXPORTS OF THE LEAST-DEVELOPED COUNTRIES –
INFORMATION PROCEDURES – REPORT BY THE CHAIRMAN ON
CONSULTATIONS
121. The Chairman said that at several previous sessions of the committee, he had reminded the
CTD that, normally, notifications and information provided on changes to GSP were sent to the CTD
under the provisions of the Enabling Clause.  Accordingly, information on any actions taken by
developed Members under their GSP schemes in fav our of LDCs would normally be provided in that
way, and indeed at the previous meeting the EC and Canada had notified the CTD of planned changesin their programmes to increase market access for LDCs.  On the other hand, steps taken by
developing countries under the 1999 Waiver on Preferential Tariff Treatment for LDCs were to be
notified to the Council on Trade in Goods.  As he had said previously, there was an inconsistency in
the reporting procedures.  In order to resolve that, he had proposed in his fax of 27 November 2000
that any market access measures taken specifically in favour of the least-developed countries, whetherunder the Enabling Clause and notified to the CTD or under the 1999 waiver and notified to the CTG
be transmitted by either body, to the Sub-Committee on LDCs, for substantive consideration.  The
Sub-Committee would report back to the CTD or CTG, as appropriate, on its discussions.  The
objective was to allow for a unified consider ation in one forum, i.e. the Sub-Committee on
Least-Developed Countries, of measures taken in fa vour of the LDCs.  No modification to existing
notification procedures was proposed.  As Members would recall, he had consulted with the Chairman
of the CTG about it who had agreed that it was a pragmatic approach that he could propose to the
CTG.  Unfortunately, the CTG had not met and he would continue to pursue the matter and monitor
CTG action.  In the meantime, he proposed that the CTD take a decision on the matter and he put it
before the Committee for its consideration.  He asked Members whether the proposal was acceptableto the Committee.
122. The representative of the United States said that her delegation probably would be prepared to
agree to such a procedure ad referendum as she wished to see what happened in the CTG.  She asked
if the notifications were to be transmitted to the Sub-Committee on Least-Developed Countries, and
whether that meant that notifications originally made in the CTD and the CTG would continue to be
made in the two bodies so that the practice of notifying the CTD and the CTG of measures by
developed and developing respectively would be co ntinued.  Her understanding was that the decision
would be to transmit those notifications to th e Sub-Committee on Least-Developed Countries for
substantive discussion and reporting back while the notifications themselves would continue to be
made according to existing practice.
123. The Chairman confirmed that that was what he proposed.  However, he sought clarification
from the representative of the United States as to whether her delegation wished to await the CTG
consideration before agreeing to a final decision in the CTD,
124. The representative of the United States said that since the proposal did not change the practice
of notifications, her delegation would probably be able to go along with the suggestion for the
substantive deliberations ad referendum until a decision had been taken in the CTG.
125. The Committee agreed ad referendum to the new procedure pending consideration of the
matter in the CTG.WT/COMTD/M/32
Page 25
K. ELECTION OF CHAIRPERSON OF THE CTD
126. The Chairman said that it was his understanding that there had been consultations and that
Ambassador Nathan Irumba of Uganda had been nominated as Chairman for the year ahead.  He
noted that Ambassador Irumba had been a keen follower and participant in the work of the CTD.  He
had served as Ambassador to the UN in New York and in a number of positions in Uganda, Londonand Paris.  There was no doubt about his experience and qualifications and his capacity to lead the
CTD.  He asked if the CTD approved the election of Ambassador Irumba.  It was so agreed.
127. He congratulated Ambassador Irumba on his election, and invited him to take the floor.
128. Ambassador Irumba thanked members of the CTD and the African group for their support.
He would do his best to emulate the example of the outgoing chairman and thanked him for the
exemplary manner in which he had led the CTD.
129. The representatives of St Lucia, Zambia , Barbados , Trinidad and Tobago , Chile , India ,
Canada, Mexico , the European Communities  and Thailand  (on behalf of ASEAN) expressed their
thanks to the Chairman for his work during the past year and offered their congratulations to
Ambassador Irumba on his election to the chair.
L. ELECTION OF THE CHAIRPERSON OF THE SUB-COMMITTEE ON LDCS
130. The Chairman said that Consultations on the subject were still being held on the election of
the chairperson of the Sub-Committee on Least-Developed Countries.  A formal meeting of the CTD
would be convened to take up this item as soon as possible.
M. OTHER BUSINESS
131. The Chairman said that there were two matters to raise under other business.  The first was a
request for any inputs to the preparation for the CTD seminar on electronic commerce planned for
May 2001.  The second was an announcement about plans for an internship scheme for missions in
Geneva.  Copies of the plan were available in the Room.
132. The Director of the Development Division recalled his earlier statement on e-commerce and
repeated his request for ideas for topics and the names of experts to speak at the seminar.  He also
introduced the internship scheme for young people from selected countries to permit them to enhance
their knowledge of the multilateral trading system and support their mission in participating more
actively in the daily activities of the WTO.  The selected candidates would ideal be involved in trade
policy matters either at home or in Geneva.  The programme would be different from other such
internship programmes in that the candidates would work within their national missions in Geneva,
not in the WTO Secretariat.  Assignments would be  of 10-12 months duration.  They would be able to
participate in seminars organised by the Secretariat.  The selection of candidates would be made
jointly by the WTO Secretariat and the mission in question.  More information could be obtained from
the WTO Human Resources Section.
133. The representative of Sri Lanka thanked the WTO for the initiative which would be of
particular help to small delegations, and she hoped that such delegations would have priority in the
selection process.  The programme would help such delegations to cover meetings.  Candidates
should also have some basic prior knowledge of WTO issues.
134. The representative of Switzerland said that the representative of Sri Lanka had made the key
points.  This was an interesting initiative and without making any commitment he was confident thatWT/COMTD/M/32
Page 26
Switzerland would look favourably on any financing request for such an internship on condition that
the issue fitted within the WTO technical assistance strategy.  He asked who in WTO would
coordinate the project.
135. The representative of Canada said this was an exciting initiative and she would put to her
capital the possibility of supporting it financially.  She asked whether thought had been given to
extending this to interns from non-resident Members.
136. The representative of Egypt thanked the Secretariat for the initiative.  He supported Sri Lanka
on selection criteria, in particular in relation to giving priority to the needs of small delegations.  In
relation to Sri Lanka's point about choosing persons with some prior knowledge of the WTO, there
could be a link with the three-month course for which there was a register of participants.  This could
be factored in as a criterion.
137. The representative of St Lucia thanked Canada for raising the question of non-residents and
how interns from such countries could be placed, as she had the same question.  Regarding Egypt's
point, she noted that, while participants in previous training courses had some prior knowledge of the
WTO, there were also other ways and there should not be an absolute linkage to the three-month
course.
138. The representative of Cuba thanked the Secretariat for the initiative which could contribute to
improving the training of young officials from developing countries, enabling them to take knowledge
back to capitals and enrich the missions here in Geneva.  Cuba also agreed with Sri Lanka that priority
should be given to small delegations based in Geneva and also supported Egypt on the selection of
participants from the three-month courses.
139. The Head of the Human Resources Section was encouraged by the responses from the
delegations.  The point about the needs of small delegations would be taken into account in
establishing the list of interns.  A prior knowledg e of the WTO would also be in the interest of all
parties concerned, and he noted the comment that there should not necessarily be a link to the
three-month courses.  Coordination was being done  by the Human Resources Section and questions
could be addressed to him or the relevant colleague.
140. The Director of the Development Division said that the aim of the scheme was for candidates
to work in their own country missions.  This did not solve the problem of non-residents and this
would need to be examined.
141. The Head of the Human Resources Section pointed out that there was another internship
programme open to interns from all Members to locate interns within the organization itself.  A
reminder of that programme would be circulated shortly.
142. The CTD took note of the information provided.
143. The observer from Saudi Arabia asked whether observers were eligible for the internship
programme.
144. The Head of the Human Resources Section replied in the affirmative.
145. The Chairman said it had been a satisfying experience to preside over meetings of the CTD in
the previous year.  This had been a year of quite intensive activity and the CTD had made progress in
clarifying and sharpening the views of participants in an number of important areas: special and
differential treatment, technical cooperation, implementation, on the participation of developing
countries in world trade, on trade and technology, on the question even of small economies and manyWT/COMTD/M/32
Page 27
others.  As in the WTO as a whole, one could not avoid a sense of regret that the CTD seemed to
move a bit too slowly from consideration of issues  to considered action on issues.  At the same time,
he recognised the importance of hearing all voices and abiding by the principles of transparency and
consensus in the work.  He was gratified that the CTD had continued to uphold these principles in the
past year.  The year had seen the announcement of measures or actions implementing improvedmarket access through the GSP schemes in favour of the developing countries and in a number of
cases in favour of least-developed countries.  Some of these measures had also been implemented by
developing countries.  There were many challenges ahead for the CTD, and the proposed work
programme for 2001 held the promise of an interesting and rewarding year to come.  He had no doubt
that under the able guidance of his successor, Ambassador Irumba, this would be realised.  He wished
to thank all participants in the work of the CTD for the cooperative spirit they had shown over the
year.  This had made his task easier.  He was aware that, if at times it had seemed a little less easy, heknew that it was as easy as instructions had permitted.  He also expressed his appreciation to the
Secretariat, including interpreters.  It was gratifying to find that on so many occasions the CTD had
moved closer to a common understanding this year including on one of particular interest to his own
delegation and he remained optimistic regarding an eventual outcome on all these issues.
146. The Chairman noted that the next scheduled meeting of the CTD was an informal meeting on
22 March to hear from the Chair and Secretary of the OECD Trade Committee on a recent
OECD paper on "Trade with Non-OECD Members" .  The seminar on electronic commerce would be
held on 9 May, and the next formal session of the CTD would be on 22 May.
147. The 32nd Session of the CTD was adjourned.WT/COMTD/M/32
Page 28
ANNEX
Seminar on Technology, Trade and Development, 14 February 2001
Report by the Chairman
148. The Committee on Trade and Development Seminar on Trade, Technology and Development,
held on 14 February, was opened by the Director-General, Mr Mike Moore.  It was addressed by
distinguished speakers from the Indian and Zambian delegations in Geneva; from the Brazilian
Ministry of Science and Technology;  from the National Research Council of Canada;  from the
Southern Methodist University, Dallas, Texas;  and from OECD, UNCTAD, UNIDO, UNEP and the
WTO Secretariat.  Although the seminar was, regrettably, sparsely attended, all those who took part
recognized the high quality of the interventions du ring the day and the keen interest of the debate,
especially in the afternoon session.  This report sets out the main points raised in statements and
discussions.
149. It was widely recognised that technology is a key driver in the trade and development process.
In the last two decades, the highest growth rates have been recorded in industries, goods and services
exhibiting high technology content.  The assimilation and absorption of new technologies, especiallythose intensive in their use of knowledge-based assets, give developing countries the opportunity to
catch up with developed country partners, or to "leapfr og" stages of development.  But, to some extent
mirroring overall patterns in developing countries’ trade, there are great disparities in the degree to
which developing countries have been able to benefit from the rapid growth in high technology, high
value added sectors.
150. Foreign investment - which includes FDI and other procedures such as joint venture or other
"arms-length" arrangements - often plays a critical role in the transfer of technology and can
contribute to upgrading domestic technological ca pabilities.  But FDI flows also vary enormously
across developing countries and are highly concentrated in a few recipients.  While foreign investors
often provide a first impetus for technological advancement, foreign investment may notautomatically lead to an upgrading of technological capabilities.  Spill-over effects may be limited, in
part owing to the interest that foreign investor s – especially multinational companies – may have in
safeguarding their technological assets from potential competitors.  Equally, the process of transfer is
typically costly, requiring significant investment by both parties in a process with uncertain outcomes.
151. Upgrading domestic technological capabilities therefore requires governments to create a
suitable enabling environment by adopting appropriate policies.  Key policy choices for a favourable
enabling environment include investment in hum an capital, with training matched to skills
requirements;  infrastructure development;  establishment of research institutions with close linkages
to the private sector and to foreign institutions;  and other policies to strengthen the development of
the private sector, including competition and regulatory policy, and sound financial and
macroeconomic management.  It is also important that policy-makers adopt a dynamic perspective,
recognising that sources of comparative advantage change over time.  For example, while a country
may initially benefit from low unit labour costs, dangers exist if production is confined to low level
assembly activities that offer little scope to move up the technology ladder.  This situation, if not
recognised, can lead to increased vulnerability as competitors emerge.  It also needs to be recognised
that in any industry, the minimal threshold capabilitie s required simply for survival is likely to rise
with time.WT/COMTD/M/32
Page 29
152. When considering policy responses, a key element to consider is the opportunities and
challenges for the development of technological capability presented by the WTO agreements and the
relation of these agreements to policy options open to developing countries.
• Some speakers noted that, while technology transfer is one of the objectives of the
TRIPS Agreement (see Article 7), it is unclear how far this objective has been met.
While there is evidence to suggest that foreign direct investment responds positivelyand significantly to strong Intellectual Property regimes, especially in sectors that are
intensive in the use of knowledge-based assets, it was also argued that such response
may not necessarily be linked to enhanced transfer of technology.  Furthermore,
while patent provisions provide channels that can facilitate the transfer of technology,
many developing countries had in practice experienced difficulty in making use of
these.
• On subsidies, it was noted that the WTO Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing
Measures rules out certain aspects of activist industrial policy, based, for example, onselective subsidisation, by making them actionable through countervailing measures.
However, serious questions were posed regarding the utility and effectiveness of such
policies in any case.  Although the Agreement classifies certain types of spending on
research and development as non-actionable (see Article 8), some examples weregiven of instances where developing countries have had practical difficulties in
deriving benefits from these provisions.
• Regarding trade in services, developing countries were encouraged to use the
flexibility – to date sparingly used – available to them under the GATS to attach
conditions to their market access offers that would facilitate access to technology (seeArticle XIX.2).  Commitments in respect of commercial presence may facilitate
access to technology, including in critical infrastructure-related areas such as
telecommunications.  However, as in goods sectors, access to technology was not
necessarily coextensive with transfer of technology.
153. The question of capacity development in Least-Developed Countries was given particular
attention, and the point was made that their low participation in the world economy was to some
extent a reflection of the technology gap they faced relative to their more developed trading partners.
Article 66.2 of the TRIPS agreement, which was le gally binding on developed country members, had
to date been of uncertain benefit.  A possible area of action was the development of a concrete list ofincentives capable of overcoming special obstacles for technology transfer for LDCs.
154. In the afternoon, various speakers from donor and international agencies outlined examples of
international collaborative arrangements at bilateral and multilateral levels that can facilitate the
upgrading of developing country technological capa bilities.  It was emphasised that it was important
to differentiate technical assistance from the transfer  of technology.  At the same time, such assistance
can enhance the possibilities for technology absorption, especially through the creation of local and
cross-border networks and partnerships – including  public-private partnerships; transfer of best
practices; and the development of linkage between research institutions and enterprises.  Numerous
examples were quoted, and a presentation was given by the National Research Council of Canada
drawing on its experience of over 30 years in the field of technology-related assistance.  It was also
pointed out that technical assistance can also play an important role in supporting policy formulation
with a view to creating an appropriate enabling environment for the enhancement of technological
capabilities.WT/COMTD/M/32
Page 30
155. The presentations made to the Seminar – most of which were in PowerPoint format - will be
placed on the WTO website and thus made available to all Members and Observers, as well as the
wider public.
__________