1/ The Eurasian Economic Union launches safeguard investigation on certain flat-rolled steel products

The Kyrgyz Republic (on 4 September 2018), the Russian Federation (on 5 September 2018), Kazakhstan (on 7 September 2018) and Armenia (on 10 September 2018) notified the WTO’s Committee on Safeguards that the competent authority of the Eurasian Economic Union initiated on 7 August 2018 a safeguard investigation on certain flat-rolled steel products

The notifications indicate, among other things, as follows:

“[…] point of contact for the investigation and identify the preferred means for corresponding.

Department for Internal Market Defence (DIMD)
Eurasian Economic Commission
3/5, Smolensky boulevard
Moscow, 119121, Russia
Tel +7 (495) 669-24-00 # 1309, # 3097, # 3223, #1272
E-mail: tradedefence@eecommission.org.

[…] deadlines and procedures for importers, exporters and other interested parties to present evidence and their views

In accordance with the Protocol on Application of Safeguard, Anti-Dumping and Countervailing Measures to Third Countries (Annex № 8 to the Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Union of 29.05.2014), interested parties may declare their intention to seek participant status not later than 25 days from the date of initiation of the investigation. Participants to the safeguard investigation have the right to request access to the non-confidential file and participate in public hearings.

The participants to the safeguard investigation may request for a public hearing within 45 days from the date of initiation of the investigation.

Interested parties should submit comments within 60 days from the date of the initiation of the investigation in writing in the Russian language to the following address:

Department for Internal Market Defence (DIMD)
Eurasian Economic Commission
3/5, Smolensky boulevard
Moscow, 119121, Russia
E-mail: tradedefence@eecommission.org.”

Further information is available in G/SG/N/6/ARM/3, G/SG/N/6/KAZ/1, G/SG/N/6/KGZ/7 and G/SG/N/6/RUS/5.

What is a safeguard investigation?

A safeguard investigation seeks to determine whether increased imports of a product are causing, or is threatening to cause, serious injury to a domestic industry.

During a safeguard investigation, importers, exporters and other interested parties may present evidence and views and respond to the presentations of other parties.

A WTO member may take a safeguard action (i.e. restrict imports of a product temporarily) only if the increased imports of the product are found to be causing, or threatening to cause, serious injury.

Source: wto.org

 

2/ WEF ASEAN: Vietnam needs to seek new competitive edge in Industry 4.0

Vietnam and other countries at the same level of development should no longer see cheap labour as a strategy to maintain competitive edges in the market, said Justin Wood, Head of Regional Agenda – Asia Pacific and member of the Executive Committee of the World Economic Forum.

He made the remarks in a recent interview granted to Vietnam News Agency correspondents in Geneva, Switzerland, on the threshold of the World Economic Forum on ASEAN (WEF ASEAN) scheduled to take place in Hanoi from September 11 to 13.

Seeking new competitive advantages in the era of modern technology is a major policy issue for Vietnam and ASEAN at large as cheap labour is no longer a feasible strategy, he said.

Mentioning the WEF ASEAN 2018, Wood said the WEF had signed with the Government of Vietnam an agreement on the organization of WEF ASEAN since January 2017.

Such an important event needs a great deal of time for preparation, he said, adding that one important work was to decide its theme “ASEAN 4.0: Entrepreneurship in the fourth industrial revolution”.

This year’s WEF will feature 53 sessions, he said, adding that more than 900 participants are due to join the forum, including delegates from the public, governmental, private and civil society sectors as well as entrepreneurs, experts, and policy makers from over 40 countries.

It is expected to welcome over 90 governmental representatives, and eight Presidents and Prime Ministers.

With the theme of “ASEAN 4.0, entrepreneurship and the Fourth Industrial Revolution,” this year’s WEF will focus on the significance of the Industry 4.0 to the 10 ASEAN member countries, seeking answers to the questions of how changes brought by the Industry 4.0 should be understood and what actions ASEAN leaders should take.

Wood stressed that the Industry 4.0 affects all countries in the world, from the richest and most modern to the poorest and least developed. However, new technologies will bring about different impacts in different countries, which is the subject of study.

The era of new technologies has posed major policy questions, and the upcoming WEF-ASEAN will provide an opportunity to discuss and understand better the steps to be taken next, the WEF official said.

The WEF was established in 1971 as a non-profit foundation and is headquartered in Geneva, Switzerland. The forum engages the foremost political, business and other leaders of society to shape global, regional and industry agendas.

Founded in 1967, the ASEAN groups Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam.-VNA

Source: VNA

 

3/ Vietnam’s trade surplus increases to $2.8 billion

Total export value increased 14.5 per cent year-on-year to $155.4 billion during the first eight months. Of which, the domestic economic sector achieved a year-on-year surge of 17.4 per cent to $45.11 billion, while the foreign direct investment (FDI) sector gained $110.3 billion, an increase of 13.4 per cent.

The FDI sector had lower growth in export value against the domestic sector but it holds 71 per cent of total national export value, said a GSO expert.

Many key export products gained high growth in value during the first eight months. Export value rose 15.7 per cent to $30.9 billion for telephone and parts; and 14.2 per cent to $18.4 billion for electronic products, computer and their parts. It surged 26.9 per cent to $10.6 billion for machine, equipment and parts, and 9.6 per cent to $10.5 billion for footwear.

Meanwhile, Viet Nam saw strong growth for some farming products, including fruits and vegetables (up 14.8 per cent to $2.7 billion) and rice (up 23.6 per cent to $2.2 billion).

However, other commodities faced difficulty increasing export value due to falling global prices. Coffee exports fell 3.1 per cent in value to $2.5 billion, though they increased 14.8 per cent in volume while rubber fell 12.1 per cent in value to $1.2 billion but rose 7.9 per cent in volume. Pepper exports also dropped 35.7 per cent in value to $584 million while surging 4.7 per cent in volume.

Crude oil exports fell in both volume and value to 46.6 per cent and 24.6 per cent, respectively, compared with the same period last year.

The office said the growth of national import value was below that of export value.

The import figure rose 11.6 per cent year-on-year to $152.6 million. Of which, the domestic sector’s value reached $61.85 billion, up 11.8 per cent while the FDI sector stood at $90.81 billion, up 11.4 per cent.

Imports mainly served production of export products in the FDI sector. The country bought $26.9 billion of electronic products, computer and parts, up 13.7 per cent; $9.3 billion for telephone and parts, up 4.3 per cent; and $8.5 billion for cloth, up 16.1 per cent.

Some others for the domestic production had high growth, including steel (up 10.2 per cent to $6.7 billion), plastic (up 17.1 per cent to $5.8 billion), petrol and oil (up 26.4 per cent to $5.7 billion), metal products (up 35.9 per cent to $5.3 billion), and chemical products (up 26.3 per cent to $3.3 billion).

The office said in the first eight months, Viet Nam had a large trade surplus of $40 billion with the US and the EU, and a trade deficit of $37 billion with South Korea and China and $4 billion with ASEAN.

Source: VNS

Ngày 05/9

4/ New International Standard for determining infant formula ingredients just published

Infant formula is perhaps one of the most highly regulated foodstuffs in the world, so checking the exact composition is a rigorous affair. ISO is developing a series of standards for verifying many of the ingredients, to demonstrate the product is safe for consumption and contains what it says on the tin. The latest one, ISO 21422 | IDF 242 for the determination of chloride content, has just been published.

Serving one of our most vulnerable population groups, the manufacture of infant formula must adhere to tough regulations before it can arrive on supermarket shelves. Nutritional labelling is heavily regulated, often requiring conformation to the Codex Alimentarius, or Food Code, the international reference for food supplements.

Codex Alimentarius is the Joint Food Standards Programme established by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) and the World Health Organization (WHO). It develops harmonized international food standards that protect consumer health and promote fair practices in the food trade.

ISO, in cooperation with a number of international industry bodies, is developing a series of International Standards on validated methods of analysis for infant formula, designed to verify these components and thus demonstrate compliance to Codex standards.

What’s more, most of these standards have been adopted by Codex Alimentarius as reference and dispute resolution methods. One such standard is the recently published ISO 21422 | IDF 242, Milk, milk products, infant formula and adult nutritionals – Determination of chloride – Potentiometric titration method, which specifies a method for determining chloride in infant formula, milk and milk products.

Published jointly by ISO and the International Dairy Federation (IDF), ISO 21422 | IDF 242 is the result of close collaboration between ISO, the IDF and the independent standards developing organization AOAC INTERNATIONAL.

The experts involved in its creation include those from industry, regulatory bodies, commercial laboratories and academia, demonstrating a truly harmonized standard that can be used to meet labelling regulations all over the world.

Other standards in the series, currently in development, include:

• ISO 21424 | IDF 243, Milk, milk products, infant formula and adult nutritionals – Determination of minerals and trace elements – Inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS) method; and
• ISO 15151 | IDF 229, Milk, milk products, infant formula and adult nutritionals – Determination of minerals and trace elements – Inductively coupled plasma atomic emission spectrometry (ICP-AES) method

ISO also has a wide range of other International Standards for verifying the contents of infant formula, including those for fatty acid composition (ISO 16958 | IDF 231); total iodine (ISO 20647 | IDF 234); vitamins A and E (ISO 20633); vitamin B₁₂ (ISO 20634); vitamin C (ISO 20635); vitamin D (ISO 20636); myo-inositol (ISO 20637); nucleotides (ISO 20638); and pantothenic acid (ISO 20639).

ISO 21422 | IDF 242 was developed by ISO technical committee ISO/TC 34, Food products, subcommittee SC 5, Milk and milk products, and is published jointly by ISO and the IDF, and separately by AOAC INTERNATIONAL. It is available from your national ISO member or through the ISO Store.

Source: iso.org

 

Ngày 07/9

5/ Adding 15 procedures to National Single Window

As of 15th August 2018, 11 ministries and sectors have connected National Single Window mechanism with 68 administrative procedures, over 1.4 million sets of dossiers and the participation of over 23,400 enterprises.

From 1st January 2018 to 15th August 2018, the number of dossier was over 510,000 sets with the participation of over 5,400 enterprises.

According to the General Department of Vietnam Customs-the Standing Office of the National Steering Committee on ASEAN Single Window (ASW), National Single Window (NSW) and trade facilitation, the number of connected procedures increased by 15 procedures compared to the previous month.

Regarding the ASW implementation, Vietnam has officially exchanged Certificate of C/O form D with 4 countries, including Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore and Thailand. At the same time, implementing the pilot exchanging of C/O form D with 3 countries (Brunei, Cambodia and Philippines).

In the coming time, under the plan, Vietnam will implement the pilot connection on information exchange of ASEAN Customs declaration, Phytosanitary Certificate (ePhyto) and Animal Health Certificate (e-AH).

For the internal IT application, the General Department of Vietnam Customs has continuously implemented IT systems meeting requirements of Decree 59/2018/ND-CP and Circular 39/2018/TT-BTC, including the management system of export production and processing; Checking system for conditions of declaration registration.

Besides, it continues to expand the Automated System for Customs management at seaports, warehouses and yards nationwide. Currently, the system has been deployed at 5 Customs Departments, including Ha Noi, Hai Phong, Ho Chi Minh City, Ba Ria -Vung Tau and Quang Ninh.

For the implementation of online public service, the current number of online public service reaching at least level 3 in Customs sector is 170 of 180 procedures (equivalent to 94.4%), of which the number of online public service at level 4 is 161 procedures.

The General Department of Vietnam Customs has continuously deployed the scheme on e-tax payment 24/7 and signed the coordination agreements on tax collection 24/7 with 21 commercial banks.

Source: VCN

 

Ngày 10/9

6/ Samoa hosts Short Trade Policy Course for Pacific Island countries

Government and private sector representatives from the six Pacific Island countries that are members of the WTO are attending the first full Short Trade Policy Course for Pacific Island countries, which is taking place in Apia from 10 to 21 September 2018.

The WTO course aims to provide participants with a good understanding of the objectives, functioning, structure and basic principles of the WTO and to enhance awareness of the regional economic perspectives of trade policy and development. It also provides a platform for Pacific countries to interact and discuss trade issues of interest to the region.

Lautafi Fio Selafi Purcell, Samoa’s Minister of Commerce, Industry and Labour, officially opened the workshop. Minister Lautafi encouraged all participants to seize the opportunity to learn more about the WTO’s multilateral trading rules and to improve their awareness of trade policy. “It is important that we fully understand WTO disciplines and principles so that we can effectively engage in policy discussions and formulation that will benefit and contribute to the development of our small economies,” he said.

Minister Lautafi underscored the need to understand developments in international trade and the role of the WTO as the global trade rules body and how these rules have an impact on regional efforts under the Framework for Pacific Regionalism, the Blue Pacific narrative and the Roadmap on Sustainable Fisheries.

Dr Luanga Mukela Faustin, Counsellor and Head of the Asia and Pacific Desk of the WTO Institute for Training and Technical Cooperation, reaffirmed the WTO’s recognition of the specific needs of Pacific countries, which is why this course has been specially designed. Mrs Mere Falemaka, Permanent Representative of the Pacific Islands Forum to the WTO in Geneva, stressed the importance of this capacity-building activity for the region, particularly as issues of Pacific interest such as fisheries subsidies are being negotiated at the WTO currently. The course will help participants in assisting their governments on WTO issues and in advancing to higher-level WTO courses.

The training course is being held at the Taumeasina Island Resort Conference Centre.

Source: wto.org

7/ DG Azevêdo opens week-long workshop on government procurement

Director-General Roberto Azevêdo, on 10 September 2018, addressed the second “Advanced Global Workshop on Government Procurement” held at the WTO. DG Azevêdo highlighted the importance of transparent and effective government procurement systems for delivering a high standard of public goods and services to consumers. He also emphasized how the WTO’s Government Procurement Agreement is enhancing transparency and market access in this sector and how its growing relevance in today’s global economy is evidenced by the increasing number of WTO members seeking to join the Agreement.

Good morning everyone.

It is my pleasure to welcome you to the WTO for this year’s Advanced Global Workshop on Government Procurement.

This is a “flagship” activity for us to disseminate information and foster dialogue on government procurement in all its dimensions. This includes market access and trade but also good governance, efficiency and the promotion of a just and inclusive society.

Government procurement is a vital sector of all our economies. It represents between 13 and 18% of GDP for the majority of WTO members. And it has major implications for growth, competitiveness, good governance and citizens’ welfare.

Without transparent, effective and competitive procurement systems governments would struggle to deliver a high standard of public goods and services. This covers vital areas of infrastructure, health care, education, defense and policing. And it connects to a wide range of policy areas – including the UN Sustainable Development Goals.

So I’m pleased that all of these issues are on your agenda this week.

And of course the WTO Government Procurement Agreement will be an overarching theme.

The revised GPA came into force in 2014. With this revision, the parties to the Agreement put in place a modern, flexible tool to enhance transparency and market access in the government procurement sector.

The revised Agreement embodies new transitional measures for developing countries that join. It encourages the use of modern e-procurement tools. And it ensures enhanced flexibility for all participating members.

It also gives increased emphasis to the conservation of natural resources and the protection of the environment.

Since 2014, four additional WTO members have acceded to the Agreement: the Republic of Moldova, Montenegro, New Zealand and Ukraine.

A total of ten other WTO members are seeking to participate in the Agreement as full parties. And 32 members, including, recently, Afghanistan and Brazil, have obtained observer status under the Agreement, in order to learn more about it.

This sends a clear message about the growing relevance of the GPA in today’s global economy.

Another very significant development is that countries are increasingly joining the Agreement for a more diverse set of reasons than was the case previously.

While market access objectives remain central to the discussion, a growing number of transition economies are joining the Agreement for additional reasons – such as the promotion of good governance, and economic and social reform.

In fact, I think that the WTO GPA can provide an important tool for building linkages between major emerging economies and the developed world. It is notable that both China and the Russian Federation are among those seeking to join the Agreement.

And of course, accession involves detailed negotiations and a significant process of institution and capacity building.

A further important dimension that I would like to highlight concerns the potential contributions of new and emerging digital technologies. They may help with more efficient procurement, transparency and effective governance in this area.

Other important and pressing issues include:

• the legal and institutional foundations of government procurement in the international trading system;
• the effective control of corruption and collusion in procurement markets; and
• emerging topics such as the implications of procurement policies for inclusiveness and women’s empowerment.

This workshop provides time for a full and thoughtful exploration of these questions. It brings together participants from a diverse range of regions and economies, with the input of prominent outside experts.

So I look forward to seeing the reports of your discussions.

Before closing, I would like to mention another reason why the discussion at this workshop is particularly timely.

There are many misconceptions about the nature and objectives of the international trading system today.

There are some who feel that it exists only to support trade and that this is indifferent to other public interests.

But this has never been the case – in theory or in practice.

If you look at the Preamble to the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization this is very clear. It refers to “the optimal use of the world’s resources in accordance with the objective of sustainable development” as an over-arching goal of the system.

This goal is central to our work in the area of government procurement, and in all other areas as well.

Trade is not an end in itself. It matters because it improves people’s lives, creates better jobs and facilitates growth and development. And it does all of this because of the network of rules, practices and disciplines that we have established here.

The GPA is part of this. And therefore your discussions here to further international dialogue on this topic could not be more important.

So thank you for being here, and for your commitment to these issues. I wish you a very positive and productive week.

Source: wto.org

 

8/ Latest ISOfocus maps global goals for sustainable development

“As an independent, non-governmental organization, ISO plays a key role in defining standards that will help support innovation. This is fundamental in accelerating results,” says Michael Møller, Director-General of the United Nations Office at Geneva (UNOG), in the latest issue of ISOfocus magazine.

Møller refers to the ability of ISO standards to contribute to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), otherwise known as the Global Goals, a universal call to action to end poverty, protect the planet and ensure that all people enjoy peace and prosperity. He is one of a dozen leaders/experts in this issue that supports the widespread use of International Standards to help meet the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.

Entitled Our vision for a better world, the September/October 2018 edition of ISOfocus offers a forward-looking view to tackling some of the world’s most global challenges by 2030. From thematic areas like climate change and smart cities, the issue highlights how International Standards respond to global needs and help benchmark our progress against the SDGs.

ISO Secretary-General Sergio Mujica explains in his opening remarks: “Companies, governments and organizations around the world will increasingly find in our collection of International Standards solutions to ensure their sustainability – and, in so doing, exercise their intrinsic value to the sustainable development of the planet. Together, with ISO standards, we can contribute to making the 2030 Agenda a reality, so no one is left behind.”

The latest ISOfocus looks at key SDGs such as clean water and sanitation (SDG 6), affordable and clean energy (SDG 7), decent work and economic growth (SDG 8), industry, innovation and infrastructure (SDG 9), sustainable cities and communities (SDG 11), responsible consumption and production (SDG 12) and climate action (SDG 13), all of which, ultimately, highlight the demand for standards.

It lays out specific examples of how users and stakeholders are using International Standards to accelerate the achievement of the SDGs, and it tells the stories of individuals whose lives, communities and businesses have improved as a result. The articles in this special edition give multiple lenses for addressing some of the key issues facing our world today as well as the power of standards to make a difference.

Source: iso.org

 

9/ Party leader affirms continuously consolidated VN-Russia relationship

Despite global and regional changes, the comprehensive strategic partnership between Vietnam and Russia has been continuously strengthened and developed for the long-term interests of the two countries’ people, for the prosperity of the two nations, as well as for peace, cooperation and development in the region and the world.

General Secretary of the Communist Party of Vietnam Central Committee Nguyen Phu Trong made the affirmation at a joint press conference together with Russian President Vladimir Putin at the Botraroov Rutrei Palace in Sochi following their talks on September 6.

The two leaders expressed their satisfaction at the outcome of their talks. Accordingly, the two sides exchanged comprehensively bilateral relations and discussed major orientations to deepen the Vietnam-Russia comprehensive strategic partnership, he said.

They will work together to deepen bilateral political ties, strengthen strategic cohesion and improve the effectiveness of bilateral cooperation in all fields, especially economy, trade, investment, security, defence and military technique, he added.

The two sides exchanged views on international and regional issues of mutual concern, agreeing that the maintenance of peace and stability and intensification of mutual trust are core factors to ensure the stable development of the Asia-Pacific region.

Border and territorial disputes and others disputes in the Asia-Pacific region should be resolved by peaceful means, without the use of force or threat to use of force, on the basis of international law, including the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, with the aim of maintaining peace, stability, freedom, security and safety of navigation and aviation in the region, he said.

President Putin stressed that Russia and Vietnam have especially important relations and the two countries have maintained regular political dialogues.

The talks took place in a candid and constructive atmosphere with the participation of senior officials from ministries, departments and major groups of Vietnam and Russia, he said.

The two sides discussed bilateral cooperation in all fields. Russia and Vietnam are comprehensive strategic partners and that relationship has been incessantly growing based on mutual respect, equality and strategic benefits, he added.

The two nations have continued collaboration across the board and maintained close coordination in the international arena. This is particularly meaningful since the two sides share the same viewpoints in various fields.

Russia and Vietnam have also paid due attention to developing economic and trade relations through the implementation of the free trade agreement between the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) and Vietnam along with deals reached by their leaders.

Both nations have expanded the exchange of goods of their strength and increased the turnover of commodities with high volume of technology in addition to supporting the implementation of joint investment projects, enhancing cooperation in such potential fields as oil and gas, energy, metallurgy, transportation, light industry, agriculture, science and technology.

President Putin said the talks took place in a pragmatic and effective manner. The official visit to Russia by the Vietnamese Party leader has created a new momentum to deepen the bilateral multifaceted cooperation.

Earlier, right after the talks, Party General Secretary Nguyen Phu Trong and President Vladimir Putin witnessed the signing of a number of cooperation documents between the two nations.

Source: VNA

10/ AIPA-39 concludes, reaching consensus in various fields

The 39th ASEAN Inter-Parliamentary Assembly (AIPA) General Assembly in Singapore wrapped up on September 6 after four working days.

The delegation of the Vietnamese National Assembly, led by Vice Chairman Do Ba Ty, along with representatives of other member states, observer nations and the ASEAN Secretariat attended the event.

At the closing session, the General Assembly approved reports submitted by the committees on political, economic, organisational and social matters and the Committee on Women Parliamentarians. They also issued a joint statement of the AIPA-39 and handed over the chairmanship of the AIPA-40 to Thailand.

Addressing the closing ceremony, Speaker of the Singaporean Parliament Tan Chuan-Jin emphasised the importance of AIPA as the bridge linking people and governments of ASEAN countries, enhancing intra-bloc cooperation and coordination to effectively cope with common challenges of the bloc.

He said the AIPA-39 discussed and reached high consensus on certain areas such as promoting the building of e-commerce and cross-border trading systems, coordinating to support small- and medium-sized enterprises in ASEAN in regional and global integration, bringing into play the role of the smart cities network, realising gender equality, and empowering women in grasping opportunities created by Industry 4.0.

Participants also agreed on some solutions to work together to deal with common challenges facing all ASEAN nations like climate change, trade protectionism, cyber security, fake news, and personal data theft.

They reiterated the bloc’s importance and central role in leading and handling cross-border security challenges, maintaining law-based regional order, and ensuring marine security.

Receiving the AIPA-40 chairmanship, President of the National Legislative Assembly of Thailand Pornpetch Wichitcholchai said his country will work closely with other member states to sustain ASEAN’s resilience and innovation trend and build ASEAN into a people-oriented and people-centred grouping.

Source: VNA

 

Ngày 11/9

11/ Sugar industry sees bitter side of ATIGA’s impacts

The sugar industry is having to overcome the challenges of high material costs and low prices of bagasse-fired power to deal with the pressure of the ASEAN Trade in Goods Agreement (ATIGA).

Bagasse-fired power– prospects for improving the sugar industry

Each year, Lam Son Sugar Joint Stock Corporation (Lasuco) earns tens of billions of Vietnamese dongs from the sale of bagasse-fired electrical power. In the 2018 sugarcane crop, Lasuco fetched a revenue of VND43 billion from selling baggase-fired electricity.

However, the corporation has had to use this sum of money to compensate the costs of production in order to enhance the competitiveness of Lam Son sugar.

Lasuco has a generating capacity of 33.5MW. Every year, Lasuco sells about 150 million kWh of electricity to the national grid. With the selling price of electricity at 5.8 cent per kWh (VND1,350 per kWh), the group is suffering losses of VND500-600 per KWh as electricity production costs have amounted to VND1,900 per kWh.

According to Lasuco General Director Le Van Phuong sugar production should go along with electricity generation, noting that investors are hesitant to fund bagasse-fired electricity at the low price of VND1,350 per kWh,as the minimum price for a profitable investment is 7.4 cent per kWh. In Thailand, the price is at 10.8 cent per kWh.

The role of bagasse-fired power is undeniable in sugar production and the development of renewable energy in Vietnam. However, few investors greatly prefer the price of 5.8 cent per kWh for bagasse-fired electricity.

Vu Ngoc Duc, deputy director of the Renewable Energy Centre of the Energy Institute under the Ministry of Industry and Trade, said that just 9 of the 40 sugar factories in Vietnam have invested in producing bagasse-fired electricity with a total installed capacity of 400MW. However, only 100MW has been sold to the national power grid.

Overcoming the difficulties ATIGA

ATIGA was signed by member states in February 2009 and the tax on imported sugar, as stipulated by ATIGA, is held at a level of 5%. However, under the roadmap for ATIGA’s tariff reduction, the sugar industry will encounter numerous difficulties when the import tax is lowered to zero%.

The sugar industry now faces tough competition from regional countries. For example, Thai sugar accounts for 80% of all sugar imported by Vietnam. The price of sugar in Thailand is always lower than domestic prices thanks to cheaper production costs and government subsidies.

Lasuco General Director Le Van Phuong said to compete with foreign rivals, sugar mills have operated under the ‘outsourcing method for sugar growers’. This means that growers can enjoy the total value of produced sugar, while factories only benefit from by-products such as bagasse, molasses, and press mud.

Apart from pressure from production costs, many sugar mills are facing challenges from sugar smuggled in from Thailand. According to statistics, as many as 500,000 tons of sugar are imported illegally from Thailand into Vietnam annually, accounting for one-third of the domestic sugar output.

According to Pham Quoc Doanh, Chairman of Vietnam Sugarcane and Sugar Association, sugar by-products such as ethanol and biomass-fired power are seen as offering plentiful opportunities for the sugar industry to sharpen its competitiveness.

Mr Doanh anticipated bright prospects for investment in bagasse-fired electricity, however, greater attention should be paid to the price of such sources of electricity while noting that the production of bagasse –fired electricity has helped resolve environmental issues and increase the efficiency of production.

Adam Ward, Country Representative for Vietnam at the Global Green Growth Institute (GGGI), suggested Vietnam gradually increase the sale price of bagasse-fired electricity to 7.4 cent per kWh, a move which would benefit the market.

He stressed the necessity of expanding production of biomass-fired power to meet the increasing demand in Vietnam and in turn, help increased the sugar industry’s competitiveness with foreign rivals.

In Mr Doanh’s opinion, the most effective model for the sugar industry in the coming time is a combination of production of sugar, ethanol and bagasse-fired power as the advantages of ethanol production (for biofuel) are open outlets with monopoly like the electricity sector. Currently, Vietnam has at least seven wholesale points for oil and gas imports and ethanol production is now being highly encouraged.

Source: VOV

 

12/ Vietnam rolls out red carpet for RoK firms: PM

The Vietnamese Government welcomes and creates favourable conditions for foreign businesses to make investments in Vietnam, including those from the Republic of Korea (RoK), Prime Minister Nguyen Xuan Phuc has affirmed.

Hosting reception in Hanoi on September 10 for Chairman of the Federation of Korean Industries Huh Chang-Soo, who led a RoK business delegation, PM Phuc lauded Korean investors for continuing their investment in large-scale projects in Vietnam, hoping that they will carry on pouring more capital into high-tech sectors, heavy industry, and infrastructure development.

PM Phuc voiced his hope that RoK companies will bring state-of-the-art technologies to Vietnam, work to protect the environment, create jobs for local people, and contribute to Vietnam-RoK relations.

He wished for stronger cooperation between enterprises of both nations and suggested the RoK side import more from Vietnam in order to balance trade.

Furthermore, the Government leader asked businesses to channel more efforts into realising the set target of 100 billion USD in bilateral trade by 2020.

Vietnam and the RoK are enjoying a fruitful strategic cooperative partnership, he said, adding that nearly 160,000 Vietnamese and RoK nationals are living in each nation, serving as a bridge to connect the two peoples and contribute to their future.

Huh Chang-Soo, for his part, highlighted Vietnam’s strong economic growth and sound relations between the two nations, saying that the two factors will open up various cooperative opportunities for Vietnamese and RoK enterprises.

He said that bilateral relations have not only been thriving in economy, but also in other sectors such as culture, tourism, cuisine, and sport.

Representatives of RoK corporations informed the Vietnamese leader of their activities in Vietnam and hoped to receive further support from the Vietnamese Government and relevant authorities.

Source: VNA

 

13/ Azevêdo urges Commonwealth to play full part in strengthening the multilateral system

Speaking at a meeting of WTO Commonwealth members held at the WTO on 11 September, Director-General Roberto Azevêdo said the support provided by Commonwealth members for the multilateral trading system is hugely important. “Bringing together countries of all sizes, from all continents, this group has a powerful voice,” he said, “and I am sure that you will continue to be a strong and positive voice” in maintaining and strengthening the rules and structures in place today.

Ladies and gentlemen,

Good morning. And thank you for inviting me to join you today.

We all know how significant trade is to Commonwealth members.

It acts as a source of growth and development, with Commonwealth countries exporting over 3 trillion dollars’ worth of goods and services each year.

And it is a major source of employment.

To take a few examples:

• In Australia and India trade accounts for 16% of jobs.
• In South Africa, Canada and the UK it’s around 20%.
• In New Zealand it’s 28%.
• And of course in the small, open, trade-dependent economies of the Commonwealth the figure is often even higher.

Given all of that, it’s no surprise that Commonwealth members are very vocal in the trade debate.

I saw this myself at the Commonwealth Business Forum in London in April this year, which was held alongside the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting.

And I heard a strong message of support for the multilateral system.

In fact the leaders’ communique reaffirmed the commitment of Commonwealth members to “free trade in a transparent, inclusive, fair, and open rules-based multilateral trading system” – and one which “takes into account the special requirements of LDCs and SVEs.”

This support is hugely important – particularly in the current circumstances.

The challenges facing the trading system are of grave concern. This situation calls for our attention, and more importantly, our action.

Trade tensions are on the rise.

WTO data shows a big increase in new trade restrictive measures applied over the last six months. The value of trade covered by these measures is almost double that of the previous period. This is extremely serious. Whether or not you call it a trade war, certainly the first shots have been fired.

Continued escalation risks a major economic impact. The predominant effect here would be disruption. It threatens jobs and growth in all countries. In fact, we may already be seeing some early effects. Delayed investment decisions are a good example.

However, I want to stress that, faced with these headwinds, the WTO continues to do its job.

WTO rules, as well as our processes of monitoring and review, are helping to avoid the situation becoming even worse. Members are using the WTO as a forum for issues to be aired and discussed. And members are bringing their concerns over new trade-restrictive measures to the DSB.

Around 30 disputes have been launched this year. This is already the highest annual total for 16 years – and it’s only September.

This is positive as it shows faith in the system. But at the same time, it is putting more strain on a dispute settlement system which is already under threat.

Let me address this point now.

The blockage in appointments to the Appellate Body is one of the key challenges before us today.

Despite much effort over recent months, we are no closer to a solution. This poses a grave systemic risk which could affect all areas of our work. And we need real commitment from all sides to solve this impasse.

I want to underline the systemic importance of the DSB. It is a fundamental pillar not just of the WTO, but of global economic governance. And it is highly effective.

Many disputes are resolved before they reach the litigation stage, but when they do proceed to that stage compliance with rulings is very high, at around 90%. So about 10% of disputes are pending implementation, and the parties are working on it, but the vast majority have already found a satisfactory solution.

So we must maintain this vital pillar and keep working to resolve the AB issue.

Ultimately I think that this issue, and all of the trade tensions that we see today, will not be solved through technical mechanisms and procedures. The crisis in global trade is political. It requires a political solution. And we need to have a political conversation about the WTO.

This brings me to the conversation about WTO reform.

The very fact that many members are seeking such a conversation is very positive. It shows that leaders are increasingly engaged in WTO issues. Instead of tearing the system up, they seem to want to strengthen and improve it. And already ideas are being brought forward.

For example:

• In July, President Trump and President Juncker committed to work to reform the WTO.
• There is the EU-China joint working group on WTO reform.
• There is also the trilateral initiative from the US, EU and Japan – covering transparency, and a range of other issues.
• Canada has called a ministerial meeting on these issues in October.
• President Macron has raised WTO reform as an issue for the G20 – and recently announced that he may convene a meeting on this in November.
• And others have raised it as well. It has been a common refrain in my exchanges with leaders over recent months.

No doubt there are a wide range of views on both the need for reform, and what such a reform could look like.

But, the important thing is that the system remains strong – and, if possible, becomes even stronger.

This is actually what we have been working on, together, in recent times. And we have made real progress.

The fact that WTO members have struck a series of agreements in a variety of formats over recent years shows a degree of flexibility and a desire to improve the system.

I hope that we will be able to build on this – not least as it could prove the key to resolving some of the underlying issues that are fuelling the trade tensions that we are seeing today.

So what is the role of the Commonwealth here?

I would point to three specific actions.

First, don’t be knocked off course – keep working here in Geneva.

We have a range of issues on the table which are very dear to many members, and that need to see progress. This includes issues such as agriculture, food security, development and fisheries subsidies. We need to keep working hard on all of these fronts, discussing ideas, and putting forward proposals.

No doubt many members will also continue working on other areas. And much of that work is evolving fast.

So that’s the first element I’d mention – stay on course.

The second is to redouble your efforts to resolve the impasse regarding the Appellate Body. As I have already explained – this is the most pressing challenge before us today. It demands the urgent attention of anyone who cares about the future of the trading system.

The third action I want to mention is to get involved in the broader debate.

This is a crucial moment in the way that the international community thinks about trade and the trading system. The outcome of this debate could shape the system for a generation.

In my view we need to hear a stronger narrative that is pro-trade and pro-cooperation, in order to counter the more negative messages which we often hear.

Of course we need trade to work better. We need it to be more inclusive. But we can only achieve this by working together – and by maintaining and strengthening the rules and structures that are in place today. So let’s be clear and let’s be loud about the value that the system provides.

The trading system has halved tariffs since 1995, it cuts red tape and it increases certainty and stability. These are the elements that businesses need to thrive and create jobs. Without the trading system, tariffs, bureaucracy and uncertainty would be through the roof.

Imagine for a moment going back to the world before the multilateral trading system.

Returning to those tariff levels would see trade flows fall by 60%. That would mean a bigger hit to GDP than we saw after the 2008 crisis – the biggest crisis we’ve seen for 80 years.

Every objective assessment of the system that I have seen shows that its importance is beyond doubt.

So I am calling on everyone who believes in trade as a force for good to speak up.

And I hope that the Commonwealth will play its full part.

Bringing together countries of all sizes, from all continents, this group has a powerful voice. And I am sure that you will continue to be a strong and positive voice in this debate.

Thank you for listening. I hope you have a very productive meeting here today.

Source: wto.org

 

14/ Redefining the city landscape

Imagine your favourite city. Now imagine the same city with more people. Lots and lots more people! A United Nations study predicts that global urban population will increase from 3.9 billion in 2015 to 6.3 billion in 2050. Yes, an increase of 60 % in just 35 years¹⁾.

Pollution, greenhouse gas emissions, traffic jams, crowded areas – these are just a few of the problems that challenge many cities. And the steady rise in urban population only means these problems could get even worse. This is why Sustainable Development Goal SDG 11, “Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable”, is so important. Success in achieving the targets under SDG 11 sets the stage for achieving many of the other SDG goals.

If we want to reach the targets set out by SDG 11, we need to work together to develop the tools that will help cities become truly smart and sustainable. International Standards can be powerful tools of change. Their application allows cities to reduce energy costs and emissions through more efficient buildings, electricity grids, street lights, transportation systems, and energy and water networks, at a time when cities already account for 70 % of greenhouse gas emissions.

International Standards provide the tools, foundations and platforms to take cities into the future, from Pully, Switzerland, to Sappada, Italy, and beyond. Let’s look at how these cities are faring.

Standards in Sappada, Italy

ISOfocus: Can you briefly explain how the idea to implement ISO 37101 in Sappada came about?

Sara Toniolo and Chiara Pieretto: Surrounded by imposing conifer forests in the Dolomite Mountains, Sappada is a place with a singular history. It was founded in the 11^th century by Tyrolean settlers who moved south in search of safety and forms a small linguistic enclave on Italian soil. While you may hear this peculiar dialect spoken on the streets, the first evidence of its cultural heritage can be seen in the distinctive wooden chalets grouped around a small chapel. The village is steeped in local folklore and the Sappadini still celebrate the “Carnevale di Sappada”, a colourful annual event that uses the same wooden masks handed down through generations.

The region’s unique mountainous landscape is conserved in three Sites of Community Importance that record more than 96 000 visitor presences each year. For Sappada is also a popular tourist resort with state-of-the-art infrastructure mainly directed at winter sports. The challenge was to manage the village’s development while still retaining its characteristic old-world charm. This required a sustainable development strategy with clearly defined actions that the community could put in place to meet development objectives that were tailored to its social, environmental and economic needs.

To enhance the area’s attractiveness while preserving its environmental, social and cultural peculiarities, the mayor of Sappada turned to ISO 37101, a management system standard for the sustainable development of communities. The project was coordinated by Prof. Antonio Scipioni of the Department of Industrial Engineering at the Università di Padova with a view to rallying all local and regional stakeholders around a common goal: to help the community plan sound territorial development programmes that look after the environmental, economic and socio-cultural features. These efforts were rewarded with an ISO 37101 certification in May this year.

What achievements related to attaining ISO 37101 are you most proud of?

Through its holistic approach, ISO 37101 has helped Sappada manage its local complexities, forged by distinctive environmental features and a strong sense of identity, while defining new ways of promoting the territory. We were fortunate to be able to involve associations for cultural and local development alongside main tour operators such as hotel and event managers. We also developed a new tool to help the municipality identify and assess all its activities in terms of their sustainability, risks and opportunities. We are proud of what we have achieved, since, to the best of our knowledge, Sappada is the first community in Italy – indeed in Europe – to gain third-party certification to ISO 37101.

In what ways will ISO 37101 help Sappada implement a sustainable development strategy?

ISO 37101 will encourage Sappada to continue celebrating its identity and culture while protecting its distinctive landscape through appropriate environmental programmes, thus reinforcing its attractiveness to the outside world. It will also help to measure and monitor its sustainability performance, ensure legal compliance and engage stakeholders.

What kind of results do you hope to see in the coming months?

Sappada is Italy’s first sustainable village. The municipality intends to promote the benefits of being ISO 37101-compliant among its main stakeholders to raise awareness around this important achievement and organize the next steps. We have plans to involve local school children in specific educational programmes on environmental aspects such as waste collection and landscape protection. The safety of public infrastructures will also be improved and there is a project to create an eco-museum in the village. The municipality will be tasked with monitoring the continuous improvement of these activities as well as their overall sustainability performance.

Do you have any advice for other cities/communities that don’t know where and how to start?

Our advice is to begin with an in-depth analysis of your community context. For instance, does it have a strong identity it wishes to preserve? What are the main features of the landscape and how can you maintain them? Do you receive much tourism and, if so, how can it best be managed? Get to know your local surroundings and circumstances better by putting in place a robust monitoring system and make it work for you.

Implementing ISO 37101 gave Sappada the opportunity to develop a multi-functional, integrated monitoring system to evaluate the environmental, economic and social conditions of the community. This enabled the collection of vast quantities of data on air quality, water consumption and emissions, but also on the rate of employment, number of teachers, sports classes and foreign language courses for children (including local dialect), number of hospital beds and types of emergencies in the region. In this regard, another ISO standard – ISO 37120 on community indicators for city services and quality of life – proved most helpful for identifying the information to be collected. With precise and verifiable indicators, you can ensure your community’s unique assets become a resource for the future.

Standards in Pully, Switzerland

ISOfocus: What do you believe are the biggest challenges facing smart cities?

Alexandre Bosshard: Many challenges need to be addressed to achieve the successful implementation of information and communication technologies (ICT) in our town’s services. At Pully’s Department of Public Works and Industrial Services (DTSI), these challenges include the culture of innovation in our local government, funding and intellectual resources, and the relationship with citizens, both in terms of protecting privacy and their role in developing a practical, human and friendly town.

What are the solutions?

The DTSI has implemented a dual process to address the culture of innovation. On an individual level, when new project managers are hired, they are trained and coached by a senior colleague throughout their first project. At group level, we have introduced a project management system in the management team. This allows decision making to be coordinated between the managers of the bodies responsible for ensuring the services provided are of consistent quality, and the project managers responsible for adjusting the DTSI to the changing environment. This process encourages and controls interaction between the employees, which ultimately fosters collective knowledge and stimulates innovation.

The following example illustrates a possible approach to resolving the issue of funding and intellectual resources. Three years ago, Pully asked several towns if they were interested in being involved in developing an e-governance project. The collaboration allowed us to benefit from expert advice that helped us extend the use of our application for “excavation e-permits” to multiple projects. Pooling investment has also brought substantial savings. Our town has contributed USD 52 000 of a total budget of USD 172 000 and the balance has been financed by other partners.

By 2017, following the successful launch of several “smart” projects, Pully was ready to outline a digital vision and strategy. The focus was on the social impact of the ICT implementation and on citizen participation in particular. A dedicated Website will be launched in the second half of 2018. It will set out the projects and will, for example, provide a concrete illustration of how the town deals with the privacy aspect. Specific events could also be organized to engage in dialogue with the public on the challenges of a digital transition and the concrete implementation of “smart” projects.

Why is Pully seeking to implement key performance indicators?

Digitization is a complex issue as it affects many of the town’s activities and the technological aspect renders it particularly abstract. It is easier to convey information about setting up a new children’s playground than about implementing big data technology to generate mobility indicators. For this reason, implementing key performance indicators can help to illustrate objectively where progress will need to be made, identify best practice and can even foster cooperation with other cities.

As a result, in April 2018, Pully was certified by the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) as part of the “United for smart and sustainable cities” initiative, thus outlining our level of digitization and sustainability according to the Recommendation ITU-T Y.4903/L.1603. ITU collaborates closely with ISO in matters of standardization. In November last year, the two organizations joined forces with the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) in hosting the World Smart Cities Forum in Barcelona, Spain, to discuss how International Standards can offer solutions that make cities more efficient and effective for their residents. The City of Pully took part in this event, which was emblematic of the collaborative approach taken by IEC, ISO and ITU to achieve today’s smart city ambitions.

How could ISO standards help smart cities?

ISO standards could help to reduce the complexity of smart city projects, for example by providing guidelines on data protection or by measuring the full cycle of energy consumed in delivering a service. They could also facilitate the certification of participatory and collaborative management by pooling investment and intellectual resources.

Finally, ISO could help to ensure that the standards laid down by the various organizations are merged or complement one another; this has already started happening at the World Smart Cities Forum.

Source: iso.org

 

15/ Our common roadmap

Nearly three years after the official launch of the post-2015 agenda, which plots the path for a better world by 2030, people are still grappling with how to make the ambitious Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) a reality. But perhaps the ambitious nature of the SDGs should give us some valuable clues on how to go about it. The new partnerships and collaborations encouraged by the goals represent a starting point for making the 2030 Agenda a truly global endeavour.

As a major operational hub of the international system, Geneva brings together many actors who play a key role in implementing the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). ISO’s long-established history of collaboration with the United Nations (UN) has been essential to tackling some of the world’s most global challenges and will continue to be a transformative force in the future, as we pursue the roadmap for 2030.

Today, we are facing more complex and interconnected global challenges. Often, even the most local problem has a wider dimension. This is why a multi-stakeholder approach to sustainable development is pivotal in guiding our collective work by 2030.

ISOfocus sits down with Michael Møller, Director-General of the United Nations Office at Geneva (UNOG), to address some of the key issues facing our world today, and how we should approach them, as well as the power of standards to make a difference.

ISOfocus: How is the world appropriating the 2030 Agenda?

Michael Møller: Since the adoption of the 2030 Agenda by the 193 Member States of the United Nations in September 2015, there has been unprecedented momentum around the world to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals. Efforts have been made at several levels and by many different stakeholders. Governments, civil society organizations, academic institutions, businesses, the United Nations itself and other international organizations are all actively joining forces to accelerate results.

In the United Nations, the entire development system is committed to supporting countries in implementing the Agenda. Reforms are also being made within UN organizations to ensure an even more efficient system that will capitalize on the expertise of the different UN entities. Other international organizations are also mobilizing to incorporate the SDGs into their work plans and are tailoring their strategies and activities to translate into action the vision and goals of the 2030 Agenda.

At the national level, many countries have made deliberate policy changes to address the systemic nature of the SDGs, demonstrating commitment to an Agenda that calls for a new way of operating. The most powerful shift, however, is in the way stakeholders are engaging with each other. There is shared recognition that this Agenda will only be met through strategic partnerships and active collaboration among organizations and different stakeholders. In Geneva, my office is particularly active in bringing partners together to demonstrate that they are more than the sum of their parts. The SDG Lab, which I launched in January 2017, acts as a connector and convenor in the Geneva ecosystem and has already achieved great results in incubating strategic partnerships that support implementation at the country level.

What major steps have been taken since the SDGs were agreed in September 2015? And, more importantly, are we on track – particularly when you compare the SDGs to their forerunner, the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs)?

The High-Level Political Forum (HLPF) on Sustainable Development, which meets annually under the auspices of the United Nations General Assembly and the Economic and Social Council, plays a central role in the follow-up and review of the implementation of Agenda 2030 at the global level. Since September 2015, two HLPFs have been held, with a third one taking place in July 2018 in New York. An increasing number of different stakeholders are participating in this annual review where countries share their achievements and challenges through Voluntary National Reviews.

This annual event is a key moment to touch base on common opportunities and hurdles in reaching the SDGs and to learn from successful and less successful practices. It is also a moment to develop new ways of addressing obstacles. Some recurrent challenges are emerging, such as finding the financial resources and ensuring cross-sectoral policies and budgets, but there are also encouraging trends like the role of technology in accelerating development results.

What is the degree of partnership, particularly here in Geneva? How important is ISO’s collaboration to the SDGs?

Partnerships, including more “unusual” partnerships, are key to achieving the SDGs. We need to be looking at multi-stakeholder collaborations where unexpected partners join forces to make sure their different, but complementary, expertise allows new solutions to emerge. In addition to diversity of knowledge, we must diversify in terms of our sources of financing so that risks and opportunities can be shared and programmes can count on regular funding.

In Geneva, the SDG Lab has co-created the Geneva 2030 Ecosystem network where connections and innovative partnerships are incubated among the different stakeholders of this unique city, in support of SDG implementation. There is unprecedented dynamism towards collaboration. With standardization as its core activity, ISO is clearly an important player for achieving the goals. Its portfolio of more than 22 000 International Standards covers almost all the SDGs, from industry to healthcare, to technology and education, and paves the way for successful partnerships.

How do you see the role of ISO standards in helping to achieve the SDGs?

As an independent, non-governmental organization, ISO plays a key role in defining standards that will help support innovation. This is fundamental in accelerating results.

The process itself of defining standards is the fruit of dialogue and partnership, much in the spirit of the 2030 Agenda. In addition, a crucial element for the SDGs is the monitoring and measuring of progress. In this domain, ISO standards help to measure success and identify challenges.

You are one of the instigators of the International Gender Champions, of which ISO is now a part. How do you see the network of champions expanding in the future? How can organizations such as ISO help in furthering these goals?

The International Gender Champions is a leadership network that brings together female and male decision-makers determined to break down gender barriers and make gender equality a working reality in their spheres of influence. Since its launch at the Palais des Nations in Geneva in July 2015, the initiative has gained 205 champions around the world. About 600 commitments have been made by the champions, related to good governance, leadership & accountability, selection & recruitment, work-life balance, organizational service, meetings, conferences & delegations, and programmatic & field work.

More and more leaders, such as the Secretary-General of the United Nations, António Guterres, and ISO Secretary-General Sergio Mujica, are joining the initiative. I hope and strongly believe that the network of champions will keep growing in the future. By making concrete and achievable commitments at their level, such as a panel parity pledge, these champions, ambassadors, heads of agencies and civil society actors will have a huge impact on SDG 5 (Gender Equality), which is fundamental for the overall implementation of the goals.

For organizations like ISO, promoting women’s effective participation in the technical work, bringing in their unique perspective and making work-life balance a reality, will help achieve gender equality as well as other goals, by making deliverables more gender-responsive.

Any key thoughts/aspirations when you fast-forward to 2030?

There are two concepts I feel strongly about. The first is “mindset shifting”. Agenda 2030 is about thinking and approaching things differently. Working in silos is not efficient and we need to create incentives for people to step out of their sector comfort zone. To make the change, we must lead by example at all working levels. The second concept is “transformation”. The SDGs are truly transformational because they are indivisible and universal. There is no doubt that Agenda 2030 is a historic opportunity to show how the world unites in sharing both its challenges and solutions for sustainable development.

Source: iso.org

 

16/ How Hilton is going green

Energy spend is a hotel’s second-highest operating cost. Hilton has achieved significant energy reductions through low-cost, high-impact steps, and a portfolio-wide certification to ISO 50001.

A few years ago, Hilton became the first global hospitality business to achieve portfolio-wide certification to ISO 50001, according to company representatives. The certification, which was achieved following a comprehensive upgrade to LightStay, the company’s corporate responsibility performance measurement platform, complimented its existing ISO 9001 and ISO 14001 management systems. With its three portfolio-wide ISO certifications, Hilton is a striking example of how companies can use ISO standards to manage their operations in an effective and sustainable way.

Earlier this year, Hilton released its Travel with Purpose targets for 2030, which include a commitment to halve its environmental impact whilst also doubling its investment in social impact, as part of its strategy to further the United Nations 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. ISOfocus asked Maxime Verstraete, Vice President of Corporate Responsibility & ADA Compliance at Hilton, how ISO 50001 will support these efforts and help Hilton to fulfil its mission to be the world’s most sustainable hospitality company.

ISOfocus: Why is energy management a key focus in the hospitality sector in general, and at Hilton in particular?

Maxime Verstraete: Energy is typically a hotel’s second-highest operating cost after labour and Hilton has a long history of carefully managing energy consumption across its global portfolio, beginning with the creation of the Hilton energy management manuals in the 1970s. We have always been very focused on reducing our resource consumption and in 2008 we developed LightStay, our proprietary corporate responsibility measurement platform. LightStay enables every one of Hilton’s 5 400 hotels to track their environmental footprint for over two hundred sustainability-related metrics.

LightStay is a brand standard and its use is required for all managed and franchised properties globally. Through the system, we are able to set property-level energy, water and waste goals while tracking individual and collective performance against our global sustainability targets. The bespoke one-stop platform for all environmental, operational and social impact reporting has helped the company carefully manage its energy, carbon, water and waste, achieving cumulative savings of more than USD 1 billion in operating efficiencies since 2008. Today, energy management remains a key priority for our business as we continue to identify innovative ways of reducing energy consumption and costs for our owners.

Could you tell us a little more about Hilton’s use of ISO 50001? How important was Hilton leadership in the process?

Support from the top has always been critical to our energy management and performance. When ISO 50001:2011 was released, our leadership became interested in leveraging our existing management system in LightStay to obtain certification. We had already achieved certification to ISO 9001 (quality management) and ISO 14001 (environmental management), so we knew all about the benefits an ISO standard can bring. After an overhaul to LightStay, we achieved portfolio-wide ISO 50001 certification in 2014. At that time, our triple ISO certification was the largest-volume certification of commercial buildings ever.

Since then, energy management has remained a key focus for our leadership and we continue to seek opportunities to drive our performance to the next level. Most recently, this has included undertaking a full revamp of our corporate responsibility strategy and setting new long-term goals for the future. In May 2018, we set ambitious targets to double our social impact and cut our environmental footprint in half by 2030 through our corporate responsibility programme, Travel with Purpose.

A big component of this commitment is our science-based carbon targets, which align with the carbon reduction levels stipulated in the Paris Agreement for climate change. We are proud to be the first major hotel brand to set greenhouse gas targets that have been approved by the Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi), an independent body that champions science-based target setting as a powerful way of boosting companies’ competitive advantage in the transition to a low-carbon economy.

What benefits has the standard brought, and can you give us an example or two of energy-saving measures and initiatives?

ISO 50001 has really helped us to ensure we are following a consistent approach to energy management across all our properties. The savings have been significant – we have reduced our energy intensity by 20.6 % and our carbon intensity by 30.0 % from our 2008 baseline.

We also estimate that we have cumulatively saved the equivalent of USD 1 billion through operating more sustainably. Our LightStay system helps us track all energy-saving initiatives taking place at our hotels, from low- and no-cost updates to major capital projects. For example, through LightStay, we can track which hotels have completed projects from LED re-lamping to the installation of solar panels or cogeneration plants.

What has been the key to the success at Hilton? What advice would you give other companies looking to use ISO 50001?

One initiative that has been critical to our success has been our close collaboration, both internally across all relevant departments and externally with our certification and assurance partners. When we first sought certification, we established a large working group with representation from nearly every Hilton department. Today, we continue to collaborate across those departments to ensure we are maintaining our certifications and receiving the corresponding benefits.

With the new edition of ISO 50001, how do you think the standard will change or influence Hilton’s approach to energy management?

As with our other two certifications, ISO 9001:2015 and ISO 14001:2015, we welcome the update of ISO 50001 and look forward to certifying to the new standard published in August 2018. We are eager to see its new High-Level Structure, which it shares with all management system standards, as it will enable us to streamline our integrated triple ISO certification process. However, we do not anticipate that the changes will fundamentally alter the way we tackle energy management at Hilton, since our integrated approach to quality, environmental and energy management is incorporated holistically across our day-to-day operations.

Source: iso.org

 

17/ Raising the bar on sustainable consumption

Companies are in the business of selling products and consumers of those products want the best possible value for money, but this puts a strain on already depleted natural resources and supply chain transparency. How does ISO 20400 help change the way we produce and consume goods and resources, and pave the way to meeting sustainable consumption?

The world is in bad need of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), the United Nations (UN) blueprint for a more prosperous and resilient world. There can be few among us who are not aware of the sometimes immeasurable and potentially catastrophic damage to the environment caused by carbon dioxide emissions, pollution from coal-fired power stations, the plastic waste clogging our oceans and killing marine animals, deforestation, the melting Arctic ice, climate change, urbanization – the list goes on.

These problems are economic as well as environmental and pose a huge threat to our future well-being. According to the World Economic Forum’s Global Risks Report 2018, despite an improved economic background, with recent signs of “encouraging” global growth, there is no room for complacency. The report raises concerns in particular about the economic impact of the new technologies of the Fourth Industrial Revolution, and the lack of progress in protecting the environment.

Economic models

This point was reinforced by Sharan Burrow, General Secretary of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC). She warned in Davos, in January this year, that the prevailing economic model is failing the global workforce, despite the commitment of a number of corporate CEOs to the SDGs and the Paris climate agreement.

Goal 12 of the UN Sustainable Development Goals is to ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns. In the UN’s words: “Achieving Goal 12 requires a strong national framework for sustainable consumption and production that is integrated into national and sectoral plans, sustainable business practices and consumer behaviour, together with adherence to international norms on the management of hazardous chemicals and wastes.”

Paul Polman, the CEO of Unilever, a global consumer goods company that puts sustainability at the core of its activity, said in a report in The Guardian that the SDGs offer the “greatest economic opportunity of a lifetime” and must become central to core business goals and investment decisions. He says Unilever’s “sustainable living” brands (which it defines as those that have integrated sustainability into their purpose and products) are growing “30 % faster than the rest of the company”.

The last straw?

There has been progress in other areas too. McDonald’s, the American fast-food company with an outlet on a street near you, has announced plans to reduce single-use plastic straws in the UK – the BBC says the UK alone uses 8.5 million a year – and is considering using paper straws instead. Also in the UK, the JD Wetherspoon chain of pubs stopped using plastic straws at the beginning of the year.

But how do small to medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) with a keen eye on the bottom line protect profits as well as the planet? How can they integrate the goals, and SDG 12 in particular, into sustainability strategies that offer value both to the companies themselves as well as citizens? Standards have a clear role to play in this process, and ISO 20400 is the worldwide guidance standard that has been developed for sustainable procurement; the standard is aligned with ISO 26000, which offers 450 recommendations related to the SDGs, addressing seven core areas of social responsibility: organizational governance; human rights; labour practices; environment; fair operating practices; consumer issues; and community involvement and development.

Benefits for SMEs

One person who has first-hand experience of this is Jacques Schramm, the founder and CEO of A2 Consulting, an SME with a staff of about one hundred operating mostly in France, which specializes in the transformation of organizations. Schramm has been involved in the chairmanship of the ISO project for four years – what he describes as “a big effort for a rather small organization”. He believes it helps A2 Consulting in terms of reputation in the French market and facilitates client acquisition.

Schramm says: “We are quite active in promoting the new standard in the French market and have constructed a French ISO 20400 barometer to measure annually how much large public and private organizations know about it, how much they apply its guidelines, and what its corporate social responsibility impacts are on society.”

He goes on to explain that ISO 20400 is aligned with ISO 26000 as well as with SDG 12. For this reason, the standard was given full support and participation in the working group from the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), an organization in charge of promoting worldwide responsible consumption and production within the UN.

Benefits of ISO 20400

ISO 20400, Sustainable procurement – Guidance, serves as a sector-specific application of ISO 26000 on social responsibility, defining the principles of ethical behaviour throughout the supply chain. The standard:

• Ensures supply chain security (i.e. product recall or supplier failure)
• Prevents financial, environmental and reputational risks
• Fosters investor and customer confidence
• Promotes employee well-being
• Contributes to opening new markets for products and services

Transforming risks

Schramm points out that ISO 20400 is considered by UNEP as a valuable tool for large purchasing organizations. It helps them to establish an appropriate purchasing policy that includes the aims of SDG 12, as much as their business and context allows them to make this a priority. He says: “Addressing it very well could mean transforming a risk into an opportunity through purchase redesign, life-cycle analysis, waste recycling and business model transformation. Some advanced organizations have therefore considered this issue as central to their strategy.” Words to cheer Paul Polman.

One direct benefit for A2 Consulting in the implementation of ISO 20400, Schramm says, has been important progress in defining sustainable procurement criteria that helped it reach a ranking of 79/100, “considered by EcoVadis Business Sustainability Ratings to be the rating of a leader in our service business”. This internal process also facilitates new client acquisition and helps not only in recruiting new talent in the markets but also in “keeping them longer in the company once they are hired”.

The SDGs follow on from and build on the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), which were agreed by governments in 2001. The UN has called the MDGs “the most successful anti-poverty movement in history”. However, some argue that engagement on achieving the SDGs has been slower and a report in The Guardian last year said that, one year on from the adoption of the SDGs, most businesses were not engaging, despite experts pointing to the economic opportunities.

Effective promotion

To be truly beneficial, ISO 20400 has to be implemented across the world and integrated into increasingly complex organizations globally. Effective promotion of the standard, particularly in terms of country context, is the best way to meet this challenge.
Schramm explains: “In France, thanks to the ‘barometer initiative’, we will first develop explanations on ‘why’ organizations should use ISO 20400, including new trends such as taking investors’ requirements into account. We also have to work on the ‘how’ and tools facilitating the implementation of the standard; for example, on more advanced guidelines such as priority setting, or also on assessment approaches, tools and service providers which, all together, provide recognition and trust.”

International collaboration and shared experiences from countries worldwide are also key to promoting the standard. Shaun McCarthy has a keen understanding of the benefits of such collaboration. He is Chair of the Supply Chain School, which is a collaboration between clients, contractors and first-tier suppliers who have a mutual interest in building the skills of their supply chain. The school supplies those who register with best-in-class knowledge on sustainability, off-site construction and management techniques “to help you lead and embed change”.

McCarthy is also the Director of Action Sustainability, a small consultancy specializing in sustainable procurement, which led the UK and Australian delegations in developing ISO 20400. Like Jacques Schramm, he claims that his clients report significant benefits, such as “reduced costs, winning more work, improved shareholder confidence, better customer relations and reduced risk”.

Practical support

Action Sustainability provides practical support and guidance and can validate an organization’s sustainable procurement processes and back the development of action plans using the ISO 20400 guidance as the strategic framework.

Most organizations around the world deliver the bulk of what they do through their supply chains. McCarthy believes it is, therefore, impossible to meet SDG 12, or many other SDGs, without the contribution of the supply chain. “ISO 20400 provides a framework to achieve this,” he says.

What’s more, ISO 20400 also gives organizations a structure for establishing sustainable procurement. In the short term, McCarthy says, organizations lack clear goals and the ability to translate their policies into a language their supply chains can respond to. “They also fail to prioritize them in a way that is meaningful for the supply chain,” but ISO 20400 provides the “golden thread” to link to their organizational objectives.

High-quality guidance

To ensure competence and to keep the supply chain competitive, McCarthy says, in the longer term, it will be necessary to develop the capacity of the supply chain. Failure to invest in this will reduce competition and drive prices up – sustainability should not cost more but bad procurement does. “ISO 20400 provides high-quality guidance in this area,” he says.

Action Sustainability’s mission is to “create sustainable business through action”. McCarthy adds that we need to measure what our suppliers actually deliver and not just bombard them with meaningless questionnaires. The guidance on performance measurement from ISO 20400 is a great help for organizations trying to achieve this, he says. With the help of the procurement standard, it is clear that small organizations can make a big impact, which gives us all hope for a more sustainable future.

Source: iso.org

Ngày 12/9

18/ Canada requests consultations with China on compliance with paper duties ruling

Canada has requested consultations with China regarding China’s alleged non-compliance with the recommendations and rulings of the Dispute Settlement Body in the dispute concerning Chinese anti-dumping duties on imports of Canadian cellulose pulp (DS483). The request was circulated to WTO members on 12 September.

The measures at issue include the original preliminary and final determinations by Chinese authorities which led to the imposition of duties as well as a recent reinvestigation determination continuing the duties. In its request for consultations under Article 21.5 of the Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU), Canada said the measures are inconsistent with the WTO’s Anti-Dumping Agreement.

Further information is available in document WT/DS483/9

Source: wto.org

 

19/ Four days remaining to register for the Public Forum

Only four days are left to register for this year’s WTO Public Forum. Participants interested in attending this year’s Forum should submit an online application form no later than 16 September 2018. Last minute and onsite registrations will not be accepted. Participation at the Forum is free of charge. Travel and accommodation costs are to be borne by participants.

The 2018 Public Forum, entitled “Trade 2030”, will be held at the WTO headquarters in Geneva from 2 to 4 October. For more information, please visit the Public Forum webpage www.wto.org/pf18.

Background

The Public Forum is the WTO’s largest annual outreach event. It provides a unique platform for heads of states, parliamentarians, leading global business people, students, academics and non-governmental organizations to come together and debate on a wide range of WTO issues and on some of the major trade and development topics of the day. Over 1,500 participants attend the Forum each year.

Should you have further questions, please contact the Public Forum Team at: pf18@wto.org.

Source: wto.org

 

20/ DDG Agah: “Knowledge is the new currency in the information age”

Speaking at the Global Knowledge for Development Partnership meeting hosted by the WTO on 12 September during Geneva Knowledge Week, Deputy Director-General Yonov Frederick Agah emphasized the essential role that knowledge plays in making trade an engine for sustainable development and presented the WTO’s outline of a knowledge agenda for global trade. In particular, he talked about how trade and knowledge are closely linked — trade as an instrument to spread knowledge across borders and knowledge as an enabler of trade. The full text is below:

Geneva Knowledge Week

Knowledge for Development Partnership

Opening Session, 12 September 2018, 09:00-10:30, Room S2

WTO Deputy Director-General Yonov Frederick Agah

Keynote address: Outlines of a knowledge agenda for global trade

Keynote address: Outlines of a knowledge agenda for global trade

Excellencies, ladies and gentlemen,

Good morning. I welcome you all to the World Trade Organization.

It is, indeed, a real pleasure to mark this event with you during the Geneva Knowledge Week 2018. As we all know, knowledge is the new currency in the information age. We are seeing incredible growth in the knowledge economy, which is fundamentally reshaping the world we now live in. And this also includes trade.

Let me start by highlighting the essential role that knowledge plays in making trade an engine for sustainable development. The 2030 Development Agenda highlights that trade is as an engine for inclusive economic growth and poverty reduction. Trade is a key means for the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals also because it leads to the sharing and proliferation of knowledge. Knowledge is embodied in goods and services that are traded across borders. International trade makes knowledge accessible to firms and consumers globally and acts as an important channel for knowledge and technology transfer.

We all know that improvements in knowledge, in the form of human capital, technological progress or innovation, are drivers

of economic growth and development. By spreading knowledge across the world, trade plays a key role in bringing the benefits of knowledge to developing countries.

While trade helps spread knowledge across the globe, knowledge is also an important enabler of trade. Lack of knowledge and costs related to obtaining information on access to foreign markets are key trade barriers, especially for micro, small and medium-sized enterprises. It is not surprising that access to information is a key issue in discussions on MSMEs by a number of Members at the WTO. The new digital world, with its communication technologies and knowledge and e-commerce platforms, has vastly facilitated the access of firms and consumers to knowledge that underpins trade.

Given the importance of trade in achieving the SDGs, the WTO has recently issued a publication titled “Mainstreaming trade to attain the SDGs”. This publication has the objective to disseminate knowledge on how trade can contribute to deliver positive outcomes on the three dimensions of the sustainable development, -economic, social and environmental.

The key message of this report is the importance of mainstreaming trade into national and sectoral development strategies. Trade is an enabler which has cross-cutting effects in the economy and has significant linkages to other sectors. So, for countries to fully reap the benefits of trade, it is necessary to adopt approaches which aim to mainstream trade into their national sustainable development strategies. We hope that this publication will be a helpful knowledge resource for countries to mainstream trade into their national development strategies.

So, trade and knowledge are closely linked: Trade is an instrument to spread knowledge across borders, and knowledge is an enabler of trade. Let me now address the relationship between knowledge and trade in the context of the WTO.

Liberalization of trade under the multilateral trading system has led to a significant reduction of trade barriers. The resulting expansion of international trade in goods and services implies that also the movement of knowledge across borders has increased.

Besides lowering trade barriers, the WTO contributes to knowledge transfer through its transparency and rules. Transparency is a fundamental principle of the multilateral trading system and is reflected in transparency provisions in WTO Agreements, notification requirements of trade measures as well as periodic reviews of Members’ trade policies. And also in the operations of the WTO, knowledge is made transparent in an appropriate manner to Members and the general public. Similarly, the rulebook of the WTO provides governments and the private sector with “knowledge” of the rules of trade. Both transparency and rules therefore facilitate access to knowledge and promote the inclusiveness of the multilateral trading system.

The WTO also has the TRIPS Agreement that directly deals with knowledge in the form of intellectual property. The TRIPS Agreement sets out global minimum standards for the various instruments used to protect intellectual property. These standards contribute to the promotion of domestic innovation and foreign direct investment inflows, which are key channels for enhancing domestic knowledge.

Another example is the plurilateral Information Technology Agreement (ITA), whose objective is to eliminate tariffs on a range of information technology products. This Agreement has not only made high-tech products more affordable, but it has also helped to promote innovation in developing economies.

Let me also mention the important role of the WTO Secretariat in knowledge creation and sharing. Through technical assistance activities, we build the capacity of Members to engage in trade policy and take advantage of the opportunities provided by the multilateral trading system. The Secretariat also facilitates the flow of knowledge through its support to the discussions of Members in various WTO Bodies. We also create knowledge through economic and statistical analysis, which is then disseminated through various publication formats and databases – available all for free online. And finally, we have built both internal and external learning networks to promote information sharing, coaching and sharing best practices among colleagues and subject matter experts from both international and national agencies, and more recently with the private sector.

All of us at the WTO are committed to incorporating Knowledge Management within the daily operations of our Secretariat. It is only through increasing the flow of knowledge, and properly leveraging it, that we can be agile in best addressing the needs of WTO Members and the people they represent.

However, the WTO does not do it alone. What is really at the heart of knowledge creation and sharing of the WTO, are the partnerships, dialogues and collaborations that we have had over the years with fellow international organizations, governments, and more recently, with businesses, academia and the civil society. We count on our partners to brainstorm together, leverage our resources and share best practices to find sustainable solutions for our joint development objectives.

Let me give you a few examples of collaborations that contribute to knowledge creation and sharing on trade and development.

WTO is working closely with UNCTAD and ITC, in what has been called the Geneva Trade Hub, to provide support to the various UN agencies that have been tasked with the implementation of the Agenda 2030 for Sustainable Development. Together with our partners, we are developing a website that will allow for easy tracking of progress towards the different trade-related targets of the SDGs and spread knowledge on the contribution of trade to the SDGs.

We also collaborate with ITC, UNCTAD and other international agencies on the Global Trade Helpdesk. The objective of this online Helpdesk is to act as a gateway for MSMEs to trade. The Helpdesk will make an important contribution to making knowledge easily accessible to MSMES by acting as a one-stop shop for trade-related information such as tariffs, standards, trade procedures, export potential and business contacts.

In the area of product requirements, we have successfully partnered with ITC and the UN in creating ePing. ePing is a notification alert system that provides governments and businesses timely access to new notifications of SPS and TBT measures at the WTO. It also facilitates the dialogue between the public and private sector.

WTO is also regularly collaborating with other agencies on publications on trade and development. For example, recently we have worked together with the World Bank and the IMF to produce publications on the “role of trade in ending poverty” as well as on “making trade an engine of growth for all”. And last year, we launched a publication with the International Labour Organization (ILO) on investing in skills for inclusive trade.

In addition to partnerships and publications, the WTO engages in knowledge sharing with stakeholders through several discussion Fora a hosted at the WTO.

The WTO Public Forum is the main channel of how the WTO engages in knowledge sharing with civil society. This year’s Public Forum will take place from 2-4 October under the theme “Trade 2030″, where discussions will focus on sustainable trade, technology-enabled trade, and a more inclusive trading system.

The biennial Global Review of Aid for Trade brings together beneficiaries, donors, development agencies and other stakeholders to discuss how aid for trade can best help developing countries overcome supply-side and infrastructure constraints. The next Global review will be held in summer 2019.

Moreover, the WTO has recently started hosting “Trade Dialogues” with different stakeholder groups. The objective of these dialogues is to learn about the priorities and views of stakeholders such as businesses and academia for the multilateral trading system.

Let me now make a few concluding remarks.

As our Director-General said in his foreword for this year’s Geneva Knowledge Week publication, “Sharing knowledge is critical to the global trading system, just as it is in many other important aspects of global cooperation in our increasingly interdependent world.”

The WTO will continue its efforts to use knowledge and trade as a force for development. We will continue to strengthen knowledge sharing through various initiatives, networks, partnerships and dialogues. Only through the sharing of knowledge we will be able to increase our understanding of the complex changes unfolding around us and find more effective ways to improve life for all people, in particular the most vulnerable.

In order to make knowledge a force for development, the right conversations have to take place across diverse disciplines here in Geneva and in other places around the world. Openness, transparency and collaboration are vital elements if we want to find solutions to economic, social and environmental challenges.

Let me conclude with a line from a film I commend to you all, called “A Plastic Ocean”. The film highlights the scale of environmental harm we are causing today, and offers a hopeful message of how we can work together to turn things around and ensure a sustainable planet for future generations. The line says:

“From KNOWING comes CARING, and from caring comes CHANGE”.

I thank you all for your commitment to share your knowledge and work with your colleagues here and around the world to make knowledge a force for sustainable development. I wish you a fruitful exchange during this year’s Geneva Knowledge Week.

Source: wto.org

21/ US-Vietnam Business Summit defines future of economic relations

The 2018 US-Vietnam Business Summit was jointly held in Hanoi on September 10 by the Vietnam Chamber of Commerce and Industry (VCCI) and the American Chamber of Commerce in Vietnam (AMCHAM).

Addressing the event, themed “Defining the Future of Bilateral Economic Relations,” Deputy Prime Minister Trinh Dinh Dung said that Vietnam always highly values investment projects of US investors, especially those in renewable, green and sustainable energy, oil and gas, infrastructure, finance-banking, education-training, tourism, agriculture, high technology, along with other traditional areas such as agriculture and aquaculture.

The Deputy PM noted that the governments and businesses of both countries have faced new challenges and they need to give assessments and new solutions, thus helping to maintain the growth trend of bilateral economic relations.

The governments and businesses should seek new opportunities and orientations, while promoting startup spirit and renovation in business in a bid to foster bilateral economic, trade, and investment ties and the whole Vietnam-US relations in general, he said.

Over the past years, economic, trade and investment cooperation has become an important foundation and motivation for the Vietnam-US relationship.

The US has become one of the biggest trade partners of Vietnam, with two-way trade reaching 54 billion USD in 2017 from only 7.8 billion USD in 2005. In the first half of 2018, import-export revenue between the two nations was estimated at 27.4 billion USD.

In term of investment, as of June 2018, the US had 877 valid projects in Vietnam with total capital of 9.37 billion USD, ranking 10th out of 128 countries and territories investing in Vietnam.

Leaders of US firms, including many prestigious enterprises in the world, lauded the investment and business environment of Vietnam and expressed their hope to run long-term business in the country.

Currently, Vietnam mostly exports aquatic products, cashew nuts, garments and footwear to the US while importing high-technology products from the country. Particularly, many contracts and agreements to buy aircraft and aircraft engines are being negotiated between businesses of the two countries.

Alongside, nearly 30,000 Vietnamese students are studying in the US, the highest number among ASEAN countries and the sixth biggest among countries having students in the US.

The Deputy PM expressed his belief that this will be a high-quality workforce to contribute to Vietnam’s economic development and a motivation for trade and investment ties between the two countries.

Meanwhile, VCCI President Vu Tien Loc highlighted the Vietnamese Government’s efforts in boosting reform and integration by reducing business conditions and specific examinations, restructuring the economy, improve infrastructure, reinforcing the foundation of the financial system, enhancing the quality of human resources, and promoting renovation, thereby opening up opportunities for US investors.

The US-Vietnam Business Summit, held one day before the World Economic Forum on ASEAN 2018 that focuses on the “ASEAN 4.0: Entrepreneurship and the Fourth Industrial Revolution,” paid great attention to the formation of digital partnerships between business communities of the two nations, showing the common interest of both countries in economic degitalisation and innovative economic promotion, said Loc.

Digital connections between the two economies is an important solution to strengthening and enhancing the efficiency of cooperation between the two business communities, he said, affirming that Vietnam hopes the US business community will share their experiences and skills in developing the digital economy.

Loc also called for support of both Vietnamese and US Governments to businesses in cooperation promotion and technology transfer.\

Source: VNA

 

Ngày 13/9

22/ WTO announces winner of 2018 Essay Award for Young Economists

The winner of the 2018 WTO Essay Award for Young Economists is Alonso de Gortari of Harvard University. His paper, “Disentangling Global Value Chains”, was ranked first by the Selection Panel. He receives a prize of CHF 5,000.

The Selection Panel also gave an honourable mention as runner-up to Yuan Mei of the University of Chicago for his work entitled “Regulatory Protection and the Role of International Cooperation”.

The prize winners were announced at the annual meeting of the European Trade Study Group, the largest conference specializing in international trade, which took place on 13 September 2018 in Warsaw, Poland.

Winning essay

Alonso de Gortari’s paper highlights a new feature of global value chains (GVCs), namely that they employ specialized inputs tailored to the destination of the final product. For example, regarding Mexico’s car exports, “the U.S. accounts for a colossal 74% of the foreign inputs embedded in Mexican vehicles sold to U.S. consumers but for only 18% of the inputs of those sold to German consumers.” Similarly, the share of German inputs is much higher in cars exported to Germany than in those exported to the United States.

The paper shows that members of GVCs are substantially more integrated with one another than traditional measures have shown, with the implication that the traditional study of GVCs substantially under-estimates the cost of GVCs being disrupted.

Since GVCs are a very significant feature of international trade, the Selection Panel took the view that the calculation of their welfare effects, including losses inflicted by the disruption of GVCs, is extremely important. While much work remains to be done, both in terms of the collection of appropriate data and the calculation of the effects, this paper is a very useful start and may launch an “industry” of research.

Alonso de Gortari is a Mexican national. He received his Ph.D. in economics from Harvard University in 2018. He is currently a IES post-doctoral fellow in Princeton University. He will be joining Dartmouth College as Assistant Professor in 2019.

Honourable mention

Yuan Mei’s paper studies the effects of product standards regulation on trade and welfare. The key finding is that standards can affect fixed as well as marginal costs of production. Therefore, these standards affect the number of firms and variety of products. This means standards regulation creates opportunities for inefficient policy making on a unilateral basis.

The paper considers various approaches to handling the regulatory inefficiencies that arise when there is a lack of coherence in policy making, and identifies conditions where the national treatment rule (the principle of giving others the same treatment as one’s own nationals) can achieve efficiency in regulations and where it cannot. The paper shows that while the gains from national treatment are relatively small, the potential gains from international cooperation in standards regulation can be very large.

In the view of the Selection Panel, the paper provides a useful reminder that while, for most non-tariff barriers (NTBs), it is possible to quantify the tariff rate that reduces trade by the same amount (the so called “tariff equivalent”), this is not an accurate measurement because how the NTB impacts the economy is of a different nature. The example of standards highlighted in the paper emphasizes this point.

Yuan Mei is a Chinese national. He received his Ph.D. in Economics from the University of Chicago in 2018. He is currently assistant Professor of Economics at Singapore Management University.

Selection Panel

The Selection Panel for 2018 comprised Avinash Dixit (Emeritus Professor of Economics, Princeton University), Robert Koopman (Director, Economic Research and Statistics Division, WTO), Robert Staiger (Professor of Economics, Dartmouth University) and Alberto Trejos (Professor of Economics, INCAE Business School). Roberta Piermartini (ERSD, WTO) coordinated the work of the Selection Panel.

Source: wto.org

 

Ngày 14/9

23/ WEF ASEAN 2018: Vietnam treasures benefits of free trade

Vietnam has long treasured the substantial benefits of free trade, particularly amidst the formidable challenges posed by global trade protectionism which is currently threatening bilateral and multilateral trade deals, Prime Minister Nguyen Xuan Phuc has said.

Attending the Vietnam Business Summit 2018 themed “Vietnam, Trusted Business Partner: Connection and Creativity” in Hanoi on September 13 in the framework of the World Economic Forum on ASEAN (WEF ASEAN) 2018, PM Phuc said that Vietnam’s reform achievements over the last 30 years of its open-door and integration policies have been made alongside the trend of global trade liberalisation.

Despite considerable difficulties, open-door policies really are virtues to the Vietnamese economy, he stressed.

However, he said that the economy still falls short by its expectations, with Vietnamese firms still not deeply footed in global value chains.

Although 51 percent of Vietnamese small- and medium-sized enterprises enter global value chain (higher than average 41 percent recorded in the ASEAN), their proportion in the chain is a far cry from their potential and set targets, he said, adding that international research has shown that many companies are now in their initial phase and still unstainable.

Thus, Vietnam should better its position in the global value chain by enhancing connections with foreign direct investment firms, he said, asking Vietnamese enterprises to improve their capacity.

Vietnam has been presented as an important gateway in the ASEAN bloc and signed a line-up of free trade deals – like the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) and the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) – which will brings various opportunities to gain a foothold in new markets, he underlined.

On Vietnam’s economic achievements, WEF President Borge Brender said that in eight years since the last WEF held in Vietnam in 2010, the local economy has witnessed fantastic growth, with gross domestic product (GDP) doubling and export revenue tripling.

Vietnam is on track to achieve an economic growth of nearly 7 percent this year, while also experiencing a rapid development of foreign investment. The poverty rate declined significantly to 3 percent from 50 percent in 1990s, he said.

Dramatic improvements have been seen in Government debt, the banking sector, trade, and business environment, he stated, pointing his finger at the economy’s weaker point which need to be addressed, such as education quality and labour efficiency.

Mobilising all economic resources to get involved in the Fourth Industrial Revolution is also a challenge, he added.

Source: VNA

 

24/ DG Azevêdo welcomes G20 focus on improving the WTO to meet “current and future challenges”

Director-General Roberto Azevêdo briefed G20 trade ministers at their meeting in Mar del Plata, Argentina (14 September) on the current situation in global trade, including the rising tensions between major trading partners and the role of the WTO in easing those tensions. The ministerial statement arising from the meeting recognized “the urgent need to discuss current events in international trade and ways to improve the WTO to face current and future challenges”. The statement was welcomed by DG Azevêdo.

Addressing the meeting, the Director-General stressed: “It is important to acknowledge: first, that trade tensions are on the rise; second, that the WTO can provide a forum to ease some of those tensions, and it can even be improved if members want to; and, third, that this issue deserves the attention of G20 leaders in the upcoming summit.”

Regarding a possible conversation about reform, he added: “Whatever the format of the conversation, it is clear you can’t have reform that only takes into account the concerns of some. All sides should be heard. I’m sure there is a wide range of views among members on both the need for reform, and what such reform should look like.”

Speaking after the meeting, DG Azevêdo said:

”I welcome the strong commitment of the G20 ministers to discuss ways of improving the WTO to ensure that it meets current and future challenges, and to come forward with ideas to this end. This will be useful for the wider debate among all WTO members in Geneva, where I am detecting a growing interest in this issue.”

The G20 ministerial statement issued after the meeting is available here.

DG Azevêdo also held several bilateral meetings in the margins of the Mar del Plata meeting.

Source: wto.org

 

25/ Workshop on government procurement concludes in Geneva

A government procurement workshop held at the WTO from 10 to 14 September 2018 allowed participants to discuss how to maximize the benefits arising from opening up government procurement markets.

The purpose of the workshop was to foster dialogue among experts from across the world and to provide them with tools for the analysis, design and implementation of government procurement policies at the national level, including market opening, reforms and capacity-building.Some 36 participating practitioners from over 28 economies pooled their expertise with experts from international organizations and academia, including the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, the George Washington University School of Law, the World Bank and the WTO Secretariat. The list of participating countries is available here.

In his opening address on 10 September, WTO Director-General Roberto Azevêdo said: “This is a “flagship” activity for us to disseminate information and foster dialogue on government procurement in all its dimensions. This includes market access and trade but also good governance, efficiency and the promotion of a just and inclusive society.” His full speech is available here.

Participants examined the trade aspects of government procurement that contribute to good governance, sustainable development and shared prosperity for all stakeholders. Also under discussion was the importance of transparent and effective government procurement systems for ensuring a high standard of public goods and services for consumers.

Particular focus was placed on the revised WTO Agreement on Government Procurement (GPA), under which WTO members open their procurement markets in a reciprocal manner to the extent that they so agree, and how it contributes to enhancing transparency and market access in this sector. The GPA’s growing relevance in today’s global economy was emphasized, as evidenced by the increasing number of WTO members seeking to join the Agreement. Participants also looked into the potential benefits, challenges and modalities of acceding to, and participating in, the Agreement, including for developing and least-developed countries.

The workshop looked at how the GPA can better respond to the evolving global policy landscape that now embraces areas such as small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), sustainability and e-procurement. It also considered the implications of such policies for future domestic reforms and for achievement of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals.

Synergies with other initiatives at the national, bilateral and regional levels were also discussed.

Source: wto.org

Ngày 17/9

26/ WEF ASEAN 2018 – the most successful regional meeting of WEF: Klaus Schwab

The World Economic Forum (WEF) on ASEAN 2018 (WEF ASEAN 2018) in Vietnam is the most successful regional meeting of the WEF, stated WEF Founder and Executive Chairman Prof. Klaus Schwab.

The WEF leader made the remark at a meeting with Prime Minister Nguyen Xuan Phuc in Hanoi on September 13.

Assessing the outcomes of the event, Klaus Schwab said that the WEF ASEAN 2018 was not only successful in terms of content but also organisation work, with 90,000 people around the world following its activities thanks to Industry 4.0 technologies in addition to thousands of others present at the site.

During the 60 discussions, interactions have been made effectively between startups and researchers, he said, adding that the success of the organisation work was also reflected through the rational arrangement of activities, plus good logistics work and ensured security.

According to the WEF leader, by September 13 noon, about 7.800 news items and articles on the WEF ASEAN 2018 had been published on global official websites, including 3,000 articles on Vietnamese leaders.

In addition, around 6.7 million people followed the event via Facebook and Twister, with 13,000 comments. On LinkedIn alone, nearly 33,500 people followed and commented on the WEF ASEAN 2018.

The number of news items and articles on the WEF event in Vietnam was four times higher than those of WEF meetings in several other regional countries.

The WEF Executive Chairman thanked the Vietnamese Party and Government for their attention, support and effective cooperation with the WEF to together create this success.

For his part, PM Phuc also thanked Prof. Klaus Schwab and the WEF Organising Committee for cooperating with and supporting Vietnam in successfully hosting the event.

This has opened up a new chapter in the collaboration between the WEF and Vietnam, he stressed.

Source: VNA

 

27/ Members start September-December fisheries subsidies talks under intensified work programme

Heads of WTO member delegations, at the 17 September meeting of the Negotiating Group on Rules, voiced their strong commitment to creative, constructive engagement in the fisheries subsidies negotiations based on the intensified work programme for September to December that was agreed in late July.

The chair of the Negotiating Group, Ambassador Roberto Zapata Barradas (Mexico), convened the meeting to brief the heads of delegations about developments in the negotiations and to seek their continued support for the talks in the coming months. The chair noted there were indications of strong support in every intervention made at the meeting.

The agreed work programme includes brainstorming for solutions in “incubator groups”, text-based discussions, bilateral meetings, technical sessions for sharing information, and continued work to streamline the negotiating documents.

In the Ministerial Decision on Fisheries Subsidies taken at the Ministerial Conference in Buenos Aires in December 2017, members agreed to continue to engage constructively in fisheries subsidies negotiations, with a view to adopting an agreement by the next Ministerial Conference in 2020 on comprehensive and effective disciplines that prohibit certain forms of fisheries subsidies that contribute to overcapacity and overfishing, and eliminate subsidies that contribute to illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing. Members also recognized that appropriate and effective special and differential treatment for developing country members and least developed country members should be an integral part of these negotiations. The ministerial decision is available here.

Source: wto.org

 

28/ DG Azevêdo in Brazil: A strong trading system is in all of our interests

WTO Director-General Roberto Azevêdo was in Brazil between 17 and 19 September, where he spoke at different events about the importance of the WTO and the need to strengthen the multilateral system, especially amid the rising tensions between major trading partners.

In Rio de Janeiro, DG Azevêdo met with business leaders and gave a keynote speech about the future of global trade at an event organized by FIRJAN, the Industry Federation of the State of Rio de Janeiro. The Director-General also visited Salvador, where he addressed the 17th International Arbitration Conference.

After his speech at FIRJAN the Director-General said:

“These are testing times for the trading system. Trade tensions are on the rise. Continued escalation risks a major economic impact, threatening jobs and growth in all countries. We need to respond urgently to these challenges and ensure that the WTO can help members address their concerns and ease tensions.

“It’s encouraging that Brazilian stakeholders are interested in discussing ways to leverage trade to improve Brazil’s integration in the global economy and also to strengthen the WTO. A strong rules-based trading system is ultimately in all of our interests.”

Source: wto.org

 

29/ Course on trade in services for developing economies ends in Geneva

A total of 29 government officials from developing economies across the world took part in the fourth WTO Advanced Course on Trade in Services from 17 to 21 September 2018 at the WTO.

This course allowed participants to deepen their understanding of the main provisions of the WTO’s General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS), to become more familiar with trade in services analytical tools and to consolidate their understanding of domestic regulation of services, e-commerce and other emerging services policy and negotiating issues.

One of the course participants, Jasemin Weekes, Permanent Secretary at the International Trade Department of the Ministry of International Trade, Industry, Commerce and Consumer Affairs of Saint Kitts and Nevis, said: “I am grateful for the opportunity to learn how to use the GATS provisions to maximize the benefits stemming from services trade and to generate economic development and growth. I also learned from the course how, as a small island with limited resources, we can reduce bureaucratic redtape and ease the entry of investment flows into Saint Kitts and Nevis.”

Another course participant, Charity Priscilla Musonzo, Deputy Director of Trade at the Ministry of Industry, Trade and Tourism of Malawi, said: “Deepening my understanding of the GATS was important as my government is currently engaged in several regional trade negotiations under the COMESA, the SADC and the CFTA. Of particular interest to me was financial services and how to better explain to our capital-based colleagues the commitments we have undertaken at the WTO in this area.”

Andrés Del Olmo García, Legal Advisor in the General Directorate of International Economic Affairs of Chile’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, who also took part in the course, said: “This course was valuable because it allowed me to increase my technical expertise and at the same time to learn about current challenges and discussions taking place at the WTO, such as how to measure trade restrictiveness and to address the e-regulations related to cross border trade.”

The course, organized jointly by the WTO Trade in Services and Investment Division and the Institute for Training and Technical Cooperation, is offered as part of the WTO’s technical assistance and capacity-building activities.  It represents the highest level of “specialist” training within the WTO’s progressive learning framework.

List of participants:

Sebastian Leonardo CORONEL	Argentina
Anastasiya BICHUN	Belarus
Sanja SUKA	Bosnia and Herzegovina
Potry CHHEAN	Cambodia
Marcelle Esther Victorine TETE NDOUMBE	Cameroon
Andres Camilo DEL OLMO GARCIA	Chile
Natalia PORRAS ZAMORA	Costa Rica
Biubiusara TOKTONALIEVA	Kyrgyz Republic
Phutsakhone SENGMANIPHON	Lao People’s Democratic Republic
Charity Priscilla MUSONZO	Malawi
Naznin BUTONKEE	Mauritius
Miguel Angel GALINDO VEGA	Mexico
Bolormaa LKHAGVASUREN	Mongolia
Nwe NWE OO	Myanmar
Hajara USMAN	Nigeria
Cheryl LACERNA	Philippines
Windel SAMANIEGO	Philippines
Jasemin Clarita WEEKES	Saint Kitts and Nevis
Miljana MANDIC	Serbia
Brian FOO	Singapore
Chee How Eric TANG	Singapore
Doolwala Madagedara Nalinda Padmalal WIJERATHNA	Sri Lanka
Gamal Eldin Mohammed Salih AHMED	Sudan
Yu-Chi CHEN	Chinese Taipei
Ratanaporn SINGHASAKDA	Thailand
Amevi Susukpo ANYINEFA	Togo
Georgina Nampeera MUGERWA	Uganda
Thi Hai Yen PHAM	Viet Nam
Mwenya CHISHETA	Zambia

Source: wto.org

 

Ngày 18/9

30/ WTO members review two regional trade agreements covering Africa, the Caribbean and the EU

WTO members reviewed Seychelles’ accession to the South African Development Community (SADC) trade protocol and the economic partnership agreement between the European Union and Cariforum states at the 18 September meeting of the Committee on Regional Trade Agreements. Members welcomed progress being made in the economic integration of the African region.

For Seychelles’ accession to the SADC trade protocol in 2015, the parties involved remarked that it will enhance trade in the region and lead to economic growth. Seychelles eliminated tariffs on 91.7% of its tariff lines for imports from other SADC members. By 2026, 97.5% of Seychelles’ tariffs will be liberalized. The other SADC parties will liberalize between 93.8% and 100% of their tariffs for imports from the Seychelles. A number of changes on rules of origin, sanitary and phytosanitary standards and provisions on technical barriers to trade have also been made to the SADC protocol which was considered in 2007 by the Committee.

Seychelles said its accession creates opportunities for further trade with Southern African neighbours and serves as a stepping stone for boosting intra-African trade. It further noted that the trade protocol is fully compatible with WTO rules and provides predictability for commerce, thus establishing better trading conditions. Namibia on behalf of SADC said the Seychelles, though a small economy, was a strategic trading partner. The accession of Seychelles will lead to further regional integration, Namibia said. Other members who took the floor at the meeting commended the parties for the review process and remarked positively on the growing integration among African economies.

Parties to the economic partnership agreement between the EU and Cariforum states meanwhile drew attention to the strengthened economic ties resulting from their regional trade agreement, which has been provisionally applied since 2008. The agreement liberalizes trade in goods over a transition period of 25 years for the Cariforum states. By 2033, Cariforum states will have eliminated tariffs on 86.5% to 97.9% of their respective tariff lines. The EU, meanwhile, eliminated duties on all but 22 tariff lines when the agreement provisionally entered into force. It also contains provisions to liberalize trade in services, development and cooperation, and sustainable development as important elements of the trade partnership.

The EU noted that exports of non-agricultural goods from Cariforum states to the EU grew by 23% between 2014 and 2017. Cariforum’s services exports and the EU’s investment in the region have also increased, the EU said. It added that the parties were working together to ensure effective implementation of the agreement and extensive outreach to the private sector. The EU provided information on the assistance it provided in this regard. Jamaica, on behalf of Cariforum states, said the agreement was compliant with WTO rules and likewise highlighted the development cooperation among the parties. The agreement’s objective is to alleviate poverty in Cariforum states, promote regional integration, and foster the group’s integration into the world economy, Jamaica added. Other members commenting on the agreement thanked the parties for their cooperation in the review process.

Improving transparency

The chair of the Committee, Ambassador Julian Braithwaite (United Kingdom), told members that 80 RTAs currently in force have not been notified to the WTO as of 11 September, acknowledging however that the Turkey-Singapore free trade agreement had been notified after the list was circulated.

The chair further noted that factual presentations for 29 RTAs involving only WTO members and those for a further 36 RTAs involving non-members remain pending, counting goods and services agreements separately. The WTO Secretariat reiterated its call to members to submit data and comments in a timely fashion. The chair said he was continuing consultations with relevant members to resolve the matter. It was however also noted that members needed to take a closer look at the reasons for the lack of notifications and ways in which to improve notifications of RTAs.

Some members noted increased engagement to resolve the issue concerning the review of certain agreements of Latin American Integration Association (LAIA) members. Some members also looked forward to the consideration of the Gulf Cooperation Council under Transparency Mechanism procedures.

As for the adoption of a new template for members to notify changes to their existing RTAs, Brazil reported that its authorities have approved the notification format and that it could now go on to the other WTO bodies for further approval.

Next meeting

The next meeting of the Committee is scheduled for 19 and 20 November.

Source: wto.org

31/ The ISO/IEC’s service management system series gets an upgrade with key standards newly revised

Improving customer service, productivity and efficiency are just a few of the many benefits of a service management system. ISO has updated two standards in its service management series, with new features, topics and tips from the top.

According to a Forbes report, IT service management is highly important to most executives and a lack of a service management approach hurts competitiveness due to too much time and money spent on ongoing maintenance and management rather than new initiatives¹⁾.

A service management system (SMS) supports the management of the service life cycle, from planning to delivery and improvement, offering better value for customers as well as those delivering the service. It gives ongoing visibility, allowing for continual improvement in effectiveness and efficiency.

Published jointly by ISO and the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), the ISO/IEC 20000 series of standards provides comprehensive guidance on virtually every aspect of SMS and two key parts have just been updated.

ISO/IEC 20000-1:2018, Information technology – Service management – Part 1: Service management system requirements, specifies the requirements for an organization to establish, implement, maintain and continually improve an SMS, while ISO/IEC 20000-10:2018, Information technology – Service management – Part 10: Concepts and vocabulary, describes the core concepts and terminology for the whole ISO/IEC 20000 series.

Jan Begg, Chair of the ISO technical subcommittee that revised the standards²⁾, said that while this series has mostly been used for IT services, it is increasingly being applied to other services to improve business processes and decision making.

“While there are many frameworks and methodologies for service management, the ISO/IEC 20000 series is the only one available to measure conformance, support certification and provide assurance to customers that their services are being effectively managed,” she said.

“The ISO/IEC 20000 series can be of benefit to anyone that provides services to customers, whether it be a whole company or an individual department, not only improving their service but ensuring that service management activities meet business needs and objectives.”

The revised versions take into account changes in market trends, including the commoditization of services and the management of multiple suppliers by an internal or external service integrator. It also incorporates new features such as requirements about knowledge and service planning, as well as updated terminology and definitions.

ISO/IEC 20000-1:2018 and ISO/IEC 20000-10:2018, and all standards in the ISO/IEC 20000 series, can be purchased from your national ISO member or through the ISO Store.

1) Forbes: How IT Service Management Delivers Value To The Digital Enterprise

2) The ISO/IEC 20000 series, including ISO/IEC 20000-1 and ISO/IEC 20000-10, were developed by the ISO and IEC joint technical committee ISO/IEC JTC 1, Information technology, subcommittee SC 40, IT Service Management and IT Governance, the secretariat of which is held by Standards Australia (SA), ISO’s member for Australia.

Source: iso.org

 

Ngày 19/9

32/ Public Forum programme is now available

This year’s Public Forum entitled “Trade: 2030” will feature 112 sessions covering sustainable trade, technology-enabled trade and a more inclusive trading system. All the sessions at the Forum, which takes place from 2 to 4 October, will be organized by participants, including WTO member governments, businesses, non-governmental organizations, academia, law firms and international organizations.

The Forum will feature a number of high-level sessions. These will focus on how new technological developments will affect the multilateral trading system, how to ensure that trade in 2030 continues to address the major issues facing the world and how to make trade work for the environment, prosperity and resilience.  The Forum will also include the launch of the 2018 edition of the World Trade Report, whose topic is “The Future of World Trade: How Digital Technologies are Transforming Global Commerce”. Another feature of the Forum will be three “Meet the Author” sessions, where selected authors will present their latest books.

In addition, 27 exhibitors will showcase their latest technologies, publications and sustainable solutions. Information on this year’s exhibitors is available here.

The full programme is available here.

Source: iso.org

 

33/ Australia gives CHF 130,000 to help poorest members use trade to achieve sustainable growth

Australia is contributing CHF 130,000 (AUD 177,000) to WTO programmes aimed at helping developing countries, and in particular least-developed countries (LDCs), enhance their trading capacities and build resilience to natural disasters.

A contribution of CHF 20,000 (approximately AUD 27,000) will be made to the WTO’s Doha Development Agenda Global Trust Fund to finance training workshops for government officials aimed at helping developing countries and LDCs participate more fully in multilateral trade and achieve economic growth. Since the creation of the fund in 2001, approximately 2,600 workshops have been organized.

A donation of CHF 110,000 (approximately AUD 150,000) will finance a new WTO research project aimed at helping countries analyze how trade can help them respond to and recover from natural disasters and build resilience to such events. This donation was announced at a symposium on trade and natural disasters held at the WTO’s headquarters on 26 April 2018.

The project will examine how natural disasters have had an impact on trade in the past and will assess which WTO rules and practices can help countries respond to or remain resilient to such disasters in the future.

WTO Director-General Roberto Azevêdo said: “Australia’s generous donations are further evidence of the country’s strong commitment to helping the WTO’s poorest members integrate more effectively into the multilateral trading system. Through its donation to the Natural Disasters and Trade Fund, Australia is demonstrating welcome leadership in deepening our understanding of the role that trade can play in dealing with natural disasters.”

Australia’s Ambassador to the WTO, Frances Lisson, said: “Australia is committed to supporting developing countries participate more fully in, and benefit from, the multilateral trading system. We value the work of the WTO’s Global Trust Fund in delivering important training for government officials, and we look forward to seeing the findings from the WTO’s research on the links between trade and natural disasters”.

Australia has donated nearly AUD 23 million (CHF 17 million) to WTO trust funds over the past 15 years.

Source: wto.org

 

34/ Philippines launches safeguard investigation on cement

On 19 September 2018, Philippines notified the WTO’s Committee on Safeguards that it initiated on 10 September 2018 a safeguard investigation on cement.

In a notice submitted together with the notification, Philippines indicated, among other things, that “submissions may be made to the Bureau on Import Services (BIS), Department of Trade and Industry, 3rd floor, Tara Building #389 Senator Gil Puyat Avenue, Makati City, within five (5) days from the date of the publication of this notice.”

Further information is available in G/SG/N/6/PHL/11.

What is a safeguard investigation?

A safeguard investigation seeks to determine whether increased imports of a product are causing, or is threatening to cause, serious injury to a domestic industry.

During a safeguard investigation, importers, exporters and other interested parties may present evidence and views and respond to the presentations of other parties.

A WTO member may take a safeguard action (i.e. restrict imports of a product temporarily) only if the increased imports of the product are found to be causing, or threatening to cause, serious injury.

Source: wto.org

 

Ngày 20/9

35/ WTO launches new iLibrary platform

The WTO has launched today (20 September) the WTO iLibrary (www.wto-ilibrary.org), a new dynamic research tool that brings together, for the first time, into one self-contained area all the WTO’s key research material on global trade. WTO iLibrary has been developed in cooperation with the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development.

WTO iLibrary contains over 400 titles published by the WTO or co-published with other international organizations, comprising almost 4,000 chapters. It also contains over 30 titles co-published with Cambridge University Press, comprising over 500 chapters, over 200 WTO working papers and comprehensive statistical data on world trade. In addition, it contains every dispute settlement report issued since the WTO was established.

Enriched metadata makes the content fully searchable, meaning users can drill down easily to their specific areas of interest. All content can be fully downloaded while a “Read Online” feature allows users to read and share content on all connected devices, such as tablets or mobile phones. Content can be viewed by country, topic, year and title. A citation tool allows content to be easily integrated by its bibliographic reference.

The content is made available in a variety of digital formats, including PDF, HTML and CSV. Each publication page contains a link to the WTO’s Online Bookshop for ordering printed copies.

WTO iLibrary is aimed at a variety of audiences looking for comprehensive access to the full range of WTO research on world trade, the latest data on global trade and the findings of the WTO’s dispute settlement system. This makes it the perfect research tool for chambers of commerce, export/import businesses, legal firms, universities and research institutions.

WTO iLibrary will be regularly updated and expanded to incorporate new content on global trade. For questions about content, please contact WTO-ilibrary@wto.org

The platform works best in a modern browser, such as Google Chrome, Firefox or Safari. For all questions related to access and subscriptions, please contact WTO-ilibrary@oecd.org

All proceeds from WTO publications and related products support the work of the WTO.

Source: wto.org

 

36/ WTO agriculture negotiators start new phase of thematic discussions

WTO members began a new series of thematic discussions on domestic support and public stockholding for food security purposes at the Special Session of the Agriculture Committee on 20-21 September, in line with the proposal by the Chair of the Committee, Ambassador John Deep Ford, to hold a series of thematic sessions in the latter part of the year. The Chair also held consultations with the Cotton 4 (Benin, Burkina Faso, Chad and Mali) and other members on the way forward on cotton.

Domestic support

Lively discussions took place during the session on domestic support, based on two submissions from Cairns Group members covering “Domestic support in the WTO Agreement on Agriculture” (JOB/AG/138) and “Trends in global trade-distorting support” (JOB/AG/143).

The two papers focused on trends in trade-distorting domestic support granted by WTO members since 2001. Both papers highlighted that the composition of support has changed over the years and that overall trade-distorting domestic support has remained high, with the top ten providers of support consistently accounting for the bulk of notified support.

Members commended the usefulness of the two submissions, underlining that they helped members gain a better understanding of the evolution of domestic support, a top priority for many members. Many members supported the call for improved transparency to ensure up-to-date notifications which would allow for more complete and accurate analysis in the future.

Some members insisted that the negotiations should initially focus on the aggregate measurement support (AMS) entitlements, which permitted certain members to exceed their de minimis levels (minimal amounts of domestic support that are allowed even though they distort trade) under the Agreement on Agriculture. They considered this to be the most trade-distorting support, while some others expressed the view that all components of trade-distorting support should be examined in the negotiations.

Some members demanded that the green box – domestic support for agriculture that is allowed without limits because it does not distort trade, or at most causes minimal distortion – should also be analysed Some challenged the methodology used in the two papers and requested the inclusion of per capita data.

The session ended on a high note, with some members noting that it was one of the best meetings in recent years in terms of discussions and engagement by members. The Chair invited members to use future dedicated sessions as a launch pad for more technical and factual analysis. He said: “With continued hard work, sustained level of engagement and some flexibility, progress [is] possible [in domestic support].”

Public stockholding for food security purposes

Indonesia spoke on behalf of the G33 Group (a coalition of developing countries), highlighting the importance of reaching a permanent solution for public stockholding programmes in developing members that are intended to ensure food security and small farmers’ livelihood.

The proponents expressed regret about the missed deadline of the WTO’s 11th Ministerial Conference for finding a permanent solution and urged members to redouble their efforts to find a solution by the 12th Ministerial Conference, which is to be held in June 2020. They said that the permanent solution should cover both existing and future public stockholding programmes of developing members.

Some members asked for more information to better understand the need for a permanent solution as well as data on which members were having difficulties with the implementation of the current rules in the Agreement on Agriculture. It was strongly suggested that proponents put forward an information paper on the issue.

In its response, Indonesia said that the G33 Group was currently studying all aspects of public stockholding that had been put forward and agreed that a technical conversation would be needed.

Cotton

The Cotton 4 reported on replies received so far to their recent data request on cotton support, production and prices. The United States presented a new paper (JOB/AG/144) which contained data on domestic support, market access and export subsidies for cotton. Members further discussed how to improve data, information collection and analysis, and possible options for advancing the negotiations.

Next step

In conclusion, the Chair said: “Time is not on our side,” yet “new ideas take time to mature”. The next cluster of dedicated discussions – scheduled for 22-23 October – will focus on market access and the special safeguard mechanism for developing countries. The Chair indicated he would be holding more consultations with members in various formats.

Source: wto.org

 

Ngày 21/9

37/ Contributing to a better world on World Tourism Day

Tourism is booming, bringing with it substantial opportunities to contribute to sustainable development. World Tourism Day is the day to draw attention to how tourism can improve our world. ISO standards play a key role.

Last year, 1.2 billion travellers went travelling, according to the World Tourism Organization, the United Nations agency responsible for the promotion of sustainable tourism, and this number is expected to rise to 1.8 billion by 2030. While this places pressure on our planet, international tourism also brings significant economic benefits to local communities, many of whom rely on it.

World Tourism Day is held every 27 September to raise awareness of the contribution that tourism can make to sustainable development. This year’s theme, “Tourism and the Digital Transformation”, highlights the importance of digital technologies in the tourism industry and how they can contribute to sustainable development through such things as local community empowerment and efficient resource management.

ISO International Standards support innovation and technology by providing a common language and agreed best practices that avoid reinventing the wheel, thus freeing up valuable time and resources for creativity and inventive work. They also lay down accepted frameworks from which innovation can flourish.

What’s more, ISO’s portfolio boasts a number of standards that serve as important tools to help key players in the tourism industry improve their contribution to sustainable development. These include standards by ISO technical committee ISO/TC 228, Tourism and related services. One example is technical specification ISO/TS 13811, Tourism and related services – Guidelines on developing environmental specifications for accommodation establishments, which helps organizations reduce the negative impacts of tourism accommodation on the natural environment.

The committee is currently working on other important standards that contribute directly to sustainable development within tourism. These include:

• ISO 21401, Tourism and related services – Sustainability management system for accommodation establishments – Requirements
• ISO 20611, Adventure tourism – Good practices for sustainability – Requirements and recommendations
• ISO 21416, Recreational diving services – Requirements and guidance on sustainable practices in recreational diving

Learn more about ISO standards for tourism in this short, engaging video:

Source: iso.org

 

38/ Chinese request for retaliation against US in dumping dispute referred to arbitration

A Chinese request for authorization to retaliate against the United States in a dispute over US anti-dumping practices has been referred to WTO arbitration. The matter was discussed at a 21 September meeting of the WTO’s Dispute Settlement Body (DSB).

DS471: United States — Certain Methodologies and their Application to Anti-Dumping Proceedings involving China

China told the DSB meeting that, as indicated in the United States’ latest status report, the US has not yet initiated any substantive implementation process to address the DSB recommendations in this dispute, other than “consulting with the interested parties”.  China said it was very disappointed and deeply concerned with the failure of the US to implement the ruling in DS471, and that the WTO-inconsistent measures taken by the US had seriously infringed China’s legitimate economic and trade interests, distorted the relevant international market and seriously damaged the rule-based multilateral trading system.

China said that in the absence of an agreement on compensation, and in line with Article 22.6 of the WTO’s Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU), it was requesting authorization from the DSB to suspend concessions or other obligations with respect to the United States at a level equivalent to the nullification or impairment suffered as a result of the failure of the United States to comply with the ruling.

The United States noted that on 19 September it objected to the level of suspension of concessions or other obligations proposed by China. Under the terms of Article 22.6 of the DSU, the filing of such an objection automatically results in the matter being referred to arbitration; the provision does not refer to any decision by the DSB, and no decision is therefore required or possible.

The United States said it is willing to discuss implementation with China on a bilateral basis, but that it was incorrect to suggest that no action has been taken on the matter; as reported by the US to the DSB, the US continues to consult with interested parties on options to address the recommendations of the DSB, with the internal process ongoing.

Brazil said that independent of the present case, objections to the level of proposed suspension of concessions should be made at the DSB both for reasons of transparency and because third parties do not participate in the arbitration process.  The United States said there was no provision under the DSU requiring this and that past experience showed that matters have been referred to arbitration in the past without any DSB action or any DSB item arising under the agenda.  WTO members always have an opportunity to express their views at a meeting of the DSB with respect to a particular arbitration if they so wish, the US added.

Next meeting

The next regular meeting of the DSB is scheduled for 26 September 2018.

Source: wto.org

 

39/ The Bahamas reactivates WTO accession process with a view to secure membership by 2019

WTO members praised The Bahamas’ commitment to reactivate and accelerate its WTO accession process after six years of impasse. At the third meeting of the Working Party on the Accession of The Bahamas, held on 21 September, members expressed their full support to the government of the Caribbean nation in its intention to secure WTO membership by the end of 2019. The Bahamas is the last nation in the Americas still outside the WTO.

“This third Working Party meeting effectively re-launches the negotiations after a six-year hiatus,” said Brent Symonette, Minister of Financial Services, Trade and Industry, and Immigration of The Bahamas, who recalled that the reactivation of this process started late last year when the Prime Minister of The Bahamas, Hubert A. Minnis, formally announced the commitment of the government to the WTO accession process “with a tentative accession date of December 2019″.

Mr Symonette, who led a high-level delegation from Nassau, stressed that his government launched a series of economic reforms in order to diversify the economy, create new business opportunities, create quality jobs and rising incomes, improve the government´s fiscal position and enhance the development of infrastructure. “These reforms and the core economic principles that facilitate them – fair and free trade, competition and intellectual property rights protection – are consistent with the aims of the WTO and the global trading system it promotes. Given their alignment with the national development interests of The Bahamas, restarting and committing to the conclusion of this process was deemed a strategic move for The Bahamas,” he said.

The Chair of the Working Party, Ambassador Andrew Staines of the United Kingdom, stressed that the accession process of The Bahamas “is strategically important, not only for herself and her reform agenda, but also for the region. The Bahamas is the last nation in the Caribbean and, indeed in the Western hemisphere, still outside the WTO. We live in a globalized world and being part of the multilateral trading system is vital for any country.”

Ambassador Staines added: “Each accession strengthens the multilateral trading system as additional voices validate and uphold the values and principles underpinning the system. This is particularly important at the current moment where there is broad recognition of the need to step up our actions and dialogue to enhance confidence in international trade. The Bahamas is such a voice, along with 21 others seeking to be part of the system.”

Over the past few days the Bahamian delegation engaged in bilateral meetings with members and held a plurilateral meeting on agriculture where it emphasized the special features of The Bahamas – a country with a unique geography composed of many small islands, where farmers encounter specific challenges, such as high poverty rates, high marketing and transportation costs and risk of rising sea-level as a result of climate change, which makes the territory particularly vulnerable to external shocks.

WTO members commended the substantive work done by the Bahamian government since late last year and expressed their support for a swift negotiating process that brings the Caribbean state closer to WTO membership. However, they said there is significant work ahead in order to advance bilateral market access negotiations, and to fully bring The Bahamas’ foreign trade regime and legislation in line with WTO requirements.

Background

The Working Party on the Accession of The Bahamas was established in July 2001 and held its first meeting in September 2010. The second meeting took place in June 2012. Between 2013 and 2016, the government of Nassau and the WTO Secretariat were in contact – however such contact did not translate into the technical inputs required for the next phase of the accession process.

At the end of 2017, the then newly elected Bahamian Prime Minister Hubert Minnis contacted the WTO Director-General Roberto Azevêdo with the message that his government was ready to resume its accession journey. This was followed up by a technical mission from the WTO Secretariat in March this year to assist The Bahamas’ technical team in the preparation of the updated inputs that were presented in this third meeting of the Working Party.

Next meeting

The Chair left open the timing for the next meeting of the Working Party, but suggested the possibility of convening it in early 2019, subject to how the work advances and the progress achieved in the upcoming months in the different negotiation areas.

Source: wto.org

 

40/ European Union files appeal in dispute with Russia over energy sector measures

The European Union filed an appeal on 21 September concerning the WTO panel report in the case brought by the Russian Federation in “European Union and its Member States — Certain Measures Relating to the Energy Sector” (DS476). The panel report was circulated to WTO members on 10 August.

Further information will be available within the next few days in document WT/DS476/6

Parties to a dispute can appeal a panel’s ruling. Appeals have to be based on points of law, such as legal interpretation — they cannot re-open factual findings made by the panel. Each appeal is heard by three members of an Appellate Body comprising persons of recognized authority and unaffiliated with any government. Each member of the Appellate Body is appointed for a fixed term. Generally, the Appellate Body has up to 3 months to conclude its report.

Source: wto.org

 

Ngày 24/9

41/ DDG Wolff: “It is essential that the WTO adapt to future changes in world trade”

Speaking at the University of International Business in Almaty, Kazakhstan, on 24 September, Deputy Director-General Alan Wolff said that trade patterns have shifted and trade measures have changed dramatically since the WTO was created over 20 years ago. The WTO needs to adapt to these and future changes, he said, including the advent of new technologies. He concluded: “I am optimistic that the WTO can and will be maintained and improved, despite the near-term challenges that need to be met and overcome.”

The University of International Business 

The Promise of the World Trade Organization

Address by

Ambassador Alan Wm. Wolff,

Deputy Director-General, WTO

Almaty, Kazakhstan

Dr Darkhan Akhmed-Zaki, President of the University of International Business,  Staff of the University of International Business, distinguished guests and ladies and gentlemen.  Good morning.  I welcome the opportunity to speak to the generation who will be making far-reaching changes in trade and who can and will transform the world trading system.

This is a country in which one can almost see the future given the rate of change that is taking place here.  History has been accelerating here — just think of the changes in recent decades.  The results have been very positive for Kazakhstan.  The University of International Business is just over 25 years old, and already thousands of its graduates are making their contribution to society at home and abroad.

Before I begin, I want to thank Kazakhstan with its recent accession to the WTO for its positive contributions.  This includes the tireless work of Ambassador Zhanar Aitzhanova, Permanent Representative of Kazakhstan to the WTO and, of course, the planned hosting of the next WTO Ministerial, MC12 in Astana in June 2020.

On behalf of the WTO Secretariat, let me also thank the University for being a valuable partner for the WTO for hosting the WTO Regional Trade Policy Course since last year for the Region of Central and Eastern European, Central Asian and the Caucasus (CEECAC), which can be a key player in the future of the Multilateral Trade System.

Many of you will be in leadership positions, and some in equally important supporting roles in public service or in the private sector.  Wherever you serve around the globe, your contribution to your country and the world can count.  From whatever path you take over your careers, very often you will be in a position to help drive public policy.  To do so is both challenging and exciting.  It has motivated me for a lifetime and continues undiminished now.

Much in the world of trade will change going forward, largely due to technology.  Trade will move in different channels and consist of different products, in terms of goods, services and products of the mind.  Artificial intelligence (AI) will make dramatic changes in how we go about our work, how we travel and how we trade. Human ingenuity and talent, and a moral centre, will determine the success of the human race.  AI has its limits.  A very human question will be the nature of the values you bring to public service, to government, business and civil society.  These values are likely to have been instilled in you by your family in your early schooling, and by your professors at a more advanced stage of your education.  An understanding of values will also come from your readings, not just text books, but history and yes, even good fiction.  Reading enlightening works are like looking at a good painting or excellent photographs.  They give the viewer a greater ability to see things differently, more clearly than before.

Technological change is not new.  When the wheel was invented, some people lost their jobs.  What is different today is the speed of change driven by technological advances, and the tendency that they will only accelerate.  I am told that every Kazakh is to know the names of seven grandfathers.  Think also of the world that they inhabited and what it was like.

My father, when very young, watched as horses gave way to cars and gas lighting to electricity and lived to see humans go into space an.  Our two generations spanned the time of travel to the moon.  I have seen giant container ships carrying massive cargoes inexpensively across oceans, the beginnings of the internet and introduction and growth of electronic commerce.

Even greater progress will be made in your generation.  One major change that is foreseen is a time when artificial intelligence found in computers will equal and then begin to exceed human intelligence.  Technologists call this event “singularity” and estimate that it will be reached in the year 2045.  They tell us that we are contributing to the creation of the AI on a daily basis, through our activities on social networks and search engines which continuously build and analyse mountains of data.

You are fortunate as students to enter your careers at a time of revolutionary change.

Technology has been integrated into our lives at innumerable levels and is having a tremendous impact on the way nations interact – cutting the costs of doing business between individuals, and small medium and large enterprises across borders, enabling the establishment of global value chains with suppliers in many nations, and opening up a global marketplace.  Even at this moment each of you may engage in international trade simply  by using your smartphone.  You can buy and order goods virtually from anywhere in the world.  And similarly, you will be able to sell your intellectual services to businesses abroad. There is no doubt; the world you live in will continue to change.  You are only at the start of this process of transformation – which people are calling the Fourth Industrial Revolution.

In this context it is essential that the WTO adapt to future changes in the world trade.  There is no reason to believe that any international system of governance can continue to keep pace or even follow closely on the heels of change in the world around us.  There is always going to be a lag.  Beyond any doubt – a system of rules requires periodic updating to remain fully relevant.  Evolution of the rules is essential and irresistible, based upon core principles, such as those contained in the Atlantic Charter crafted in 1941, when Winston Churchill and Franklin Roosevelt met in Newfoundland to consider the world which they wanted to emerge from what the West knows a World War II and what the USSR regarded as The Great Patriotic War.  This is one of the principles that they enunciated: “to further the enjoyment by all states, great or small of access, on equal terms, to the world trade needed for their economic prosperity”.  When you pass by the Panfilov Division Memorial a short distance from here, remember that those soldiers fought and sacrificed their lives not just to save Moscow but to create a better world to pass on to their children and subsequent generations.  Those who followed, the leaders and their peoples, believed in a more open international system that would create far better economic conditions and lay the foundations for peace.  Their gift to us needs to be cherished, maintained and improved.

Now at least a quarter century has passed since the WTO was created and most of the current rules were negotiated.  The world economy has grown and evolved.  Trade patterns have shifted, and trade measures have changed dramatically.  This is a difficult time for suggesting liberalizing trade initiatives given the rise of populism and dissatisfaction on the part of many with what they see as the imbalance of the benefits as compared with the costs of international trade.  However, the rate of change in the world economy is only going to increase.  It will take strong positive leadership on the part of many to be equal to the coming challenges.

Where do matters stand today?

First, the starting point is that all WTO Members profess that they agree on the importance of the multilateral trading system.  Sustainable trade relations require a foundation in rules and commitments that are complied with. Wherever one looks, wherever there is society, there are rules.  The alternative is chaos.

In order for trade to flow, there needs to be a high degree of certainty.  Businesses, even those consisting of one person or just a few, require the rules to be clear and predictable in order to attempt to ship a good or provide a service across a border.  For major international companies, uncertainty slows or freezes investment.  The early signs of slowing cross-border investment have already appeared.  For all of us, consumers, distributors and producers alike, in short for most of the world’s inhabitants who engage in trade, uncertainty diminishes economic activity, and that affects all.

The presence of law does not suggest that there will be no conflicts.  To the contrary, law exists because there will always be differences that are not automatically reconcilable.  Few can be unaware that there has been a large increase in new trade restrictive measures applied over the last six months.

However, to keep this in perspective, nearly all world trade, which for merchandise alone exceeds $11 trillion, continues to flow every bit as freely as it did previously.  This is due to the WTO rules holding for most trade.

The trading system has halved tariffs since 1995, it cuts red tape and it increases certainty and stability.  These are the elements that businesses need to thrive and create jobs. Without the rules of the world trading system, tariffs, bureaucracy and uncertainty would multiply. To return to the world before the multilateral trading system would see trade flows fall by 60%. That would mean a far larger decline in global economic activity than occurred during the financial crisis a decade ago.

In fact, the rules have been improved in the last few years with the coverage of the information technology agreement being expanded, the Trade Facilitation Agreement coming into effect, and WTO Members agreeing to ban agricultural export subsidies.  The effect of those agreements is to move trade even more freely with fewer distortions.

Secondly, Members are using the WTO as a forum for trade issues of concern to them.  Members continue to be active participants in the standing committees of the WTO.  They notify proposed standards, receive comments and are able to take them into account in formulating final regulations.  They review sanitary and phytosanitary measures to give greater assurance that necessary requirements are also as non-trade restrictive as possible.  They make negotiating proposals on a wide variety of subjects in order to improve the rules further.  They are increasingly more open in stating their concerns and interests (although there is room for even more openness).

Ways forward are being actively sought to improve the conditions of agricultural trade, with respect to domestic subsidies, market access, export restrictions and food security.  At the Buenos Aires Ministerial Meeting last December, WTO Members recommitted to achieve disciplines on fishery subsidies, to avoid depletion of the oceans fish stocks.   Members have set a deadline of reaching agreement in less than two years from now, at the next WTO Ministerial Meeting.

Kazakhstan plays a leadership role by hosting the next WTO Ministerial Conference – that is, bringing a cross section of WTO membership to this part of the world for the first time.  It took 20 years for Kazakhstan to become a Member.  The accession process accompanied the country’s transformation from a Soviet outpost to a modern, knowledge-based economy.  An accession like that of Kazakhstan makes the system stronger.

Third, the value of the system is attested to by those seeking to accede to its rights and obligations.

Since 1995, when the WTO came into being, 36 countries have completed their accessions to the WTO.  Twenty-two countries are in the process of acceding to the WTO.  They are of different size and economic conditions, but all have the ability to use WTO membership and accession to pursue their domestic reforms and their integration into the global economy.  They all share a common vision — to be part of the WTO whose rules govern the conduct of over 98% of global trade.

All of this reinforces the fact that there is still a demand for the system and the Organization itself.  Acceding countries are on the leading edge of evolution of the world trading system as they negotiate their entry into the system.

The future of the world trading system.

The accession process and current conversations among Members can lead to WTO 2.0, in which a number of important changes are made in the current WTO rules and institutions.  That there is more to be done is demonstrated by the vigorous debate in the United Kingdom as to the gap between a single market and trade on the basis of the WTO rules and commitments.  This is amply demonstrated by the concern that over border trade between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland in the event of a “hard Brexit”.

In your generation’s hands will be the creation of WTO 3.0.  It could bring to a higher plane the way countries regard the role of trade and the rules which govern it.

A more open world trading system has been a goal since the time of the silk road.  In the west, in 1609, Hugo Grotius in his treatise Mare Liberum (or The Freedom of the Seas), Grotius held that the “most specific and unimpeachable axiom of the Law of Nations, called a primary rule or first principle, the spirit of which is self-evident and immutable” is that “every nation is free to travel to every other nation, and to trade with it.”

What might be considered for inclusion in WTO 3.0: that membership in the system is universal; that the default condition of national borders and domestic economies is openness and closing a border or impeding foreign economic participation would require a strong justification; that with respect to trade there is a duty to provide fairness not just among nations but within them; that the disadvantaged will be raised up; that the land, air and waters of the planet will be treated as an inheritance to be passed on.

I have a strong hope for the future here in Kazakhstan where a nation is being built, an ancient land is being reborn.  Here the silk road and trade are in the blood of this country.  President Nazarbayev has said “I tell young people here that they should be citizens of the world and for them there should be only one nationality – humankind.”  That message is more important now more than ever.  It is needed to a greater extent to promote cooperation and progress toward improvements in the arrangements governing international trade.

The youth of Athens, on reaching maturity, were required to take an oath.  They were to leave their city, their world, in a better condition than they had received it. They pledged that the rule of law, by consent of the systems’ members, would continually be improved, and adhered to.

That is what the current generation must strive for.  It may be accomplished by you.

The future is not written yet. You and your generation have been given the privilege and responsibility of holding the pen.

I am optimistic that the WTO can and will be maintained and improved, despite the near-term challenges that need to be met and overcome.  And perhaps a number of you will take on the next challenges, as there will always be more to deal with.

The future is in your hands.

Thank you.

Source: wto.org

42/ Members complete first cluster of meetings in Sept-Dec fisheries subsidies work programme

During their 24-28 September cluster of fisheries subsidies meetings, WTO members in the Negotiating Group on Rules held text-based discussions on capacity— and effort-related subsidies, and heard reports by four “incubator groups” on ideas discussed regarding certain pending issues.

Members also exchanged views and information on enhancing the transparency of fishery subsidy programmes and establishing institutional arrangements for monitoring the implementation of new disciplines. In addition, members continued their work to streamline negotiating documents.

The next cluster of meetings will be on 5-9 November. Incubator groups will meet beforehand on 29 October-2 November.

Source: wto.org

 

43/ Vietnam pursues open trade, investment environment: official

Vietnam is determined to build an open trade and investment environment and welcomes all European investors and entrepreneurs to do business in the country, Deputy Minister of Industry and Trade Tran Quoc Khanh has said.

The official made the statement in Brussels on September 18 at a high-level conference on the EU-Vietnam Free Trade Agreement (EVFTA), which was attended by nearly 100 delegates who are experts, entrepreneurs and representatives of organisations from the EU and Vietnam.

Speakers at the event provided participants with an insight into the agreement and the benefits it will bring to the two sides’ enterprises in fields ranging from services, trade, investment and intellectual property to e-commerce.

Peter Berz, Head of Unit in the Directorate General for Trade of the European Commission responsible for trade relations with Southeast Asian nations, said the EVFTA and the Investment Protection Agreement (IPA), once signed and brought into effect, will become a model for FTAs between Vietnam and other partners in the future.

Ambassador Vu Anh Quang, head of the Vietnam Delegation to the EU, stated Vietnam and the EU shared a common view on multilateralism in maintaining relations and international law.

He said the EVFTA will create a legal framework for free trade between the two sides and become part of the EU-Vietnam Framework Agreement on Comprehensive Partnership and Cooperation (PCA).

Axel Goethals, CEO of the European Institute for Asian Studies (EIAS), said up to 99% of EU tariffs will be removed for Vietnamese products thanks to the EVFTA.

Therefore, the agreement is expected to raise the volume of exports to the EU by a third, and open up a new chapter for bilateral trade, he added.

Deputy Minister Khanh stressed the Vietnamese Government is preparing a plan on the enforcement of the EVFTA, and is willing to work with the EU towards trade liberalisation.

He affirmed that the EU is a trusted partner of Vietnam.

Legal reviews for a free trade agreement between Vietnam and the EU started after negotiations on the deal concluded on December 2, 2015. However, the EU changed its regulations on the process of approving FTAs, with the division of contents related to investment protection and investor-state dispute settlement made into a separate deal called Investment Protection Agreement (IPA).

In April 2018, the agreement was successfully divided into the EVFTA and the IPA.

On June 25, 2018, the two sides finished the legal review process for the EVFTA and agreed on the investment protection deal.

The EVFTA has now been finalised after a series of efforts to solve technical problems. It is being translated into the 24 official languages of the European Union (EU) and sent to member countries for consideration.

Source: NDO/VNA

 

Ngày 25/9

44/ ISO standards can help tackle global inequality, says UN Women expert

At the 2018 ISO Week in Geneva, the ISO committee dedicated to developing countries, DEVCO, unveiled ambitious plans to reduce inequalities and continue spreading the benefits of International Standards where they’re needed most.

At the 52^nd ISO DEVCO meeting, participants were roused by the words of guest speaker Christine Loew, Director of the UN Women Liaison Office, Geneva. Loew addressed a number of topics related to global inequality, and the role of women. Her speech drew attention to the fact that under-representation of women perpetuates further inequalities in wider society.

“When [women’s] lives are improved, the benefits reverberate across society,”  says Loew. She cited the ways in which inequality pays compound interest, “women and girls bear the greatest burden of energy poverty – gathering fuel for an average of 18 hours per week”, with a knock-on effect of lower school attendance than their male counterparts.

Unfortunately, it doesn’t end there. With women generally doing the majority of the cooking, in conditions that are detrimental to their health, thousands die prematurely from respiratory illness. While praising standards such as cleaner-burning stoves, and pointing to ISO’s positive gender representation in some areas, Loew underlined that more could be done to involve female experts in the standards development process.

Loew’s comments echoed the views of ISO’s Secretary-General, Sergio Mujica, an International Gender Champion who has placed diversity and capacity building at the heart of ISO’s work. His strong belief in the role of standards in building a fairer society was clear, and will be echoed throughout other events during the ISO Week 2018. Speaking on the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, Sergio Mujica @isosecgen said “we can contribute to making the 2030 Agenda a reality, so no one is left behind”.

A series of breakout sessions looked at future challenges, including stakeholder engagement focusing on small- and medium-sized businesses; standards and public procurement; and teaching standards in higher education.

The ISO President, John Walter, who opened the DEVCO session, used the opportunity to express thanks to the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency, Sida, whose generous funding has enabled a number of capacity building and technical assistance programmes. Walter also recognized the considerable efforts of Lena Dargham, whose hard work and dedication contributed to her re-election as Chair of DEVCO, which was announced at the meeting.

Source: iso.org

 

45/ DG Azevêdo addresses Day of German Industry; meets Chancellor Merkel on trade tensions

Director-General Roberto Azevêdo addressed the ‘Day of German Industry’ event today (25 September) in Berlin, organized by the Federation of German Industries (BDI). DG Azevêdo met with Chancellor Merkel, who also addressed the event, to discuss the current situation in global trade, efforts to reduce tensions and ideas regarding improving and strengthening the WTO. They discussed the potential of improving the trading system in helping to deal with the current tensions. DG Azevêdo also held a bilateral meeting with Minister for Economic Affairs and Energy Peter Altmaier.

In his speech to the Day of German Industry event, the Director-General said:

“The trading system is not perfect – but it represents the best efforts of governments around the world, working together for 70 years. The system can be better – and it must be better – but it is nonetheless vital. So while we work to improve it, and ensure that it is more responsive to evolving economic needs, we must also preserve what we have. I count on your support to that end.

“Germany and German industry are valuable champions of trade and the trading system. So I urge you to make your voices heard louder than ever. Working together, we can meet the challenges of today and build a trading system which will continue to serve our economies and communities for generations to come.”

The Director-General’s full speech is available here.

Source: wto.org

 

46/ BDI event: ‘Day of German Industry’

Remarks by DG Azevêdo

Thank you Professor Kempf, President of the BDI,

Chancellor Merkel,

Ministers,

Excellencies,

Ladies and gentlemen,

Good morning. It is an honour to be with you today to celebrate this Day of German Industry.

At the outset I want to thank Chancellor Merkel for her leadership in supporting trade and the trading system – not just for the good of Germany, but for the promotion of global peace and prosperity.

In addition, let me say a word of thanks to the BDI for its work to champion free and fair trade, based on global trade rules. We have worked closely together in recent years – for example through the WTO’s Trade Dialogues initiative and through the B20. So thank you once again for that support and partnership.

Today, German industry is a brand. And it has the kind of reputation that any brand would envy. It is respected, admired and sought-after around the world.

Last year I had the opportunity to see for myself why this is the case.

I visited a factory just outside Berlin, which makes state-of-the-art jet engines.

It was truly impressive. I saw how engineers were applying the latest technologies to their work. I saw how they were training apprentices to continue building German industry into the next generation. And I saw how German industry operates in the modern world – in a way that is deeply integrated with the global economy.

To produce one engine this facility uses parts from 900 suppliers, from small and large companies – both here in Germany and around the world.

This story is repeated in plants and factories throughout the country.

Each year Germany exports a remarkable 18,000 dollars of goods per citizen.

Almost one in three German jobs are export-related.

But even with such clear benefits, I think we still have a perception gap. People don’t always connect their jobs, or lower prices on the shelves, with being open to trade. Industry has to be vocal in spreading that message.

All the evidence before us proves how the health of global trade and the maintenance of stable, open markets are absolutely fundamental for the economy, here in Germany and everywhere else.

So this is my message to you today: let’s work together to strengthen the trading system so that it can continue to serve Germany – and serve us all – for many years to come.

I think this is the best response to the current challenges that we see all around us.

As you all know, tensions have been escalating rapidly in recent months between major trading partners.

New tariffs announced so far this year cover hundreds of billions of dollars of trade. Further measures have been proposed. And at present there is no end in sight.

Now, some might say: let’s keep this in perspective. The measures announced this year – while very significant – affect less than 2.5% of global trade. Moreover, we are still enjoying the best run of strong and sustained trade growth since the financial crisis.

Of course this is all true – but, at the same time, the warning lights are flashing.

A continued escalation of tensions would pose an increased threat to stability, to jobs and to the kind of growth that we are enjoying today.

There is a lag between the moment when a trade restrictive measure is introduced and when its full impact is felt on the ground.

Nevertheless, we may already be seeing some early effects.

Indicators show that businesses are holding off on making job-creating investments. Export orders are declining.

Our economists have been assessing a variety of possible scenarios to develop this picture. The scenario of a full, global trade war, with a breakdown in international trade cooperation, would have very dramatic effects. It would knock around 17% off global trade growth, and 1.9% off GDP growth.

There would be no winners from such a scenario. Every region would be affected. For the EU the hit to GDP could be around 1.7%.

Clearly we cannot let this happen.

There is a responsibility on the whole international community to help ease tensions, in the interests of all of our citizens.

We need to see more dialogue – both bilaterally and through the WTO.

And, in fact, this situation is putting a new focus on the multilateral trading system as a place where the solution may be found.

At the root of the current tensions is the argument that the trading system is allowing distortive trade practices to go unchecked. Therefore, the argument goes, the system needs to change to be more responsive to such measures.

I don’t think that anyone believes this can be done through a technical discussion. The current crisis is political. It requires a political solution.

This is why a high-level conversation about ‘WTO reform’ or ‘modernisation’ is beginning to emerge. It is seen as a way to deal with some of the big trade problems that some members have identified.

A variety of initiatives and meetings are being prepared, including by the EU – and with Germany also playing a key role.

A range of priorities have been suggested by WTO members. These include:

• resolving disputes and reaching agreements more rapidly and effectively,
• addressing a variety of trade distorting practices,
• advancing the trade and development debate, and
• improving notifications and transparency.

These are all important issues. Precisely which issues are taken forward is for members to determine. But clearly this reform debate is gathering significant momentum.

It was at the top of the agenda when I met with G20 trade ministers in Argentina two weeks ago. They committed to work on ways of improving the WTO to ensure that it can meet current and future challenges. And they recommended that leaders address these issues at the G20 summit in Buenos Aires in November.

The summit will be a key moment.

In addition to the immediate economic threats of a trade war, we need to acknowledge the serious systemic threat of a continued escalation in tensions. This would have consequences for the long term.

It took many decades of painstaking work from governments around the world to build the trading system that we have today.

Many, including Germany and the EU, currently put a lot of focus on pursuing their trade interests bilaterally and regionally – and I welcome this – it all contributes to freer trade. But we should remember that all such activity is underpinned by the WTO system.

We all rely on the WTO.

It plays a crucial role in maintaining stability and predictability in global trade and in the global economy. It helps to lower prices. It helps to create jobs and growth.

Without the system we would face a future of uncertainty, lower growth and diminished opportunities everywhere.

Yet today we are in a situation where basic rules and principles of the WTO are being questioned, and where the continued functioning of the Appellate Body is at risk.

If we truly value cooperation in global trade then we must step up our efforts to resolve these issues. And we must stand up for the system.

After the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, I think that economists, academics, business people and politicians concluded that the argument had been won. They no longer thought it necessary to raise their voices for trade and for an open and better integrated global economy.

Making the case for trade and the trading system seemed almost like making the case for breathing. It was self-evident. And, as a result, people began to forget its value. They simply took the benefits for granted.

Of course the trading system is not perfect – but it represents the best efforts of governments around the world, working together for 70 years.

The system can be better – and it must be better. But it is nonetheless vital.

So while we work to improve it, and ensure that it is more responsive to evolving economic needs, we must also preserve what we have.

I count on your support to that end.

Germany and German industry are valuable champions of trade and the trading system. So I urge you to make your voices heard louder than ever.

Working together, we can meet the challenges of today and build a trading system which will continue to serve our economies and communities for generations to come.

Thank you.

Source: wto.org

 

47/ Members conclude first review of Nairobi Decision on export competition, seek details on US farm aid package

WTO Members approved by consensus the first triennial review of the 2015 Nairobi Decision on export competition during a meeting of the WTO’s agriculture committee on 25-26 September. The ongoing review of the operation of the 2013 Bali Ministerial Decision on tariff rate quota (TRQ) administration turned more specific as the chair reminded Members of the end-December 2019 deadline for the General Council to finalize its recommendations on the review. Members also continued to examine various agriculture policies, including the newly-announced $12billion farm aid package of the United States.

Triennial Review of the Nairobi Decision on Export Competition and implementation of the Decision

As proposed by the chair, Debora Cumes (Guatemala), members adopted by consensus the report of the first triennial review of the Nairobi Ministerial Decision of 19 December 2015 on Export Competition(G/AG/28).

The Cairns Group (a group of agricultural exporting nations lobbying for agricultural trade liberalization) circulated a supplement to a previous submission (G/AG/W/180/Add.1) aimed at analysing the information on export support collected by the Secretariat (G/AG/W/125/Rev.9).

Since the last meeting in June, the WTO certification procedure of Switzerland’s revised schedule for eliminating export subsidies was completed while Colombia, Uruguay and the United States have each tabled amended draft schedules with a “nil” entitlement for all products. So far, among the 18 members with export subsidy commitments, two members — New Zealand and Panama – had already phased out their export subsidies at the time of the Nairobi Decision, ten (Australia, Norway, Israel, Switzerland, the EU, Canada, South Africa, Colombia, Uruguay and the US) have taken actions to amend their schedules, and six (Brazil, Indonesia, Iceland, Mexico, Turkey and Venezuela) still have to submit their revised draft schedule.

During the meeting, Brazil, Mexico, Indonesia and Turkey provided an update on their ongoing internal process to prepare the submission of their draft schedule. The United States asked additional questions regarding other members’ export programmes (G/AG/W/184/Corr.1)

The chair, congratulated members that had replied to the Secretariat’s questionnaire, including those that had made the effort to reply after the June 2018 meeting. The chair announced that a new questionnaire would be circulated by the Secretariat to prepare for the next dedicated discussion scheduled in June 2019.

Several members called for greater participation in the dedicated discussions and more replies to the questionnaire.

US’s new $12billion farm aid package

The $12billion farm aid package announced by the United States on 24 July provoked strong interest among members (G/AG/W/184, page 9-12). This programme was rolled out by the US government to assist farmers deemed most hit by the retaliatory tariff measures of some WTO members. It will be distributed through the Market Facilitation Program (MFP) as direct payments to farmers, the purchase of certain commodities, and a trade promotion programme. Multiple questions were posed to the United States to seek further clarity on the policy and to better understand its potential impact on global market.

Members sought details on the methodology of the programme, its duration,  and its consistency with existing WTOrules. Some members worried that US might exceed its aggregate measurement of support (AMS) entitlement limit of $19 billion per annum, running afoul of the disciplines in the WTO’s Agreement of Agriculture.

The United States confirmed that it is a one-time policy, covering the fiscal period September 2018 – January 2019. Regarding the methodology used, the subsidised products will be decided based on its export amount to the countries that have imposed retaliatory tariffs. Asked about its trade distorting effect, the US stressed that this is a short-term programme aimed at dealing with the impact of retaliatory tariffs, and would not entail export subsidies norwoudl it become a public stockholding programme. The US said information on the methodology and market facilitation programme is posted on the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) website and that it planned to submit WTO notifications in a timely manner. The US noted that the programme would not have an impact on farmers’ production decisions since the programme was initiated after farmers had planted their annual crops.

Many members expressed strong interest in following up on the implementation of the programme. Others said they intended to monitor whether the programme is fully consistent with WTO rules.

Meanwhile, India’s farm policies continued to draw attention due to concerns about their potential impacts on global markets. Members pressed for more detailed information regarding India’s export subsidies on skim milk powder and proposed domestic support programme (G/AG/W/184, page 6-8). India stated that financial supports provided through various state policies are intended to compensate farmers for marketing, handling, distribution and associated costs, which are allowed under Article 9 of the Agriculture Agreement. It said the proposed national agriculture policy is still under consideration but would be consistent with WTO rules.

Members reviewed submissions of 10 new questions associated with Article 18.6 of the Agreement on Agriculture (review of the implementation of commitments), all included in Secretariat document G/AG/W/184.

Tariff rate quota administration

Members continued to review the Bali Decision on TRQ administration, which seeks to  promote a continuing process of improvement in the utilisation of tariff rate quotas. Provisions dealing with the last stage of the underfill mechanism were addressed in the review discussions.  The talks were facilitated by two new documents: the Secretariat’s background paper on TRQ administration methods and fill-rates from 2007 to 2016 (G/AG/W/183) and Australia’s “Review of Bali Decision on TRQ administration” (G/AG/W/186). The papers submitted earlier by the Cairns Group (G/AG/W/179) and the European Union (G/AG/W/175)were also discussed.

The exchanges focused on addressing the causes of chronic TRQ underfill and how to share best practices to improve the efficiency and quality of the notifications submitted. The issue of special and differential (S&D) treatment and the universal applicability of the underfill mechanism came up frequently in the discussions. A number of developing members stressed the importance of S&D and cautioned against burdensome TRQ reporting requirements.

Several members expressed interest in organizing a thematic session on TRQ administration and the underfill mechanism in November to promote sharing of experiences on various aspects of TRQ administration arrangements. The chair invited the Secretariat to explore the possible timing for this event. The chair also reminded members of the end-December 2019 deadline, when the General Council must finalize its recommendations on the review; the committee therefore needs to finalize its report possibly by June 2019.

Regular review of agriculture policies

Members continued to review policies related to the three pillars of agriculture trade: market access, domestic support and export competition. Members kept probing for information on the sugar policies of India and Pakistan and expressed concerns regarding their potential trade distorting effects. Questions were also raised regarding the United Kingdom’s future schedule of agriculture commitments; the EU said it could not answer the question which related to UK´s future trade policy after UK ceases to be a member of the EU after 30 March 2019. Many members highlighted their strong interest in this issue.

Enhancing Transparency and the Committee on Agriculture Review Process

Norway in its paper (G/AG/W/185) expressed continued interest in revising the notification requirements and formats for the committee, currently set out in G/AG/2. Norway said that the deadlines contained in that document are unrealistic. It also called for best practice sharing to improve notifications and enhance transparency. Members reaffirmed that timely and complete notifications are crucial in order to move negotiations forward. However, some members preferred to maintain the deadlines decided by ministers in 1995 and to focus on how to strengthen notification capabilities.

The next agriculture committee regular meeting is tentatively scheduled for 26-27 November.

Source: wto.org

 

Ngày 26/9

48/ Panels established to rule on US safeguards, Canadian wine measures

At a meeting of the WTO’s Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) on 26 September, WTO members agreed to requests from Korea for the establishment of two panels to determine whether safeguards imposed by the United States on imports of solar cells and washers are compatible with WTO rules. The DSB also agreed to a request from Australia for a panel to rule on Canada’s measures affecting the sale of wine.

DS545: United States — Safeguard measure on imports of crystalline silicon photovoltaic products

DS546: United States — Safeguard measure on imports of large residential washers

Korea submitted its second requests for WTO panels regarding the safeguard measures imposed by the United States on imports of certain crystalline silicon photovoltaic products and large residential washers. Korea’s first requests were blocked by the US at a DSB meeting on 27 August. Korea said it considers that the US safeguard measures are inconsistent with US obligations under the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) 1994 and the WTO’s Safeguards Agreement.

The United States said WTO rules allow members to temporarily suspend concessions when a product is being imported into its territory in such increased quantities and under such conditions as to cause injury, or threat of serious injury, to the member’s domestic industry.  The US has exercised this right with regards to the two measures, which are based on the findings of an independent authority that determined the imports were causing serious injury to US producers of the two products.  The US said it regretted Korea’s decision to submit the second requests but was prepared to engage in the proceedings.

The DSB agreed to the establishment of the two panels.

Japan, Chinese Taipei, the Russian Federation, Malaysia, Singapore, Viet Nam, Thailand, the European Union, Norway, Mexico, Canada, China, Kazakhstan, Egypt, India, and the Philippines reserved their third party rights to participate in the DS545 proceedings.

Japan, the EU, Kazakhstan, the Russia Federation, Egypt, India, Norway, Brazil, Thailand, China and Viet Nam reserved their third party rights to participate in the DS546 proceedings.

DS537: Canada — Measures Governing the Sale of Wine

Australia submitted its second request for a panel in its complaint concerning measures maintained by the Canadian government and the Canadian provinces of British Columbia, Ontario, Quebec, and Nova Scotia governing the sale of wine; Australia’s first request was blocked by Canada at the 27 August DSB meeting. Australia said consultations which took place on 1 March and subsequent informal technical discussions with Canada failed to resolve the matter, prompting Australia to submit its request for a panel.  Australia said that while it remains ready to engage in discussions with Canada, it is disappointed that Canada has not taken any concrete steps to resolve its concerns.  Australia noted that a panel has already been established by the DSB in a similar complaint against Canadian wine restrictions brought by the United States (DS531) and that it believed it appropriate that the disputes be procedurally linked by creating separate but harmonized panels, with the same three panelists serving on the two panels.

Canada said it was deeply disappointed with Australia’s decision to request a panel, and that it remained open to discussions with Australia on the matter. Canada reiterated that it had serious concerns about deficiencies in Australia’s initial request for consultations which were repeated in the request for a panel.

The United States said it fully supports Australia’s request for the establishment of a panel restrictions and supports Australia’s request for harmonized proceedings with the same panelists, given that Australia makes identical claims concerning the same measures in its dispute with Canada.  Canada however said the parties should meet to discuss harmonization, since its concerns with the deficiencies in Australia’s request is likely to raise procedural difficulties if the two proceedings are harmonized.

The DSB agreed to the establishment of the panel.  The United States, Russia, Mexico, Korea, India, South Africa, Chinese Taipei, China, Chile, the EU, and Argentina reserved their third party rights to participate in the proceedings.

DS553: Korea — Sunset Review of Anti-Dumping Duties on Stainless Steel Bars

Japan submitted its first request for a panel challenging Korea’s sunset review of an anti-dumping duty order on stainless steel bars from Japan, a review which resulted in the continuation of the duties.  Japan said it considers Korea’s measures to be inconsistent with the GATT 1994 and the WTO’s Anti-Dumping Agreement; in particular, Korea failed to demonstrate the link between the expiry of the duties and a continuation or reoccurrence of injury.  Japan also questioned Korea’s use of third party data regarding the production capacity of Japanese exporters. Consultations between Korea and Japan took place on 13 August but the two sides failed to resolve the dispute, prompting Japan to request the establishment of a panel.

Korea said it regretted Japan’s decision to request a panel and not to continue the constructive dialogue they had engaged in.  The Anti-Dumping Agreement gives WTO members the right to take anti-dumping measures to counteract dumping which is causing injury and to maintain such measures if there is a likelihood of continuing/reoccurring injury.  The Korean authorities determined through an objective review that this was highly likely to be the case if the duties were terminated.  Korea also said Japan’s request failed to clearly identify the measures challenged and unduly expanded the scope of the matter to include issues not raised in the previous consultations. As a result, Korea said it respectfully disagreed to the establishment of a panel.

The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to revert to the matter.

DS234: United States – Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act Of 2000

The European Union reiterated its request that the United States cease transferring anti-dumping and countervailing duties to the US domestic industry, arguing that every such disbursement was a clear act of non-compliance with the DSB’s recommendations and rulings on the matter. Brazil, Canada and Chile thanked the EU for keeping the item on the agenda and called on the US to fully comply. The United States referred to its previous statement and said it had taken all action necessary to comply with the DSB’s recommendations and rulings.

Appellate Body matters

Statement by China regarding concerning Article 17.6 of the Dispute Settlement Understanding

China delivered a statement in which it addressed US concerns raised at the 27 August DSB meeting regarding what the US said was the Appellate Body exceeding its mandate under Article 17.6 of the Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU) by reviewing and even reversing a panel’s findings of facts, including domestic or municipal law.  China disagreed with the US assessment; WTO panels are obliged to carry out an objective assessment of facts in accordance with Article 11 of the DSU, and the Appellate Body can review whether a panel properly discharged its objective assessment obligations. Most WTO members, if not all, agree that the manner of a panel’s fact-finding is within the scope of appellate review and that members have frequently asked the Appellate Body to review fact-finding by panels – including the US, which has requested such appellate reviews in a number of dispute cases, China said. In regards to its reviews of domestic/municipal law, China said the Appellate Body has correctly drawn a line between a panel’s findings on the meaning of municipal law and its findings on the characterization of municipal law.  This line is not easy to draw in practice, and there is no clear-cut rule with respect to drawing this line.

The United States reiterated its belief that the Appellate Body lacks authority to review a panel’s finding of fact.  While Article 11 gives panels the authority to make factual and legal findings, Article 17.6 expressly limits the scope of the Appellate Body’s review to issues of law covered in the panel report and legal interpretations developed by the panel.  The Appellate Body’s decision to engage in review of fact-finding has had adverse effects on the WTO’s dispute settlement system, including an increased workload, increased complexity of appeals, and more time and resources needed to handle such appeals. In regards to municipal law, the US said the Appellate Body’s treatment of this issue departs from the agreed text of the DSU and is a serious waste of the WTO dispute settlement system’s limited resources.

Japan, Brazil, Canada, Mexico, the European Union and Chile all intervened and said they remained open to discussing this issue further.

Appellate Body appointments

Mexico, speaking on behalf of 68 WTO members, once again introduced a proposal calling for the establishment of a selection committee for the appointment of new Appellate Body members, the submission of candidates within 30 days, and the issuance by the committee of recommendations within 60 days. The latest request covers the impending vacancy arising from the departure of Mr. Shree Baboo Chekitan Servansing, whose four-year term of office will expire on 30 September. The considerable number of members supporting the proposal reflects a common concern with the current situation in the Appellate Body that is seriously affecting its workings and the overall dispute settlement system against the best interest of its members, Mexico said.

The United States again said it was not in a position to agree to the proposal. As it explained in previous meetings, the US said the systemic concerns it has identified remain unaddressed, such as the concerns that an individual who is not currently an Appellate Body member continues to decide appeals. It is the DSB, not the Appellate Body, which has the authority to decide whether a person who is no longer an Appellate Body member can continue to serve on an appeal. The US said it will continue its efforts and its discussions with WTO members and with the DSB chair to seek a solution.

Twenty-four members made statements.  These delegations reiterated their concerns with the continued impasse regarding the appointment of new Appellate Body members and urged all members to show flexibility in order to resolve the deadlock as soon as possible.  Several delegations expressed their regret on the lack of consensus to reappoint Mr. Servansing and cited the growing dangers the continued impasse posed not only to the dispute settlement system but the WTO as a whole.

Statement by Honduras – Fostering a discussion on the functioning of the Appellate Body

Honduras presented to WTO members its ideas for addressing one of the concerns raised by the United States regarding the Appellate Body – the practice of allowing Appellate Body members whose terms have expired to continue working on cases without the DSB’s approval. The practice is set out under Rule 15 of the Working Procedures for Appellate Review. Honduras said that as a small developing country active in dispute settlement, it attached great importance to the Appellate Body, whose survival is at stake.  Honduras said that there are currently no specific criteria under Rule 15 for determining when an Appellate Body member should continue to work on an appeal and outlined what it said were “objective and reasonable” criteria for consideration by the membership.

Twenty-three members took the floor to comment on the proposal.  These members welcomed the initiative from Honduras and noted that the paper contained some possible options for addressing the issue.  The United States said it looked forward to hearing other members’ views on the options. Honduras thanked members that had expressed interest in its initiative asked for a dedicated open-ended meeting to continue the discussions.

Surveillance of implementation

The United States presented status reports with regard to DS184, US — Anti-Dumping Measures on Certain Hot-Rolled Steel Products from Japan,  DS160, United States — Section 110(5) of US Copyright Act, and DS464, United States — Anti-Dumping and Countervailing Measures on Large Residential Washers from Korea, while the European Union presented status reports with regard to DS291, EC — Measures Affecting the Approval and Marketing of Biotech Products.

The United States said that it continued to consult with interested parties on options for implementing the WTO’s ruling in DS471, United States — Certain Methodologies and their Application to Anti-Dumping Proceedings Involving China. China noted that the deadline for the United States to comply with the ruling expired on 22 August, that it was very disappointed with the continued US inaction on the matter, and that it had requested WTO authorization to suspend concessions against the US for non-compliance with the ruling.

The United States said it continues to consult with interested parties on options for addressing the findings of the WTO ruling in DS488, US — Anti-Dumping Measures on Certain Oil Country Tubular Goods from Korea. The US and Korea earlier agreed that the deadline for implementing the ruling would be 12 January 2019.  Korea said there was insufficient information on the steps the US is taking to comply with the ruling.

Indonesia noted that the deadline for implementation of the WTO’s findings in DS484, Indonesia — Measures Concerning the Importation of Chicken Meat and Chicken Products, expired on 22 July.  Indonesia said that it has taken the necessary steps to adjust the relevant measures by amending two relevant regulations.  Brazil said it had concerns about Indonesia’s continued application of certain restrictive import licensing practices, and its continued failure to recognize Brazilian veterinary health certification for exported chicken.

The EU noted that it still had one month to comply with the WTO ruling in DS480, European Union — Anti-Dumping Measures on Biodiesel from Indonesia, and that it expected implementation to be finalized in the near future.  Indonesia expressed hope that implementation would be done in time and in line with the WTO ruling.

Other business

DS490 and DS496: Indonesia — Safeguard on Certain Iron or Steel Products

Indonesia said it would need a reasonable period of time to comply with the WTO’s ruling in DS490 and DS496.  Chinese Taipei said the best thing would be for Indonesia to remove the safeguard at the earliest possible time while Viet Nam said it was ready to discuss with Indonesia a specific time frame for ensuring compliance.

Next meeting

The next regular meeting of the DSB will take place on 29 October.

Source: wto.org

 

49/ DDG Wolff: WTO accessions have accelerated economic development

Speaking at the Seventh China Round Table on WTO accessions in the Kazakh capital Astana on 26 September, Deputy Director-General Alan Wolff underlined the import role WTO membership has played in the economic development of Kazakhstan and other recently-acceded members. “While lengthy and demanding, the accession journey has helped many countries to implement their development strategies for modernisation and transformation,” he said. DDG Wolff’s remarks are below:

Excellencies,

Ladies and Gentlemen,

I want to thank the Government of Kazakhstan for hosting this, the Seventh China Round Table.

Second, I would like to thank the Government of China for its support extended through the China LDCs and Accessions Programme. Since its establishment in 2011, this Programme has made a substantial and welcome contribution to our accessions work, including through the Round Tables.  Over the years, these Round Tables have provided a valuable forum for fruitful discussions on systemic issues and practical considerations related to WTO accessions.

It is a great pleasure to return to Astana.  The creation of a new capital city is an expression of both hope and belief in the future.  This was true in modern times of Canberra and Brasilia.  It was true for the creation of my home city, Washington DC, and it is true for Astana, a new heart for Kazakhstan and Eurasia.

The choice of Astana for this meeting of the Accessions Roundtable is particularly appropriate.

The founding principle of the WTO, and the GATT system before it, is to promote peace.

• Peace through reconstruction after war.
• Peace through economic development.
• Peace through improved commercial relations.
• Peace through negotiation and implementation of common rules.

We meet this week in a city that has been dedicated to peace.  In its short 20-year history, Astana has a remarkable record of seeking to foster peace.

• In 2010 Astana hosted the Summit of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe at which the heads of state and government put forward a vision of “a free, democratic, common and indivisible Euro-Atlantic and Eurasian security community stretching from Vancouver to Vladivostok, rooted in agreed principles, shared commitments and common goals”.
• Astana hosted the Congresses of Leaders of World and Traditional Religions to promote inter-religious and international dialogue for the sake of peace, justice and security in the 21st century.
• Astana has hosted a series of summits aimed at improving regional security and co-operation.
• Not least, Astana serves as an important location for negotiating an end to violence in Syria.

The hosting of this Roundtable is in line with the supreme purpose to which Astana has been dedicated – to expand the areas of the world in which peace is possible and to advance the well-being of more of the world’s peoples.

This is the context in which the discussions these two days take place.

One of our main priorities in the WTO is to ensure that all countries wishing to do so can use trade as a tool to promote economic growth and development. This is why WTO accessions continue to be a priority for the Organization. Since the transformation from the GATT to the WTO in 1995, the Organization has dealt with 58 accessions, 36 of which have been concluded to date thanks in large part to the strong interest of these acceding countries.

The accession process has expanded the Organization’s membership to 164 with a profound effect – greatly extending the reach of the WTO’s shared rules and principles, and providing a platform for accelerated economic growth for many economies and regions across the globe.

Much of this post-1995 expansion has occurred in this region.  Many of the acceding countries are represented here today are, including former Soviet republics; China and Mongolia to the East; Afghanistan to the South and Montenegro from the Western Balkans to the West – adding over 15% to world trade covered under WTO rules.  In the coming years, more countries from this region will accede to the WTO:  Indeed. At present seven are in the process of working on their own accessions.  I cannot therefore think of any better place to reflect on the future of the multilateral trading system, through the lens of WTO accessions, than here in Astana, in the heart of modern Eurasia.

Trade has played a major role in the exchanges of ideas, cultures and religions that took place between the major centres of civilization of Asia and Europe beginning in antiquity.  Much like today, the trade routes served to transfer raw materials, foodstuffs, and luxury goods from areas with surpluses to others where they were in short supply. With the demise of the ancient trade routes of the Silk Road, the sheer expanse of land and distance became a barrier to transportation and development. Today, with the disappearance of old, ideological battle lines and the establishment of new trade links, Eurasia has become increasingly important in terms of potential economic growth and key energy supplier to the world’s biggest markets.

Over the last 20 years, this vast landscape has seen greater connectivity through the emergence of better transportation infrastructure, logistics hubs and industrial zones.  New trading networks have opened up, and new trade agreements have been signed.  The WTO has an important role to play in this transformation. In fact, in many cases the accession process itself, which typically requires structural reforms across many areas of the economy, has been a key part of the story.  Following the dissolution of the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia in 1991, international trade played a powerful role in transforming the economies of the newly independent states and in deepening their relationships with the rest of the world. GATT/WTO membership was used by them – and other formerly central planned economies, such as China and Vietnam – as a vehicle to modernize and adapt to market-based economic principles.

Despite their similar paths of economic reforms, accession experiences have differed widely.  While some joined the WTO after a short period of negotiations – for instance, Kyrgyz Republic in 1998 and Georgia in 2000, after 3 to 4 years of negotiations, others, such as the Russian Federation and Kazakhstan, spent nearly 20 years in negotiations and only joined the Organization more recently, in 2012 and 2015, respectively.  Generally, the longer the accession negotiation took, the greater the level of obligations the applicant has undertaken.

There is still a lot of work to be done to bring the Eurasian dream fully to life. The full benefits of economic development and integration can only be realized within a stable and predictable framework of international rules, which allows governments and companies to define strategic goals and plan investments with a degree of certainty. This is precisely what the WTO is about.  It is a pillar of global economic governance, established on a foundation of non-discrimination, openness and transparency.

By committing to a maximum level of tariff protection and eliminating quotas on imports as required by the WTO, member countries create a predictable and transparent framework which improves the business environment and promotes good governance.  Similarly, the establishment of simplified rules on licensing, registration, and customs clearance can have a very positive effect on business.  For instance, for the landlocked countries in Central Asia, the WTO’s Trade Facilitation Agreement offers a multilateral framework to address the region’s connectivity challenges that are integral to its agenda for economic diversification and modernization.

For the region as a whole, to take advantage of all of the opportunities of potential economic growth, the rules of the international trading system need to apply uniformly. And while there has been tremendous progress in bringing countries of Europe and Asia into the WTO, as noted many accessions are still in the pipeline. These include Belarus and Uzbekistan, which originally applied for accession in the GATT period in 1993 and 1994, respectively.  Azerbaijan has been in this process since 1997 and Bosnia and Herzegovina since 1999.  For their part, Serbia and Iran began their own WTO accession journey in 2005. To this list of prospective WTO Members, we can also add Turkmenistan, which is yet to start the process.

While lengthy and demanding, the accession journey has helped many countries to implement their development strategies for modernisation and transformation. There is probably no better place to discuss the dividends of the WTO accession process than in Kazakhstan.  Kazakhstan’s WTO accession process lasted nearly 20 years.  It accompanied the country’s transformation from a Soviet outpost to a modern, knowledge-based economy. Of course, accession is only the first part of the story. The full value of the multilateral trading system is in experiencing the benefits of day-to-day membership, and in exercising leadership in the system. Kazakhstan provides a good example of this leadership by hosting the next WTO Ministerial Conference – that is, bringing a cross section of WTO membership to this part of the world for the first time.  This meeting is a good precursor to Astana serving as the venue for the WTO 2020 Ministerial Meeting.  It is my hope that several of the acceding governments represented here will have become WTO members already or will be celebrating the conclusion of accessions at the Astana Ministerial Conference.

This brings me to the second theme of the Round Table – the evolution of WTO rules. It is no secret that the global trading system, and multilateralism itself, have come under fire in recent times. As the global economy is undergoing change at an unprecedented pace, one of the leading policy debates of the day is how to improve and adapt the rules and operation of the trading system to the needs of today’s realities. There is an urgent challenge that we all recognize.  The WTO is a system that requires investment both through the lengthy accession processes for those recently acceded Members and through the continued engagement of the founding Members. All have a stake in preserving its value.

The WTO is constantly engaged in the process of improvement in the conditions for international trade.  A number of WTO Members have shown that they are prepared to consider a further evolution of the WTO’s disciplines.  Many have begun conversations in a number of new areas as well as existing rules.  The initiatives announced in Buenos Aires in December of last year – covering: e-commerce; investment facilitation; MSMEs; and women’s economic empowerment – are just part of the story. Although we must acknowledge that not all Members support these initiatives, it is clear that they are attracting interest.

The accessions process also contributes to the evolution of the international trading system, to rule-making in the WTO. Each new accession protocol has been adopted with the aim of strengthening multilateral disciplines.  In many instances this has set a new standard for WTO rules, such as enhancing legal certainty in relation to trade in energy products or raising the bar for transparency.  Accessions have also been a step ahead of the multilateral trade negotiations in the areas of trade facilitation and export subsidies.

With one-fifth of the WTO Membership now composed of economies that have gone through the accession process since the WTO was created, and with a further 22 economies in the accession queue, it is inevitable that the results of accession negotiations will continue to inform discussions on the future of the multilateral trading system and will accompany the evolution of WTO rules.

Turning to our program this week in Astana, we have a packed agenda ahead of us, that I am sure that this will be both useful and productive.

At this Round Table we are privileged to have high-level participants and distinguished guests who have been made substantive contributions to the multilateral trading system through their role in WTO accessions.  The discussions over the next two days can inject positive momentum not only in ongoing accessions but in the ongoing policy conversation on how to strengthen the multilateral trading system.

With these thoughts and my best wishes, I conclude my opening remarks.

Thank you.

Source: wto.org

 

Ngày 27/9

50/ ISO hosts world leaders in standardization to advance the 2030 Global Agenda

Show that you are open and throw away old beliefs and paradigms in order to find solutions that nobody would have been able to find, says Bertrand Piccard, the initiator of Solar Impulse, the first airplane to fly around the world without fuel.

Bertrand Piccard was addressing more than 500 delegates from over 150 countries representing standardization and other international organizations at the 41^st ISO General Assembly, being held in Geneva, Switzerland, this week.

“You have to be interested in what other people are doing, even if it’s not what you think, to create other ways of thinking,” he said, referring to how organizations can innovate and make positive change.

“Advancing the global agenda” is this year’s theme, which looks at how the power of International Standards can be harnessed to address many of the world’s greatest challenges like climate change, pollution and poverty.

The event comes at a time when “the world needs more ISO”, said ISO President John Walter at the event.

“We don’t build walls, we build bridges. We don’t develop enemies, we develop trusted colleagues. We don’t promote division and isolation from the rest of the world, we create partnerships. And ISO members have a unique opportunity and obligation to show to the rest of the world that we can only address and resolve the challenges that we face by working together – for the benefit of all.”

In his opening remarks, ISO Secretary-General Sergio Mujica highlighted that International Standards provide a platform for innovation, from which new technologies and solutions can be found.

“They are also key tools for addressing all of the challenges outlined in the United Nations Development Agenda 2030 and its 17 Sustainable Development Goals (UN SDGs), a key focus of this year’s event,” he said.

“ISO has been involved with the SDGs even before they were created, and this year’s General Assembly is the perfect starting point for developing a roadmap for policy makers, businesses and organizations for how International Standards can help us achieve a more sustainable future.”

To this end, ISO held an interactive session jointly with the United Nations, represented by the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE), to discuss how regulators, businesses and standardizers can work together to further contribute to the UN SDGs.

ISO has also launched a dedicated page on its Website, with a mapping tool that highlights more than 600 standards that contribute directly to achieving the Goals. It is intended to serve as a valuable resource for organizations looking to play their part.

Other key speakers at the event, which closes tomorrow, Friday 28 September, include Jean-Pierre Reymond, Ambassador of the Permanent Mission of Switzerland to the United Nations Office, Deputy Director-General Alan Wolff of the World Trade Organization (WTO) about how standards help to facilitate international trade, and Filippo Veglio from the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) on how standards contribute to addressing sustainability.

Interactive workshops and discussions are also taking place about trends in international trade and the role of standards, technology standards and innovation, and engaging policy makers and government.

The annual ISO General Assembly brings together representatives from ISO members around the world. It is part of the ISO Week 2018, a week of meetings held in Geneva, Switzerland, from 24 to 28 September 2018.

Source: iso.org

 

51/ Azevêdo meets President Nazarbayev in Astana; welcomes strong support for the WTO

Director-General Roberto Azevêdo met with President Nazarbayev of Kazakhstan in Astana on 27 September to discuss the current state of global trade and economic cooperation and to review preparations for the 12th WTO Ministerial Conference, which is to be held in Astana in 2020.

During the meeting, the President reiterated Kazakhstan’s strong supports for the principles underpinning the WTO, and for its role in strengthening and expanding trade and economic relations between its members. DG Azevedo thanked President Nazarbayev for Kazakhstan’s successful bid to host the Ministerial Conference, and welcomed the opportunity to deepen cooperation between Kazakhstan and the WTO.

After the meeting DG Azevêdo said:

“President Nazarbayev and I discussed the current trends of the global economy, the tensions that we see in the trading system and possible steps to resolve those tensions. The meeting was very fruitful. I thanked the President for supporting Kazakhstan’s active membership of the multilateral trade system and for the government’s initiative to host the WTO Ministerial Conference in 2020. This will be a historic event. I look forward to further developing the cooperation between the WTO and Kazakhstan.”

The Director-General also met Kazakhstan’s Prime Minister, Bakytzhan Sagintayev.

In addition, DG Azevêdo addressed the Seventh China Round Table on WTO Accessions, which has been held in Astana this week. His remarks are available here.

DG Azevêdo also spoke at a high-level forum on advancing trade and investment facilitation for development in Astana on 28 September. His remarks are available here

Source: wto.org

 

52/ Seventh China Round Table — Eurasian perspectives on the future of the multilateral trading system

Speech by the Director-General

Excellencies,

Ladies and gentlemen,

Good afternoon.

I am pleased to join you today at the closing session of this China Round Table. At the outset, let me thank the Government of China for their generous support towards this initiative.

This event has quickly established itself as a highlight in the calendar of the WTO accessions community.

These annual gatherings bring together old and new friends who believe in the system. They have contributed to the better understanding of the accession process, including its benefits and challenges. They have also injected positive momentum in many individual accessions processes.

I have no doubt that the last two days of discussion have continued in this tradition. And being hosted by a recently-acceded member makes this occasion all the more special.

So let me thank our hosts, the Government of Kazakhstan.

In particular, I want to mention Ambassador Aitzhanova who served as Chief Negotiator during Kazakhstan’s accession. Now she is working to bring the WTO community to Astana at our next Ministerial Conference in 2020.

I think that Kazakhstan’s generous offer to host MC12 is testament to your commitment to the organization and to your support of the multilateral trading system.

In fact, I understand that this support has been echoed throughout the discussions of this event.  So thank you all for that.

This event has been dedicated to the Eurasian perspective on the future of the multilateral trading system. And it is notable that a significant number of the WTO’s recent accessions have come precisely from this region.

For acceding members, the process of WTO accession has usually accompanied structural transformation of the domestic economy, and a reshaping of trading relationships regionally and globally.

By acceding to the WTO, governments are sending a message that they are committed to the core values of openness, transparency, good governance, and the rule of law.

A number of Eurasian economies still remain outside the Organization. So it’s important that we continue our collective efforts and fully integrate the region into the global economy, including through accession to the WTO.

While many of the accessions reforms happen in the domestic sphere, each accession process is also a building block for the multilateral trading system itself. They have a systemic effect, helping the multilateral trading system to evolve. The results of accession negotiations can help to consolidate and strengthen our rules.

So it is very encouraging to see your discussions here today. And it is positive that you have also been touching on some of the longstanding issues at the WTO, such as agriculture, food security, development, and fisheries subsidies.

I understand that you also covered some of the joint initiatives which were launched by groups of WTO members, covering issues such as e-commerce, investment facilitation, small businesses, and women’s economic empowerment.

While it is recognised that these initiatives are being advanced by some members and are not supported by all, the outreach efforts and open approach to the discussions are quite important. This approach can help to deepen and widen engagement on these and other issues of interest to members.

As Director General I am encouraged by the engagement of members in all formats. We all recognise that multilateral outcomes have the greatest reach and impact, but we must also remember that the WTO is built to enable members to deliver outcomes in a number of different ways.

All discussions and debates among members are very valuable and can contribute to the continued vitality of the system.

With all of that in mind, I am glad to note that your conversations here will form the basis of a new book entitled “Eurasian Perspectives on the Future of the World Trading System”. I understand that the plan is to launch this publication at the Ministerial Conference here in Kazakhstan, so watch this space.

The fact that the accessions debate is so vibrant, and that we have more countries looking at joining the WTO is very positive.

It is a strong sign of the importance of this system to help promote development, growth, and job creation.

And of course all of this is particularly important in the current circumstances.

Trade tensions are on the rise. New tariffs announced this year cover hundreds of billions of dollars of trade. Further measures have been proposed.

This is extremely serious.

Continued escalation risks a major economic impact. The predominant effect here would be disruption. It threatens jobs and growth in all countries. In fact, we may already be seeing some early effects. Delayed investment decisions are a good example.

In addition, we are faced with a serious situation in the Dispute Settlement Body, with the blockage in appointments to the Appellate Body.

All this requires an urgent response. There is a responsibility on the whole international community to help resolve all these issues.

However I think that this issue, and all of the trade tensions that we see today, will not be solved through technical mechanisms and procedures. The crisis in global trade is political. It requires a political solution. And this is why we are beginning to see a new political conversation emerging about the WTO.

Leaders are increasingly engaged in WTO issues – and so the debate is increasingly turning towards ideas about ‘reform’ and ‘modernisation’. Instead of tearing the system up, the focus is on strengthening the system. This has to be positive – and so too is the fact that many members are getting involved. Already a range of issues and ideas are being brought forward.

Whatever the precise answers may be, there’s no doubt that we can improve the system. We need to ensure that it is more responsive to members’ needs and to the challenges of a changing global economy.

Where these discussions about reforming the system will go is up to members, so I invite you all to voice your concerns and ideas.

I’ll say more about all of this at the investment forum tomorrow.

But in closing let me stress that this Round Table is an important contribution to the debate about the future of trade and the WTO.

The accessions community always contributes a unique perspective, bringing together newly acceded members, future members and all those involved in the negotiating processes.

Efforts like this are essential in building a more open and inclusive trading system.

So I urge you again all to keep raising your voices. And keep speaking up for the kind of trading system that you want to see – one which will serve your economies and your communities for generations to come.

Thank you.

Source: wto.org

 

Ngày 28/9

53/ All aboard for world maritime day

With 90 % of global trade now being carried out by marine transportation, measures for safety, security and sustainability are increasingly paramount.

Did you know that, in one year, an average container ship travels the equivalent of 75 % of the way to the moon and back? And that there are around 55 000 cargo ships floating around our seas¹⁾, not to mention the many cruise ships to carry the 27 million holidaymakers expected to go on a cruising holiday this year²⁾.

The industry has grown exponentially over the last few decades, bringing with it issues related to safety, environment, security, climate change, energy, trade and more.

As we celebrate World Maritime Day (27 September), we recognize the regulations and guidance by the International Maritime Organization (IMO), the United Nations body that sets the mandatory international relations for shipping, to which ISO standards contribute.

The theme of this year’s World Maritime Day is “IMO 70: Our Heritage – Better Shipping for a Better Future”. ISO is a key partner of the IMO through its committee of experts in shipping, ISO/TC 8, Ships and marine technology. IMO regulations are created with ISO/TC 8’s valuable input, and ISO/TC 8 standards serve as key tools to help meet these regulations.

ISO/TC 8 is one of ISO’s oldest technical committees and has developed more than 300 International Standards since its inception in 1947, covering many aspects of shipping including safety, intelligent navigation and environmental protection.

It is a model example of a body that serves the needs of the industry and maritime legislation, while promoting sustainable development and continuous improvement. Its achievements have been recognized through the Lawrence D. Eicher Award for excellence and superior performance in standards development, presented today at the 41^st ISO General Assembly, held in Geneva, Switzerland.

Announcing the award winner, ISO President John Walter pointed out that ISO/TC 8 also works closely with 25 other relevant international organizations. “ISO/TC 8 also does an excellent job at creating and maintaining strong links with industry to ensure that their standards meet market needs,” he said.

For more information about ISO standards for shipping and ISO/TC 8, visit the committee’s Web page on ISO.org.

1) Ocean insights: 8 facts about the shipping industry

2) Cruise Lines International Association: 2018 Cruise Industry Outlook [PDF]

Source: iso.org

 

54/ High-level forum on advancing trade and investment facilitation for development: a Eurasian perspective

Speech by the Director-General

Prime Minister Sagintayev,

Minister Suleimenov,

Minister Li,

Excellencies,

Ladies and gentlemen,

Good morning.

I want to thank Kazakhstan and the Friends of Investment for Development for inviting me to join you today, and for hosting this event.

Let me also extend my thanks to the government of Kazakhstan once again for stepping forward to host the next WTO Ministerial Conference in 2020. Coming from one of the newest WTO Members, I think this shows tremendous commitment to the multilateral trading system. It also shows your belief in the capacity of trade to deliver for growth, job creation and development.

Kazakhstan and other Eurasian economies have made significant progress over the past two decades, thanks in part to your embracing of open trade and investment policies.

Growth has been robust, inflation has fallen, and impressive gains have been made in reducing poverty.

A strong multilateral trading system helps to underpin all of this. And so your support for the system is hugely important – particularly in the current circumstances.

We are meeting at a crucial moment for global trade.

Tensions are escalating rapidly. New tariffs announced so far this year cover hundreds of billions of dollars of trade. Further measures have been proposed. And at present there is no end in sight.

If this trend continues, we could see a real threat to stability and therefore to jobs and growth. And with the integrated nature of trade today, this would affect everyone, in all regions of the globe.

We may already be seeing some early effects. Export orders are declining. Indicators show that businesses are holding off on making job-creating investments.

This is very concerning. In fact, this trend runs contrary to what this forum today aims to encourage, which is to facilitate investments to support further growth.

Just yesterday we announced a revision to our trade forecasts – from 4.4% growth for this year, down to 3.9. This is still healthy, but it is an indication of what a further escalation of tit-for-tat trade restrictions could mean.

Our economists have been assessing a variety of possible scenarios. This includes a scenario of full, global trade war, with international trade cooperation breaking down and all countries setting tariffs non-cooperatively. This scenario would knock around 17% off global trade growth, and 1.9% off GDP growth.

Clearly we cannot let that happen.

There is a responsibility on the whole international community to help ease tensions. I have been consulting with leaders around the world to this end.

It is important to note that at the root of the current tensions is the argument that the trading system is allowing distortive trade practices to go unchecked – and therefore that the system needs to change, so as to be more responsive to such measures.

But I don’t think that anyone believes this can be done through a technical discussion. This crisis is political. It requires a political solution.

This is why a high-level, political conversation about ‘WTO reform’ or ‘modernisation’ is beginning to emerge. It is seen as a way to deal with some of the big trade problems that some members have identified.

And it has been gathering significant momentum.

A variety of initiatives and meetings are being prepared. The issue was at the top of the agenda when I met with trade ministers at the G20 meeting in Argentina two weeks ago. They committed to work on ways of improving the WTO to ensure that it can meet current and future challenges.

This is very positive – and it is useful for the wider debate among all WTO members in Geneva.

We all have to consider how the trading system can be better. We have to think about how it can be more responsive to members’ needs and to the challenges of a changing global economy.

In a sense, today’s initiative is an important addition to those efforts.

It will help us to better understand the evolving linkages between trade, investment and development in Eurasia, and around the world.

For much of the 20th century, goods were made in one place and shipped to another. In that scenario, manufacturing FDI was mostly a substitute for trade. Companies either exported or were established in the target market through FDI and would produce, assemble and distribute their products from there.

Today, trade is far more multi-faceted, involving flows of goods, services, people, and also investments. Today nearly two-thirds of traded goods were made with components from at least two different countries.

This new reality presents many opportunities to leverage trade and investment for growth and development. However, for these elements to play their full part, the right conditions need to be in place.

A key element here is trade facilitation. We need to ensure smooth customs procedures, especially when goods and components cross borders many times during their production.

The WTO’s Trade Facilitation Agreement promises to deliver precisely this.

This agreement has huge economic significance, potentially cutting trade costs globally by an average of 14.3 percent. This is a bigger impact than the elimination of all remaining tariffs in the world today.

Implementation of the TFA can also be a powerful instrument in this region, which is at the centre of the modern “Silk Road” – a route that has contributed to the exchange between Europe and Asia since ancient times.

To make this a reality and ensure that trade can flow smoothly, you need the appropriate infrastructure. You need roads, railways and telecommunications. And you need human capital.

This requires investment. And it also requires strong, reliable institutions.

These elements will be critical to further boost the competitiveness of Eurasian economies.

Progress here could help overcome supply side constraints and promote the diversification of production. It can improve access to more advanced technologies, production techniques, and managerial methods. It can also boost connectivity, tackling the inherently challenging conditions in the region, such as low population density and vast distances.

Many governments simply do not have the resources to invest in all this. Therefore, a large part of the necessary investment will need to come from other partners. Facilitating investment flows, therefore, can have a huge impact.

But of course, this is easier said than done.

Projections for 2018 are highly uncertain. Robust economic growth and trade growth, combined with rising commodity prices suggest a potential increase in global FDI.

However, as I have said, there are risks to such forecasts, and uncertainty is like kryptonite to investors.

Nonetheless, some important steps have been taken. Kazakhstan, for example, has made significant progress over the last year in this area with its framework for FDI facilitation. I understand that this could become a model for the region.

So what more can members do?

Cooperation at the global level can also play an important role.

Some WTO members have been holding structured discussions to consider whether – and how – the WTO might better contribute to facilitating investment flows. This initiative was launched at our 11th Ministerial Conference in Buenos Aires last December, with 70 members signing up to launch a joint initiative on the topic.

The Friends of Investment Facilitation for Development, including Kazakhstan, were a driving force behind this initiative.

The work of the group has been important to highlight the interlinkages between trade, investment and development. I think that this has helped to shift from the more controversial debate about investment protection towards a more positive focus on facilitation.

This discussion also resonates with the challenges faced by the users of the trading system. The fact is, we live in a world where traditional barriers to foreign investment are falling. Investment facilitation is actually what investors, entrepreneurs and businesses tell us they most urgently need to make FDI in many markets a reality.

While some members do not support this work, it is clear that it is fast evolving. Proponents have engaged in an open and transparent manner. Interest and engagement are high, with many non-signatories also participating in the discussions.

As to where all of this leads, that is for the proponents to determine, working with the rest of the membership.

Ultimately facilitating investment is in everyone’s interest.

It is critical to expanding development, fuelling innovation, generating jobs, and achieving the Sustainable Development Goals. So it’s important to get it right. And that includes an informed, open and frank debate such as the one we’re having here today.

It can be difficult to focus on detailed issues of policy when it seems that any opportunity to make progress could be jeopardized by escalating tensions. But if you ask my advice, I would say: don’t be knocked off course.

We have to respond urgently to the very difficult, systemic issues that we face in the trading system. But we have to do it at the same time as finding positive routes forward in our deliberations in all areas. Members can’t put this issue on hold – just as we can’t put on hold issues like agriculture, food security or fisheries subsidies. They are too important for that.

We have to make progress across the board. This will be crucial to strengthening the multilateral trading system for the long term – something which I continue to believe is absolutely vital for us all.

Since it was created, the trading system has promoted growth and development by providing stability and predictability in economic relations around the world. This task is no less crucial today. So we have to keep updating and strengthening the rules and structures that are in place today. These are the pillars of the global economy.

So let’s be clear and let’s be loud about the value that the trading system provides.

I am calling on everyone who believes in trade as a force for good to speak up. And I hope that this region will play its full part.

The region’s engagement in the WTO, as well as Kazakhstan’s bid to host MC12, show your faith in trade to help improve the livelihoods of your people. We must do all we can to honour that faith.

I wish you a productive event.

Thank you.

Source: wto.org

 

55/ DDG Wolff urges standards bodies to boost support for multilateral trading system

Deputy Director-General Alan Wolff urged international standards bodies to strengthen their support for the WTO and the multilateral trading system. “We need to spread the message that an integrated global economy, with a strong and dynamic multilateral trading system — which includes international standards — is a better world for everyone,” he said in a keynote address 28 September to the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) General Assembly in Geneva. “Technology and innovation do not tend to thrive behind walls of any kind.”

President Walter, distinguished ISO delegates, Ladies and Gentlemen, Good Morning.

Thank you very much for inviting me to join you today.  Let me first convey DG Azevedo’s best wishes to you for a successful and productive ISO general assembly.

Given the current turbulence in international trade relations, fostering the trade and standards linkage is more important than ever.

Why is this “trade and standards linkage” so important?

The headlines are all about tariffs, and trade war.  Two comments are in order.  One is that a crisis in the past has been an opportunity to create something better, to bring international cooperation to a better place.  This was true with the creation of the GATT, the predecessor of the WTO, born from the ruined global economy of the Second World War, true of the creation of the GATT Tokyo Round and the current international monetary exchange system, and true of the creation of the WTO itself, to escape from international relations characterized by unilateral trade measures.

Secondly, despite the headlines, the reality is that most trade that has been flowing will continue to flow, and the rules of the multilateral trading system are in large part responsible for the continuity.  This is particularly true with respect to product standards.  A tariff might make a product more expensive, but it does not actually prevent access to the market.  Indeed, it is both transparent and predictable and there is not much uncertainty involved. This is not to suggest that tariffs are a welcome trade instrument, they are just preferable to those which are worse.

Less thought is given in the press, understandably, of the role of standards. Without international standards there would be far less international trade, far less global prosperity, far fewer markets for exporters, and far less variety for consumers. Most goods and many services traded are affected in one way or another by standards. Indeed, it is often when standards fail that we notice them.  A failure to meet standards can stop trade in a product or service altogether.

The importance of the TBT Agreement to world trade.

My own experience with standards is less a matter of expertise than personal experience.  I know that I am not to bring most electrical appliances from the United States to use in Geneva.  And I have been told that I will be unable to register my European BMW in the United States when I go back, and that if I did not have status at the WTO I could not register a BMW made in South Carolina on Swiss roads.

On the other hand, I have visited the modern port of Baltimore, not far from Washington DC, and watched the incredibly intricate choreography of the unloading of a giant container ship onto flatbed trucks.  Each container is unloaded in a pre‑ordained order and it will end up on the right truck going to the right destination.  Of course, this could not occur without the application of sophisticated computer software; but it would not be possible at all without international standards for containers, a revolutionary change that has accelerated the growth of international trade.

At the other end of the spectrum, as part of a briefing I received in connection with my activities of the U.S. National Academy of Science, we learned that in a hospital operating theatre, crowded with some fifteen monitoring devices, for oxygen, anaesthesia, the patient’s vital signs and the like, none of those devices talk to each other, there is no interoperability. Complex medical equipment comes from many sources from around the world.  International standards were needed.  This was four or five years ago, and maybe everything has changed for the better, but it is not clear that that is the case.

There have been recent announcements of prototype driverless cars.  Volvo announced one model to be outfitted with beds. Both drivers and passengers will be putting a lot of faith in automation and artificial intelligence.  But before any of us lie down in a car, we best think about whether the standards for intelligent highways and different brands of autonomous vehicles will operate under the same international standards and communicate perfectly with each other.  Standards are needed to build public trust and confidence in artificial intelligence (AI). Compatibility through international standards will be necessary for a restful automobile trip, if is not to be a final journey.

The challenges that the ISO and TBT faced in the past are going to seem simple, I suspect, compared with the standards challenges posed by AI.

A standard (regulation) can be a formidable barrier.  As all of us know in our daily lives, unlike a tariff, a product that does not meet a requirement set out in a regulation may not enter at all.  What is not obvious to consumers, but is known to those engaged in international trade, perhaps worse: a product might actually comply with all the necessary requirements but may still not gain access because the importer cannot demonstrate conformity through certification and testing.  For example, a country’s bicycles are produced following the latest international standards on safety. But the country does not have accredited labs to issue the required certificates. The result is not less trade, but no trade.  These types of barriers are less transparent and very technical and may curb trade even when markets are open.

UNCTAD has recently found, based on data from December 2017 comprising 109 countries and covering 90% of global trade, that identifiable TBT measures are the most frequent form of non‑tariff measures, NTMs, affecting 65% of world trade in terms of value, and 35% of product lines.⁽¹⁾

This is not to disparage standards; and here I am using this term broadly, to mean any form of regulation.  Standards are also necessary, and increasingly so.  Where production is fragmented across borders and firms, production lines need to merge at some point, so as to deliver the final product. When this happens, then the use of international standards is crucial in ensuring compatibility, quality and safety.  They help build trust throughout the global value chain, from the original suppliers of components, through the various dispersed producers, to the consumer – wherever she may happen to be.

In the current trade conflicts, global value chains are likely being reconfigured.  The extent that a country can participate in this process depends in large part on its ability to meet international standards.

So, what, then, is the challenge?  As you are keenly aware, governments greatly prize their freedom to regulate as a sovereign right.  As a general proposition, no government wants to be told by another government (let alone an international organization) how to protect their consumers, animals, plants or the environment.

Fortunately, they have not given up that right under the Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Agreement. Instead, what the Agreement aims to do is to filter out unnecessary friction that arises because approaches chosen in standards differ. This does not impinge on the right to regulate.  It is about reducing unnecessary trade costs that arise from different choices made in crafting national and regional standards while not jeopardizing their underlying purpose.

That’s why TBT gives international standards such a central role.  They can serve as an important tool for helping countries find a balance between their right to regulate and their obligation not to create unnecessary barriers trade.  International standard setting – your work – is not only important here: it’s essential!

How can the international standard-setting community support the multilateral trading system and promote inclusive and sustainable development?  In short, what can you do?

This is a forward‑looking question, but let me begin with the context of the past.

Both the ISO and the GATT (the WTO’s predecessor) were born in 1947, rising from the ashes of the Second World War.  They were part of efforts of a community of nations seeking more international cooperation and coordination.  Since 1947 our organizations have collaborated constructively.  The ISO has been a WTO TBT Committee observer since its creation in 1995.⁽²⁾

The relationship between trade and international standards has been and continues to be mutually supportive.  A shared standard is of even more value when markets are open.  Benefits multiply.  This was why the adoption of the GATT ”Standards Code” in 1979 was such a landmark achievement.  It was the first international instrument recognizing the use of international standards as a powerful tool for addressing non‑tariff, regulatory barriers.

On my first visit to Geneva and the GATT, I attended a negotiating session on the new Standards Code.  Later when I was Deputy U.S. Trade Representative, it was part of my responsibilities to explain the value to business and legislators the importance of this new Code.  NTBs were then a relatively novel concern, but it was understood that they could potentially nullify market access gained from years of tariff reductions, and even the elimination of tariffs.  This recognition later led to the WTO TBT Agreement, which created an even more sophisticated framework of rules, including the promotion of international standards.

A word on the present. As put by ISO Secretary‑General Sergio Mujica: “multilateralism [is] being challenged and [we have seen] an increase in support of protectionist measures“.⁽³⁾

This is a time when it is more important than ever to foster a broad understanding that the world trading system and the activities in which the ISO is engaged, within the framework of the WTO delivers results, underwriting global economic growth and prosperity.

In recent years, the WTO has delivered new results with respect to trade facilitation and information technology products.  Members with an interest in doing so are working hard on e‑commerce; domestic regulation of services; investment facilitation; and benefits of the system for micro, small and medium sized enterprises (MSMEs).  There is also much talk of how to make the WTO set of rules and the institutional arrangements better.  The TBT Committee is frequently cited by WTO Members as an example of where things work well.  Where there is increased transparency, a major objective of those WTO Members seeking reform.  The TBT processes are frequently mentioned as a potential role model for other WTO bodies.

The TBT Committee is getting favorable notice because it has been consistently successful in doing two things:

• adopting decisions and recommendations on how to best implement and make use of the TBT Agreement.  An example you are probably aware of is the famous “Six Principles” decision on international standardization.⁽⁴⁾  Some of these decisions find their way into regional trade agreements as TBT‑plus elements, such as in the US‑Korea FTA and the CPTPP⁽⁵⁾.
• bringing, discussing (and sometimes even resolving) concerns with respect to other Members’ draft or adopted standards and regulations.  This is not just another “talk‑shop”.  Members take very seriously this practice of raising “specific trade concerns” (known simply as “STCs”).  This is a practice that offers them, and their stakeholders, a faster, cheaper and non‑litigious alternative avenue for addressing trade frictions.⁽⁶⁾  This practice has been wholeheartedly embraced by TBT Committee Members⁽⁷⁾; and frequently recommended to be emulated by other WTO bodies.  These principles are also included in recent proposals for reforming the WTO⁽⁸⁾.

The rules of the international trading system have continually evolved since the foundation of the GATT in 1947.  This is equally the case today.  Conditions and needs of international trade change over time.  The rules need to remain relevant.  Ways to improve the WTO, to make it more efficient, responsive and stronger, are currently being discussed by interested Members.

That brings me to the future.

I have five suggestions for you with respect to what your role can be with respect to fostering trade

First, by improving coherence in international standard-setting. Competing or contradictory international standards can lock-in divergent regulatory approaches, impede market access, sometimes without good reason. Take again the example of “driverless cars”.  If, for example, two international bodies decide, independently and without talking with each other, to develop differing standards for addressing issues related to the safety of these vehicles, for example, in terms of obstacle avoidance, they may well end up adopting two significantly different – or worse, conflicting – international standards addressing the same issue.  This may in turn result in driverless safety regulations in countries varying depending on which of the two international standards was used as a basis.  Trade in driverless cars will be very difficult, if not impossible, between countries that have not used the same international standard as a basis for their regulations.

I encourage ISO and its members to lead by example in promoting coherence with other standardizing bodies.  You can do this by simply following, implementing and promoting principle 5 of the “Six Principles” TBT Committee Decision: “In order to avoid the development of conflicting international standards, it is important that international standardizing bodies avoid duplication of, or overlap with, the work of other international standardizing bodies. In this respect, cooperation and coordination with other relevant international bodies is essential.”

Second, I would ask you to promote the development of quality infrastructure for trade.  The TBT Agreement ensures that regulations in export markets are not disproportionally restrictive and discriminatory.  But this is meaningless if a producer, or whoever is bringing his/her product into another country’s market, cannot actually show that a product complies with applicable regulations. Having an adequate National Quality Infrastructure (NQI) is an important way to overcome this problem.  In some cases, this can be done most practically on a region rather than solely a national basis.

Possessing quality infrastructure is particularly important for MSMEs, as they need access to adequate conformity assessment, standardization and metrology infrastructure to be able to engage successfully in trade.

This is a gap worth narrowing and it can be useful to consider a mechanism linking TBT and quality infrastructure capacity, similar to that already in place for SPS:  The Standards and Trade Development Facility (STDF)⁽⁹⁾.  A possible good start in this direction would be to begin with a common data collection hub that would help identify and prioritize gaps in NQI capacity.  There could also be a mechanism for rating the level of development of NQI in countries in a manner similar to the ease of doing business ratings provided by the World Bank.  These are just a couple of ideas worth thinking about.

Third, increase your support to MSMEs.  Ambassador José Luis Cancela Gómez ⁽¹⁰⁾ gave a presentation yesterday in Astana, from where I have just arrived today, which included the following striking data:

• Firms employing fewer than 250 workers account for 78% of total exporters worldwide.
• In developing countries, MSME exporters only account for 7.6% of total sales of manufactured products.  Smaller firms often lack the necessary resources to seek information about foreign regulations that may affect their trade.  They are extremely unlikely to be able to engage directly with trading partners.  It is difficult for them to ensure that standards being developed at home – let alone in international settings – take into account their particular commercial interests.

MSMEs are going to account for an increasing share of world trade in electronic commerce.  I ask that you consider what more can be done to enhance the interests of MSMEs in the standard‑setting context, including how their participation can be increased.  It is important that they benefit more from standards development – so that they can, to a greater extent, become standards makers, and not just standards takers.

Fourth, placing more focus on reaching out to regulators.  National regulators have to decide whether and how to use (international) standards as the basis for their regulations, which can either facilitate or impede trade.  Regulators might not be aware of the existence of relevant international standards, or their obligations under the TBT Agreement.   Here are some further areas where your reaching out to regulators can really matter:

Good Regulatory Practices (GRP): Engaging with regulators to promote the application of GRP, and the appropriate use of the NQI, in their regulatory interventions.  The WTO TBT and SPS notification and comment obligations can make a meaningful contribution in this direction by generating valuable feedback to improve regulatory proposals.  More than 4,000 draft regulations are subject of TBT/SPS notification each year, and the WTO Secretariat is working with Members and their regulators to further increase this number, including through our technical assistance to developing countries.  To help this notification process work even more effectively, the WTO, in cooperation with ITC and UNDESA, developed ePing ⁽¹¹⁾ – an online alert system which gives public and private sector stakeholders instant updates and access to TBT measures notified to the WTO.  ePing helps users of the system to keep track of technical regulations proposed for adoption by country and product category.  The number of ePing subscribers grows every day ⁽¹²⁾, but we need your help to make it truly a global success.  Please, visit the “Ask ISO” stand during the upcoming break to find out more and register. Help ePing make trade more inclusive and participative.  You can make this tool something that makes a real difference in the accessibility of world markets, increasing global prosperity.

Regulatory cooperation is an area of growing focus for trade negotiators in efforts to combat NTBs to trade.  In the transatlantic context, it was recently reported that identifying and reducing technical barriers to trade could be an early focus for talks between the EU and US in coming months. ⁽¹³⁾  This follows a joint US‑EU statement from last July, which called for “a close dialogue on standards in order to ease trade, reduce bureaucratic obstacles, and slash costs“. ⁽¹⁴⁾  In defining the future relationship between the UK and EU, standards and regulatory alignment may quietly prove to be one of the thorny issues.  In general, regional trade agreements now systematically include TBT provisions; and increasingly these agreements contain provisions that build upon the work of the TBT Committee to improve transparency or identify relevant international standards as the basis for regulation (the TBT Committee’s “Six Principles”).  In this context, your outreach to regulators is ever more relevant!

It would be helpful for the WTO Secretariat to receive more broad‑based information about the extent to which ISO standards (as well as standards developed by other international standardizing bodies) are used by regulators in different countries.  I would encourage you to explore how this information could be gathered and shared.

Fifth, there needs to be broader and stronger support for multilateral trade and the WTO from the standardization community.  We need to spread the message that an integrated global economy, with a strong and dynamic multilateral trading system – which includes international standards! – is a better world for everyone.  The backlash against globalization has tended to focus on trade as one of the most visible pillars of globalization.  But behind trade are other drivers of change, like new technologies – supported by standardization.  These need to be nurtured.  Technology and innovation do not tend to thrive behind walls of any kind.  If governments take a more protectionist stance, this is worrying and could weaken the case for international standardization.  Today, in this inward‑looking climate, it is easy to forget the fruits of competition and cooperation.  But these need to be promoted now more than ever.  You, too, can help us with this!

A strong and dynamic multilateral trading system, supported by international standards – supported by you! – is going to be a better world for all.

The work that you do is vitally important to world trade.  I wish you well in your efforts.

Thank you!

Source: wto.org

 

56/ Seventh China Round Table on WTO Accessions puts Eurasia in the spotlight

In closing the 7th China Round Table on WTO Accessions on 27 September in Astana, Kazakhstan, WTO Director-General Roberto Azevêdo underscored the need to fully integrate Eurasian economies into the global trading system through WTO accessions. He noted that discussions at the Round Table had contributed to the debate about the future of trade and the WTO. Kazakhstan’s Deputy Prime Minister, Mr Yerbolat Dossayev, and China’s Assistant Minister of Commerce, Mr Li Chenggang, also highlighted the value of regional integration in supporting economic growth and multilateral cooperation.

“This event has been dedicated to the Eurasian perspective on the future of the multilateral trading system.” DG Azevêdo said.  ”And it is notable that a significant number of the WTO’s recent accessions have come precisely from this region. For acceding members, the process of WTO accession has usually accompanied structural transformation of the domestic economy, and a reshaping of trading relationships regionally and globally.

“By acceding to the WTO, governments are sending a message that they are committed to the core values of openness, transparency, good governance, and the rule of law,” he added  ”A number of Eurasian economies still remain outside the Organization. So it’s important that we continue our collective efforts and fully integrate the region into the global economy, including through accession to the WTO,” DG Azevêdo’s full speech is available here.

Held under the theme of “Eurasian Perspectives on the Future of the Multilateral Trading System: Accessions and the Evolution of WTO Rules”, the Seventh China Round Table provided a platform for an exchange of views on the future of trade and the WTO through the perspective of WTO accessions and their systemic contributions. The Round Table was opened on 26 September by WTO Deputy Director-General Alan Wolff, Ambassador Zhanar Aitzhanova of Kazakhstan and Ambassador Zhang Xiangchen of China. The opening ceremony was attended by over 90 participants, including representatives from 26 WTO members and observers, and 6 international organizations. Astana will host the 12th WTO Ministerial Conference in June 2020.

Recalling the importance of Eurasia in the global economy, DDG Wolff highlighted the WTO’s role in the region: “Over the last 20 years, this vast landscape has seen greater connectivity through the emergence of better transportation infrastructure, logistics hubs and industrial zones. New trading networks have opened up, and new trade agreements have been signed. The WTO has an important role to play in this transformation.”

“In fact, in many cases the accession process itself, which typically requires structural reforms across many areas of the economy, has been a key part of the story. Following the dissolution of the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia in 1991, international trade played a powerful role in transforming the economies of the newly independent states and in deepening their relationships with the rest of the world.” His full speech is available here.

In her welcoming remarks, Kazakhstan’s Permanent Representative to the WTO, Ambassador Zhanar Aitzhanova shared her country’s accession experience and reflected on the positive impact of WTO membership: “WTO member countries have recognized Kazakhstan as a country with a predictable and favourable investment climate that conducts trade policies in accordance with the international law.”

“Today Kazakhstan develops trade relations with 185 countries of the world, and more than 90% of our trade is done with WTO member countries,” she continued. “Over the past 10 years, foreign direct investment in the amount of more than US$ 200 billion has been attracted to the country’s economy. All of this demonstrates that Kazakhstan is deeply integrated into the world trade and economic system and became its integral part.”. Her full speech is available here.

China’s Permanent Representative to the WTO, Ambassador Zhang Xiangchen, focused on the key role of capacity building and called upon WTO members, the WTO Secretariat and acceding least developed countries (LDCs)  to enhance capacity building on accessions: “the capacity constraint, or the capacity gap between developing countries – including LDCs, and developed countries, is the fundamental aspect for  the accession to the WTO of developing countries – especially LDCs, their further integration into the multilateral trading system, and ultimately the development issue within the Organization. […] We hope [China's] efforts will facilitate and accelerate the process of LDCs’ accession, and further help them to complete the transition from accession negotiations to fulfilling the rights and obligations as WTO members as soon as possible.” His full speech is available here.

At the closing session, Ambassador Aitzhanova of Kazakhstan presented a Report on the Outcome of the Seventh China Round Table.

The programme for the Seventh China Round Table is available here.

Source: wto.org

 

Ngày 30/9

57/ WTO-IMF-World Bank report: greater trade integration will boost shared prosperity

A new report issued today, 30 September, argues that trade integration can play a larger role in boosting shared prosperity. The report, by economists from the World Trade Organization, the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, concludes that global trade policy can help to unlock opportunities provided by fundamental changes in the global economy.

In the report, entitled “Reinvigorating Trade and Inclusive Growth,” the economists find that the opening of trade has played a key role in lifting living standards and reducing poverty since World War II, but that this work remains incomplete. Trade reform has not sufficiently kept pace with the changing landscape of services trade, digital technologies, and foreign direct investment. Much also remains to be done in areas such as market access for goods and regulatory cooperation. Greater openness in such areas, the report claims, would promote competition, lift productivity, and raise living standards. In many other domains, such as the rural economy, gender and smaller enterprises, trade-related reforms are important to foster more inclusive growth and increase productivity. Moreover, the report notes that the current trade tensions may in part be rooted in issues that have been left unresolved on the negotiating table for too long. Cooperative action to secure greater, more durable openness could help to resolve these issues.

Director General Roberto Azevêdo said:

“Trade has been vital in lifting living standards and reducing poverty over the years but much more remains to be done. Many WTO members recognize that improvements are necessary in many areas of trade policy to keep up with the evolving needs of their economies and their people. This report is a welcome contribution to ongoing discussions on reinvigorating the trading system to the benefit of all.”

Source: wto.org

 

Ngày 01/10

58/Course on trade in value-added and global value chains concludes at WTO

A course entitled “Trade in Value-Added Statistics and Global Value Chains” held at the WTO from 24 to 28 September 2018 allowed participants to better understand, use and interpret statistics on trade in value-added terms (TiVA) and global value chains (GVCs). The participants included some 30 statisticians and trade analysts from developing economies across the world.

he week-long course explored the domestic and foreign value-added content of an economy’s exports and the impact of measuring trade in value-added terms on policy-making. The course also taught participants various ways of assessing the impact of GVCs on trade, particularly from a development perspective, and to get familiarized with TiVA online databases.

 

One of the course participants, Abhirarm Chandrasen, Trade Officer at Thailand’s Department of Trade Negotiations, said: “My objective was to gain a better understanding of how to measure Thailand’s exports in value terms. This will be very useful as we are currently engaged in trade negotiations under ASEAN to further our regional integration.”

 

Another course participant, Arlina Gomez Fernandez, Coordinator Directorate of Economic Research and Analysis at Costa Rica’s Ministry of Foreign Trade, said: “Learning how to analyse our country’s participation in GVCs gave us a clearer view of Costa Rica’s integration in global trade. Of particular interest to us is how to increase the participation of small and medium-sized enterprises in GVCs as they account for 90% of Costa Rica’s businesses.”

 

Ana Maria del Carmen Vera Ganoza, Director of Economic Studies at Peru’s Ministry of Foreign Trade and Tourism, who also took part in the course, said: “This course is particularly timely as Peru was included just last year in the WTO’s TiVA database. It helped me gain more autonomy in using and measuring data, which will guide me through policy-making.”

 

Another course participant, Vanessa Carvalho Dos Santos, Coordinator of Economic Studies and Strategic Information at Brazil’s Ministry of Industry, Trade and Services, said: “This course helped us gain more experience in dealing with trade-related data. This will be useful for our work on how to integrate Brazil more fully into global value chains, which is one of the objectives of our current bilateral trade negotiations.”

In addition to presentations from WTO staff and international experts from the Chinese Academy of Sciences, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and the World Intellectual Property Organization, the course featured demonstrations of databases, educative and interactive hands-on exercises and quizzes, round-table discussions and presentations of GVC case studies in developing economies.

The programme is available here.

The WTO maintains a portal to support the exchange of projects, experiences and practical approaches in measuring and analysing TiVA and GVCs.  The portal can be accessed here.

Further information on WTO technical assistance and training can be found here.

List of participants:

Angola	Mr. Cedrik João ABBA
Argentina	Mrs Verónica Daiana FRANCCE
Australia	Mr. Olivier BRUNET
Bangladesh	Mr. Mahmodul HASAN
Belarus	Mr. Anton GORBACH
Benin	Mr. N’tcherisima Armand CHABI
Bosnia and Herzegovina	Mrs Emina FOCO-OBEJI
Brazil	Mrs Vanessa CARVALHO DOS SANTOS
Cameroon	Mr. Alain Magloire TALOM KAMGA
Chile	Mr. Nelson Manuel PAREDES CACERES
China	Miss Feifei WU
Costa Rica	Miss Arlina GOMEZ FERNANDEZ
Côte d’Ivoire	Miss Ehou M’Boya KOTO
Ecuador	Mr. Victor Manuel ANDRADE DIAZ
Egypt	Mr. Mahmoud EL MADNA
Hong Kong, China	Ms Yuk Ling LAI
Korea, Republic of	Mr. Kyungkeun KIM
Lao People’s Democratic Republic	Ms Phetsangiem CHANTHALANGSY
Morocco	Miss Nisrine GHEFOU
Myanmar	Mrs Thet AYE
Namibia	Ms Evelina Nghishikomesho HASHOLO
Nigeria	Mrs Ese EKORHI
Paraguay	Miss Maria Emilia ALVAREZ LEZCANO
Peru	Miss Ana Maria del Carmen VERA GANOZA
Philippines	Ms Eva Lynne MARCOS
Rwanda	Mr. Jean Baptiste UKWIZAGIRA
Southern African Customs Union (SACU)	Mrs Khutsafalo SEKOLOKWANE
Sri Lanka	Mrs Waruni Dilrukshi Warnasooriya DEWATHA PEDIGE
Thailand	Mr. Abhirarm CHANDRASEN
Uganda	Mr. Allan Mugarura NDAGIJE
Viet Nam	Ms Thi Huyen NGUYEN

Source: wto.org

 

59/ Azevêdo stresses role of trade in helping women participate fully in the global economy

on Women in Global Value Chains held at the WTO on 1 October, Director-General Roberto Azevêdo said that women currently face a range of barriers in participating in international trade and in connecting to global value chains. Ways to overcome these obstacles include helping women integrate into the formal sector, improving access to capital, increasing awareness of trade regulations and facilitating digital inclusion. He concluded: “The economic case for empowering women is clear. Trade is just one part of the picture — but it is an essential part.”

“Low levels of literacy and lack of information and awareness about cross-border trade regulations and procedures are much more common among female traders. Capacity building is clearly an important tool here,” underlined DG Azevêdo.

The workshop was organized in the context of implementing the Buenos Aires Declaration on Trade and Women’s Economic Empowerment launched at the WTO’s 11th Ministerial Conference in December 2017 and signed by 121 WTO members.

Throughout this year, WTO members have been exploring the links between trade and women’s economic empowerment and how trade can be a powerful tool for integrating women into the economy.

Today’s workshop focused on understanding the challenges that women are facing in integrating into value chains and how GVCs can foster women’s economic empowerment. It highlighted the perspectives of various participants in GVCs, best practices and experiences of WTO members.

“Globally, only 15% of exporting MSMEs are led by women. Today, more than 70% of world trade passes through global value chains. If we want to make trade work for women and to expand their participation in trade through global value chains, the WTO can offer some solutions. Through capacity building in the area of standards, the implementation of the Trade Facilitation Agreement, Aid for Trade, and promoting targeted trade policies, the WTO can help to empower women,” said Anoush der Boghossian, the WTO’s Trade and Gender Focal Point.

Source: wto.org

 

60/ Workshop on Women in Global Value Chains

Remarks by DG Azevêdo

Excellencies,

Ladies and gentlemen,

Good afternoon everyone.

I am pleased to join you for this workshop on women and global value chains.

At the outset, I would like to thank the MIKTA countries for their leadership in organizing this event. It’s great to see momentum building in this debate at the WTO.

It is just 10 months since 118 WTO members and observers signed up to the Buenos Aires Declaration on Trade and Women’s Economic Empowerment. And I think a lot has been achieved since then.

More members have signed up, bringing the total to 121.

And members are following up on their commitments – including the pledge to deepen our dialogue with a series of dedicated sessions on gender-related topics.

These discussions have helped to establish the importance of these issues. They have helped to identify obstacles which can prevent women from participating fully in the global economy. And they have helped members to consider how trade and the WTO could help to overcome – or eliminate – those obstacles.

A number of thematic sessions have been held.

Earlier this year, a seminar highlighted the importance of improving gender-based analysis in trade. There is a data gap at present, which prevents us from gaining a better understanding of the linkages between trade and gender.

To help address this, the WTO has joined forces with the World Bank on a research project to gather such data. The plan is to launch a dedicated publication next year – so watch this space.

Members also held a session looking at the importance of government procurement markets for inclusive economic development, particularly for women. The role of the WTO’s Government Procurement Agreement was a big focus there.

Today, we are continuing to develop the conversation.

The focus of this session is how to enhance the participation of women entrepreneurs and traders in global value chains.

For much of the 20th century, goods were made in one place and shipped to another. Companies either exported their products, or were established in the target market through FDI and would produce, assemble and distribute their products from there.

Today, trade is far more multi-faceted, involving flows of goods, services, investments and people – all contributing to global value chains. Today nearly two-thirds of traded goods are made with components from at least two different countries.

Therefore, it seems clear that helping women to access these networks would unlock many opportunities, with a direct impact for economic wellbeing. Joining GVCs can potentially help female entrepreneurs to improve the quality of their products, scale up and diversify their production.

However, evidence suggests that we have a long way to go.

Women are much less integrated into international trade, so they are not feeling the benefits.

Globally, only 15% of exporting SMEs are led by women.

This suggests that women are facing a range of barriers in connecting to GVCs. Today’s workshop will help us to understand the challenges here, and how we may be able to work together to meet them.

One element here could be to help women integrate into the formal sector. Female entrepreneurs account for one third of all business in the formal sector, globally.

At present many women work in the informal sector. In Benin, Chad, and Mali, for example, the informal sector accounts for over 95% of women working outside agriculture. In India and in Indonesia it’s 90%.

Facilitating more women to work in the formal sector would bring the possibility of trading and getting involved in GVCs much closer.

Of course, formalization also means registering businesses and ultimately paying taxes. Entrepreneurs will only be willing to bear this cost if they perceive benefits from operating formally.

Therefore, domestic policy can play a key role.

But even when female-led businesses are formalized, a range of other obstacles persist.

Access to capital is an important factor.

In many countries women often have less collateral.  To open a bank account or register a business, they must sometimes have their father or husband’s authorization.

A World Bank study shows that women-owned SMEs have unmet financial needs of between 260 and 320 billion dollars a year.

Trade finance may also be an issue here, and we are working with a number of partners to increase access, including for female entrepreneurs and SMEs. Next week I will be meeting with the International Finance Corporation, the regional development banks, the Financial Stability Board and others to examine what more can be done in this area.

Another issue is access to information.

According to the World Bank, low levels of literacy and lack of information and awareness about cross-border trade regulations and procedures are much more common among female traders.

Capacity building is clearly an important tool here.

One good example is the work that the Enhanced Integrated Framework is doing in Mali.

Through this project women mango producers are learning how to meet the necessary sanitary and phytosanitary standards for global trading. It has helped them to harness the opportunities provided by trade. They were even able to expand their business into the production of mango jam and juice – thereby climbing up the value chain.

The role of the Aid for Trade initiative in removing obstacles that women face when trading is a topic that merits much deeper discussion. So I’m pleased that this is on your agenda today.

The final area I want to mention, and where action could make a difference, is facilitating digital inclusion.

The internet provides women entrepreneurs with easier and less expensive ways to access foreign markets. Improving digital inclusion could therefore dramatically lower the barriers to joining GVCs.

The International Telecommunications Union reports that the proportion of women using the internet is 12% lower than the proportion of men. This gender gap widens to around 33% in least developed countries.

Discussions are ongoing among a large group of members regarding how they can ensure that everybody can participate and benefit from the digital economy. This could prove helpful in bridging this connectivity gender gap.

Of course there are many other areas where action may be needed.

This is what we are here today to explore. And I look forward to hearing about the ideas raised.

The economic case for empowering women is clear.

In fact, it is estimated that increasing women’s labour market participation to the same level as men’s would have dramatic effects. It would raise GDP between 5 and 34%.

But of course this is about more than economics.

Having the freedom to participate in the economy is about having the freedom to explore your full potential and to contribute to society in the way you choose.

Trade is just one part of the picture – but it is an essential part. So let’s keep building this momentum.

I hope you have a very constructive and positive discussion today – and I look forward to working with you as this debate continues to develop.

Thank you.

Source: wto.org

 

61/ Opening the 41st ISO General Assembly  in Geneva, Switzerland

From 26-28 September 2018, the ISO General assembly and related events took place in Geneva, Switzerland. Attending the General Assembly including over 500 representatives came from 150 member countries of ISO. The Vietnamese delegation was led by Ms. Vu Thi Tu Quyen, Deputy Director General of International Cooperation Department and representatives of Vietnam Standards and Quality Institute, Information Center; Representatives of the Ministry of Industry and Trade, Ministry of Transportation, Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism and businesses.

The highlight subject of the ISO General Assembly 2018 is “Promoting the Global Agenda”, sharing knowledge and innovating new ideas on how International Standards can make the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development a reality. ISO has been actively involved in these activities for a long time. Currently, there are 600 ISO standards directly contributing to the implementation of 17 United Nations Sustainable Development Goals.

Meetings on the sidelines of the General Assembly include: 52nd Meeting of the ISO Committee on the Issues of Developing Countries (DEVCO); Conference on Standards for Sustainable Development Goals; meetings on sustainable cities and communities, action on climate change, sanitation and clean water, clean energy, technology, standards and innovation, trends in national trade and role of standards, the linkage of standardizing bodies and government agencies;

At the General Assembly, the Vietnamese delegation presented and shared the experiences on enhancing the information exchange between the standardization body and government agencies.

The General Assembly discussed and adopted the Resolution on the position of the ISO Chairman for the term 2020-2021, arranged the personnel position of ISO, financial issues as well as the implementation plan in next time.

In addition, the General Assembly session is also an occasion to promote bilateral activities. The Vietnamese delegation received a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the French Federation for Standardization and the Directorate for Standard, Metrology and Quality and exchanged with the French delegation on the orientation for further cooperation.

17 United Nations Sustainable Development Goals :

SDG 1 End poverty in all its forms everywhere

SDG 2 End hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition, and promote sustainable agriculture SDG 3 Ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages

SDG 4 Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all

SDG 5 Achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls

SDG 6 Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all

SDG 7 Ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all

SDG 8 Promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment and decent work for all

SDG 9 Build resilient infrastructure, promote inclusive and sustainable industrialization and foster innovation SDG 10 Reduce inequality within and among countries

SDG 11 Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable

SDG 12 Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns

SDG 13 Take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts

SDG 14 Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development

SDG 15 Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, and halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss

SDG 16 Promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels

SDG 17 Strengthen the means of implementation and revitalize the Global Partnership for Sustainable Development

 

Ngày 02/10

62/ WTO and UN Environment join forces to make trade work for the environment

WTO Director-General Roberto Azevêdo and UN Environment Executive Director Erik Solheim issued a new study today (2 October) identifying ways to ensure that trade policies support a healthy environment and promote sustainable development. The joint publication entitled “Making trade work for the environment, prosperity and resilience” will be discussed at a high-level session at the WTO’s Public Forum on 2 October, bringing together leaders from business, government and civil society.

The joint publication details how governments can work together to ensure that trade and a healthy environment reinforce each other. It makes the case that opening up trade in environmental goods and services is a triple win for the economy, the environment and development. According to the Business and Sustainable Development Commission, new business opportunities brought about by a more sustainable world economy could be worth an estimated US$ 12 trillion annually by 2030.

Director-General Azevêdo said:

“Executive Director Solheim and I have pledged to work together in support of sustainable trade. This new report is a blueprint to deliver that goal. WTO rules have led to tariffs being cut in half since 1995, to lower trade costs and to greater certainty and stability in the global trading system. These are essential elements to help the green economy expand and flourish, but they are not sufficient in themselves – we must do more.

“To ensure that trade is sustainable, while continuing to deliver benefits for jobs, growth and economic prosperity, governments must work to make trade and environmental policies complementary. Examples of this could include agreeing deep cuts in fish-depleting subsidies and the scaling back of trade barriers on environmental goods and services. The WTO is the place to deliver progress on these issues.”

Executive Director Solheim said:

“We already have many champions and pioneers that are showing us every day how the economy of the future can work. Innovation can help us overcome environmental challenges. We must do everything we can to support these frontrunners to unlock trade in green sectors and move us towards more sustainable ways of consuming and production. When we do this, we will find huge opportunities for prosperity and jobs.”

The joint publication emphasizes that to maximise the contribution of trade to a better and more resilient environment, action would be needed in the following areas:

• collaborative work focusing on strengthening multilateral cooperation and governance,
• fostering private-public partnerships to facilitate market-oriented approaches that allow trade and environment to be mutually supportive,
• encouraging national policy makers to work together across environment and trade domains,
• fostering “win-win” opportunities which provide economic and environmental benefits,
• supporting decision-makers from the world’s poorest countries, along with vulnerable groups and under-represented communities, in preserving natural assets,
• delivering inclusive, gender-sensitive outcomes for environmental and trade policy to support broader goals within the 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda,
• raising awareness among stakeholders on the role of trade in environmental sustainability and resilience to climate change.

This publication is being launched by DG Azevêdo and Executive Director Solheim during the WTO Public Forum (2-4 October) which this year has sustainability as one of its core themes. Alongside the high-level event mentioned above, the Forum will feature an exhibition with cutting-edge environmental technologies from around the world.

The partnership between the two bodies was announced in January 2018. It seeks to highlight practical ways to bring trade and the environmental policies closer together.

Source: wto.org

 

63/ Registration opens for public access to 2nd oral hearing in “US — Large Civil Aircraft” appeal

At the request of the European Union and the United States in the dispute “United States — Measures Affecting Trade in Large Civil Aircraft (Second Complaint) — Recourse to Article 21.5 of the DSU by the European Union” (DS353), the Appellate Body has authorized access to the second oral hearing for WTO members and the general public via delayed broadcast. The video broadcast will take place at 9.30 a.m. on Tuesday, 9 October 2018 at the WTO headquarters in Geneva.

Given the participants’ request to protect certain sensitive business information, public observation will be limited to a broadcast of the opening and closing statements made at the second session of the oral hearing.

Places reserved for the public will be allocated on a first come, first served basis upon receipt of a completed registration form. Completed forms should be sent by e-mail only to: wto.abregistration@wto.org.

Applications will be accepted until 12 noon, Geneva time, on Monday, 8 October 2018. Those to whom seats have been allocated will be advised by e-mail. Those attending will need to present an official photo ID to access the viewing room. Please note that no audio/video recording will be permitted. Portable phones must be switched off throughout the broadcast. Security checks may delay access to the viewing room.

The WTO is unable to offer any support, including financial, for accommodation, flight arrangements, or visas.

Only those with pre-allocated seats will be admitted.

Source: wto.org

 

64/ DG Azevêdo: “We can’t put progress on hold until we’re ready”

In his welcome remarks to the Opening Plenary of the 2018 Public Forum on 2 October, WTO Director-General Roberto Azevêdo underlined the importance of modernizing and adapting the rules of global trade in order to manage the major social and economic challenges ahead from technological change. The DG’s remarks kicked off three days of discussions and debate at the WTO regarding the future of trade and how to make it more sustainable and inclusive.

The Public Forum is the WTO’s largest annual outreach event, providing a unique platform for parliamentarians, leading global business people, students, academics and non-governmental organizations to come together and debate on a wide range of WTO issues and on some of the major trade and development topics of the day.

More than 2,500 participants have registered to attend this year’s Forum, the theme of which is “Trade 2030″.  More than 100 sessions have been scheduled to examine what sustainable trade will look like in 2030 and beyond, with sub-themes focusing on sustainable trade, technology-enabled trade and a more inclusive trading system.

DG Azevêdo noted that the rapid changes taking place today, from the emergence of new technologies to growing environmental risks, are challenging the way we think about trade. With the proper policies in place, the technological revolution could help fuel significant trade growth. At the same time, new technologies are expected to create substantial churn in the global jobs market, with tens of millions of jobs lost and created in the coming years.

“More and more trade will be happening through digital platforms,” DG Azevêdo said. “New ways of delivering products will come on stream. New kinds of services will be created. So we have to ask – is the global trading system that we have today equipped for that new environment?”

“I believe that the fundamental principles still apply, as enshrined in the WTO agreements: the importance of clear rules, openness, cooperation and non-discrimination,” he said.

Whether the current system of rules is enough to manage this change is still an open question, DG Azevêdo added. Absent a regular updating of these rules, there is a risk of growing gaps between those basic principles and the evolution of habits, behaviours and even ethical values.

“We have to set a path towards better global trade by 2030 – trade that is even more sustainable and inclusive,” he said. “We can’t put progress on hold until we’re ready. We have to start talking now. We have to get involved.” His full speech is available here.

Keynote speakers at the Opening Plenary stressed the importance of innovation and flexibility in adapting to the new global trading environment, and putting proper policies in place to allow innovation to flourish and facilitate the achievement of sustainability and inclusiveness objectives.

Erik Solheim, Executive Director of UN Environment, underlined the important role of trade in supporting sustainable development, including trade’s role in contributing to the sharp reduction in global poverty in recent years and promoting the expanded use of renewable energies and technologies.

“Last year we had more electricity coming onto the global grid from solar alone,” noted Mr Solheim. “Could that happen without trade?  No. It may have started in California and Germany, but the enormous markets of China and India took it to such a scale that solar can now compete on price with coal everywhere in the world.”

“That’s a change that would have been impossible without trade.”

Jack Ma, Executive Chairman and co-founder of the Alibaba Group, a world leader in global e-commerce, outlined a rosy forecast for trade – one driven by e-commerce, small businesses and services. He urged the Forum audience to have confidence in the future.

“Let’s stop worrying about the future,” he declared. “You may not have the solutions, but young people have the solutions.  You don’t have the solution today, but you’ll have the solution tomorrow.”

The year 2030, he predicted, would see a substantial increase in the amount of business conducted online, greater involvement of small businesses in e-commerce, and more consumer-to-business transactions.

“Today we see Made in China or Made in Switzerland, 2030 will be Made in Internet,” he declared.  “All these things will fundamentally change the way we do trade, but for sure most businesses will benefit, we will create a lot more jobs than we expected.”

Laura Behrens Wu, CEO and co-founder of Shippo, a multi-carrier shipping platform, said one of the big advantages from the new world of trade will include lower entry costs for entrepreneurs and removing geographical boundaries to trade.

“It’s easier than ever to start an online business,” Ms Behrens said. “You don’t need a physical location, starting an online business is asset-low, and people can focus on what they’re best at, which is making creative and beautiful products, taking care of customers, and being in touch with the trends.”

“People have been saying we cannot stop technology. I don’t want to stop technology. People are leveraging technologies to be more creative and be able to form more human connections and make the world a smaller place.”

Tunde Kehinde, Co-founder of Lidya, a leading platform for small- and medium-sized business lending in emerging markets, said obtaining affordable finance was critical in allowing these companies to participate in trade and take advantage of the opportunities offered by access to global markets.

“When you look at sustainable development goals, around job creation and equality, the fact that you can now provide the financing (small businesses) need to meet buyers’ demands really opens up markets for these small businesses that weren’t there before.”

Mr Kehinde urged small business to engage with governments and make their case for creating a business environment that will help them take advantage of new technologies and flourish.

“If you’re not at the table, the challenge you face is that regulation is being made without your voice. And that regulation can be very disruptive, it’s tough to unwind.”

Christine Bliss, President of the US-based Coalition of Services Industries (CSI), said there was a bright future ahead for services providers in the new technology-driven trade environment. Nevertheless, her members were concerned with some emerging regulatory trends which threatened to disrupt this progress.

“The demands for data localization and data processing requirements are a huge problem and they do threaten to break down the delivery of services in an efficient, cost-effective manner on a cross-border basis,” Ms Bliss declared.  “The pressure to impose duties on electronic transmissions is another huge challenge which, if not handled correctly, could lead to a serious breakdown in cross-border e-commerce.”

“Cybersecurity risks and over-reaction by governments is another area that needs to be tackled. Cooperative frameworks need to be developed to handle that carefully. And the limits of services market access commitments are also limiting. We’re pressing up against them and need to find ways to move forward.”

Source: wto.org

 

65/ Public Forum — Opening Plenary Debate

Opening remarks by DG Azevêdo

Welcome to the 2018 WTO Public Forum. I’m Roberto Azevêdo, Director-General of the WTO – and your host today.

Thank you all for joining us.

With our theme this year of ‘Trade 2030′, we are inviting you to raise your eyes from the trade issues of today, and look to the future.

• What will trade be like in 2030?
• How can we shape it to fit our priorities?
• How can we make it more sustainable?
• How can we make it more inclusive?
• Are we ready for the changes that lie ahead?

These are the issues that we will be discussing this week.

We all know that the world is changing. It is happening at an unprecedented rate.

New technologies are emerging. Environmental risks are growing. And this is challenging the way we think about trade.

If the proper synergies are in place, particularly regarding public policies, by 2030 the technological revolution could help fuel additional trade growth of around 30 percentage points. This is huge.

More and more trade will be happening through digital platforms. New ways of delivering products will come on stream. New kinds of services will be created.

So we have to ask – is the global trading system that we have today equipped for that new environment?

I believe that the fundamental principles still apply, as enshrined in the WTO agreements: the importance of clear rules, openness, cooperation and non-discrimination.

But is this enough?

We are seeing new advances being made every day in so many fields: in AI, green technology, 3-D printing, robotics, quantum computing and blockchain (or distributed ledgers).

In any system where you have a constitution, or a founding legal text, if it is not regularly updated, you will see growing gaps between those basic principles and the evolution of habits, behaviours and even ethical values.

More often than not, it is the courts that step in to fill those gaps, creating jurisprudence. This route may be faster, but it does not necessarily reflect the wishes and priorities of everyone it affects.

So this is the key question: Do we want to leave the task of filling the blanks to the courts or to unilateral action? Or do we want to sit down and fill in the blanks together?

The world is changing before our eyes. And although we cannot stop this evolution, we can shape it. In fact, I believe we have to shape it.

If we do not, it is inevitable that many will be left behind. It will create new social problems, new sources of unease and unrest.

For example, there was a recent report from the World Economic Forum which found that by 2025, for the first time in history, machines will perform more work tasks than humans.

They found that technology could wipe out 75 million jobs over the next four years. 75 million!

But, at the same time, it could create 133 million new roles.

That is a phenomenal opportunity. But it can only be seized with immediate, positive action to reskill workers and support their transition into these new jobs. And that is because the worker that loses his or her job (in manufacturing, for example) will not be ready to occupy a position that has opened in a more dynamic sector of the economy.

This kind of lesson applies across the board.

Technological change could create new problems. It could increase the power of bigger firms at the expense of smaller companies. It could create new inequalities, for example between digitally advanced economies and those that are lagging behind.

Or it could help us to build the future that we want to see, helping smaller players and distributing the benefits of trade and economic growth more widely.

In fact, this is what the Sustainable Development Goals are all about. World leaders came together to set those goals precisely to shape the future, and create a better world by 2030.

We have to set a path towards better global trade by 2030 – trade that is even more sustainable and inclusive, and which is responsive to emerging challenges.

And in doing this, I don’t think we can wait until we understand all of the elements of technological change and precisely how they are going to evolve. Because that is never going to happen.

We can’t put progress on hold until we’re ready. We have to start talking now. We have to get involved.

And that’s what we’ll be debating here at the Public Forum: what the future will look like – and how we can work together to make sure that it works for everyone.

This year’s event is bigger than ever.

In fact, since 2012 the attendance and the number of events have more than doubled.

Over the next three days, we’ll welcome over two and a half thousand attendees and hold 112 events.

We actually received applications to host a remarkable 237 events this year. The only problem is that we ran out of space. I’m afraid we can’t add any more rooms, but we could add more time – so next year we’re thinking about extending the event to a 4th day.

It’s great that we’re seeing such an overwhelming response. It means we’re on the right track, and we’re raising the right issues.

So I think it’s going to be a great week.

And to kick-off the conversation, we have gathered a fantastic panel.

• I’m very pleased to welcome Erik Solheim, Executive Director of UN Environment and UN Under-Secretary-General. Erik has an extensive career focusing on environment and development issues. And I’m pleased to say that we are joining forces to find opportunities and innovative ways to strengthen our economies and the environment at the same time.
• I’m pleased also to welcome Jack Ma, who is the Founder and Executive Chairman of the Alibaba Group – and surely one of the most remarkable business leaders and visionaries of our time. Jack has been named a Sustainable Development Goals advocate by the United Nations. And Jack and I have been working closely together in recent years to enrich and inform the growing debate on e-commerce.
• Next we have Laura Behrens Wu – the CEO and Co-founder of Shippo, which she has built into a leading multi-carrier shipping platform. She is also one of the Forbes 30 under 30s. And as we’re talking about the future today, I look forward to hearing Laura’s perspective as a young business leader.
• Next we have another young business leader – Tunde Kehinde, who is the Co-founder of Lydia. Lydia is a digital platform designed to help business owners access financing. Tunde is quite a prolific entrepreneur having also co-founded Africa Courier Express, a last-mile delivery company, and Jumia, an e-commerce platform. Both of which are leaders in their field in Nigeria.
• And finally we have Christine Bliss, the President of the US Coalition of Services Industries. Christine is well known to many of us as she is a former Assistant U.S. Trade Representative and trade negotiator – both here at the WTO and for various US free trade agreements. She is a noted expert on trade issues, and particularly services.

So that’s our panel. We are very pleased to have you all with us today.

And this is going to be a truly global debate. We are opening up the conversation to those who couldn’t join us today.

We are webcasting this session – so I should say a special welcome to everyone watching around the world.

When it comes to the moment for the panel to take questions, we will be receiving them from you here in the room, and from outside – via social media.

Once you’ve sent them in, I will receive your questions here on my tablet. And I promise that I’ll ask as many as I can.

So now, that’s enough housekeeping – let’s get started.

Source: wto.org

 

66/ Trade Dialogues: ICC and B20 present recommendations on strengthening global trade

The International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) and B20 Argentina, the business arm of the G20, presented at the WTO Public Forum today (2 October) a list of recommendations on how to reinforce global trade in support of inclusive growth and development. Building on the outcomes of the Business Forum held in Buenos Aires at the end of 2017 and the Trade Dialogues meeting held at the WTO in June 2018, these recommendations cover e-commerce, investment facilitation, small businesses and sustainable development.

The meeting in June was the second Trade Dialogues event with the business community. It was held at the request of the ICC and the B20, and facilitated by the WTO. Following the June meeting, four groups of business representatives continued discussions on how to deal with today’s trade challenges.

The resulting business recommendations were presented during a session at the Public Forum by ICC Secretary General John Denton, the B20 Chair Mr Daniel Funes de Rioja and B20 Policy Sherpa Fernando Landa. Director-General Roberto Azevêdo attended the session and delivered the opening remarks.

DG Azevêdo said: “Reaching consensus amongst businesses is just one element of the equation. You also have to bring your ideas and suggestions to the members themselves, and work with them to drive your issues forward.

“For that to happen, it is vital to engage with governments directly, and with other stakeholders who also inform members’ positions. This must be a constant process. Therefore, I am delighted you are using the Public Forum for this continued exchange.”

Secretary General Denton said: “We know it is a particularly challenging time for the multilateral trading system and the point we made when we met in June was that the ICC stands willing and able to engage in constructive discussions to facilitate a continuing role for multilateralism in global commerce. We think it is in everyone’s interest and we also think that it is the higher probability that this will lead to peace and prosperity.

“We would like to see some movements in the role of the WTO to support e-commerce and the digital economy and also on the role of the multilateral trading system in supporting the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals. The business community is extremely engaged in the SDGs and we want to make sure that the actions from the multilateral trading system and the WTO are in support of that as well.”

Mr Funes de Rioja said: “We are all convinced of the need for a strong multilateral trading system, with the main values of open trade and a level playing field for all for achieving inclusive development. Certainly, the WTO has been the cornerstone of this system. We ask the WTO to have the proper mechanism, not only to avoid trade distortions but also to adapt the rules for the new digital age.  We are ready to play our role in order to have a good multilateral system. We think the future of fair global trade is based on multilateralism.

“Business encourages the WTO to capitalise on the current engagement on regulatory cooperation in the area of investment. We believe a multilateral approach in investment can be a cost-effective alternative to bilateral negotiations. An investment facilitation agreement should focus on transparency, predictability and cutting red tape.”

Mr Fernando Landa said: “When we talk about small and medium sized enterprises, the issue cuts across every trade aspect that you can think of. Predictable rules are fundamental for MSMEs, and the availability of information is also important to them. Trade facilitation has a great impact on MSMEs. We need to better acknowledge that trade is increasingly happening in small packages, and we need to be prepared to deal with this. We need to consider how to revisit these areas that are important for MSMEs.

“We need to discuss things that are simple and also those that are difficult. The initiative on MSMEs is one that should move forward. This is something that we would encourage our B20 leaders to get involved in and to be proactive.”

In their recommendations, the business representatives reaffirm their strong support for the WTO and stress that the stability, predictability and transparency provided by the multilateral trading system are crucial for supporting growth, development and job creation.

The Trade Dialogues event in June 2018 brought together over 60 senior business representatives to discuss the challenges they face in global trade. Participants were from small and large enterprises, from developed, developing and least-developed countries and from a variety of sectors.

Source: wto.org

 

67/ DG Azevêdo calls on international community to ensure nobody is left behind in digital era

WTO Director-General Roberto Azevêdo has called on the international community to ensure that the digital revolution underway is fully inclusive and leaves nobody behind. Speaking at a Public Forum session entitled “E-commerce 2030: Enabling an inclusive future for e-commerce”, DG Azevêdo stressed that e-commerce provides a springboard to overcome some of the traditional obstacles to trade but warned that without the right approach the big players could easily dominate this market at the expense of smaller business.

The session was organised as part of the ‘Enabling E-commerce’ initiative which was launched by the Electronic World Trade Platform and the World Economic Forum together with the WTO on the margins of the 11th WTO Ministerial Conference in Buenos Aires in December 2017. The initiative aims to galvanize debate on e-commerce issues among a wide range of stakeholders, encouraging the sharing of ideas and best practice. DG Azevêdo was joined at the session by Borge Brende, President of the World Economic Forum, Jack Ma, representing the Electronic World Trade Platform, UNCTAD Secretary-General Mukhisa Kituyi, Ambassador Robert Dufter Salama of Malawi and Ambassador Frances Lisson of Australia.

“E-commerce 2030: Enabling an inclusive future for e-commerce”

Remarks by DG Azevêdo

Hello everybody – good afternoon.

Welcome to this panel session on ‘Enabling an Inclusive Future for Electronic Commerce’.

‘Inclusive’ is the key word here.

It’s great to have you here today. At the outset, let me thank the World Economic Forum and the Electronic World Trade Platform for their help in organising today’s event.

At the WTO’s Ministerial Conference in Buenos Aires last December we joined forces with these two bodies to launch the ‘Enabling E-commerce’ initiative.

Our aim is to facilitate a deeper debate on e-commerce issues among a wide range of stakeholders, encouraging the sharing of ideas and best practices. We want to broaden opportunities for smaller players, entrepreneurs and regular citizens.

So I am pleased that Jack Ma and Borge Brende are here with us today.

And I’m also very pleased to be joined by Secretary-General Mukhisa Kituyi, Ambassador Robert Dufter Salama of Malawi and Ambassador Frances Lisson of Australia.

So in a moment I will ask my two Enabling E-commerce partners to give opening remarks summing up their activities in this area so far. And then we’ll move to our more interactive debate with the whole panel.

It’s clear that the internet and new technologies are revolutionizing our lives. If you have a phone, you are now connected to a global marketplace.

In this way, e-commerce provides a springboard to overcome some of the traditional obstacles to trade. It has reduced the trade costs associated with physical distance. And it has given consumers access to a broader selection of products, from a wider range of suppliers.

But without the right approach, the big players could easily dominate this market at the expense of smaller businesses.

If we cross our arms and do nothing, that is precisely what is going to happen.

Poorer countries could also be left behind. We know that around 4 billion people do not yet have internet access – and of course this is concentrated in developing and least-developed economies.

But even when you are connected, there are still many other barriers.

We need also the right policy infrastructure, such as regulatory and payment systems – as well as the appropriate skills and expertise.

So if we want this digital revolution to be inclusive, we have to work on all of these areas. And I think we need two things:

• One, we need a more focused debate which identifies more precisely where the gaps are, and where action could be required.
• And, two, we need a major collaborative effort that brings together governments, labour, consumers and business, including small and large companies, from developed and developing countries.

There is a responsibility on the whole international community to ensure that nobody is left behind.

And it is positive that many WTO members are taking up that challenge.

At our Ministerial Conference in Buenos Aires last year, there was a significant focus on e-commerce.

WTO members took some important actions there – which follow two distinct tracks.

On the multilateral track, members agreed to continue work under the existing Work Programme on Electronic Commerce. And they agreed to extend until 2019 the moratorium for customs duties on electronic transmissions. Members now need to determine the way forward for this work.

In addition, a group of 71 WTO members signed a Joint Statement on E-Commerce. This statement committed them to start exploratory work towards future WTO negotiations on this issue.

The signatories include LDCs, developing and developed members – including major players like the US, EU, Brazil, Nigeria, Korea and others.

In fact, these 71 members represent around 77% of global trade.

This was a major milestone. And, while some are not in a position to support this initiative, it is clearly evolving fast. It is already providing an important forum to discuss how initiatives under the WTO can help spread the opportunities that e-commerce offers.

We are also seeing a growing number of requests for technical assistance on e-commerce. Members are keen to learn more about the history of these discussions in the WTO and the recent views and submissions.

So we have been delivering that training.

And of course we continue to work with other international organisations to this end – including through encouraging other efforts in this area, such as UNCTAD’s eTrade for All initiative.

I also think the business community had a key role in bringing this debate to life.

They have the technical expertise and first-hand experience that governments can sometimes lack. And in this highly complex and fast-moving area, I think tapping into that knowledge is essential.

We have been pleased to facilitate a number of meetings with business here at the WTO, as part of our Trade Dialogues series.

The most recent session was held in June of this year – initiated by the International Chamber of Commerce and the B20. And that meeting actually led to a statement of business priorities which was published earlier today. I urge you all to take a look.

It lists a range of e-commerce issues which business would like to see addressed at the WTO such as: cross border data flows, data localization requirements and consumer protection. It also makes the case for continued work to implement the WTO’s Trade Facilitation Agreement and for a potential further expansion of the WTO’s Information Technology Agreement.

This is just to list a few of their priorities at random – without any judgement given on my part. Indeed, clearly some of these points are more controversial than others. Nevertheless, it’s welcome that this kind of detailed and proactive thinking is being done.

I also know that the World Economic Forum and the Electronic World Trade Platform have been doing some excellent work along these same lines.

We are all pushing in the same direction, so it’s a pleasure to bring these efforts together under the banner of Enabling E-commerce.

I hope that we can continue to shed light into what is a very exciting area.

Thank you all for listening.

Source: wto.org

 

68/ Trade dialogues — Public Forum

Remarks by DG Azevêdo

Good morning everyone.

It is great to join John, Daniel, Fernando and Frances today.

I’m pleased to welcome you all to our Public Forum.

This session is a symbol of the very positive engagement that we have built with the business community in recent years.

Let’s be honest, for a long time, the WTO was not on your radar. We weren’t delivering new trade agreements. And it seemed like all the action on trade was happening elsewhere.

But from the end of 2013, we started to change that.

Members delivered a number of trade deals, which could bring some big gains for business. They include:

• the Trade Facilitation Agreement
• the expanded Information Technology Agreement, and
• a deal to abolish export subsidies in agriculture.

These are the biggest reforms in the global trading system in a generation.

All this created a surge of engagement in the WTO – including from the business community.

People were excited about the WTO’s work, and also wanted to contribute to that conversation.

That’s why in 2016, at the request of the ICC and the B20, we held our first Trade Dialogues meeting.

This initiative was aimed at facilitating a dialogue with a range of stakeholders, so that they could raise the issues that they think the WTO should be tackling.

That first meeting was a real success. And it has led to a significant strengthening of our dialogue with the business community. Since that meeting in 2016,

• we held a Business Summit alongside our Ministerial Conference in Buenos Aires last year – this was the first business event held in the margins of a WTO Ministerial Conference
• we also held dedicated discussions at our annual Public Forums and at other related events around the globe
• we facilitated another Trade Dialogues event with business at the WTO earlier this year, and
• we launched the Small Business Champions initiative together with the ICC, aiming to promote practical ideas to help smaller companies join global markets.

I am happy to say that the ICC and the B20 are the driving forces behind all these initiatives – including today’s meeting. So I want to thank them for their leadership and support on this front.

Through these activities, the business community has been able to bring to the fore the issues that mattered most to them. Business also had a chance to present their concerns and ideas to WTO members. And these discussions have had a remarkable impact.

At our Ministerial Conference in Buenos Aires last year, groups of WTO members announced new initiatives to pursue discussions in a number of areas. They included:

• how to help promote electronic commerce for inclusiveness
• how to support smaller businesses to trade so that they are not crowded out by bigger players
• how to facilitate investments – which are critical to job creation, to build connectivity infrastructure, among other things, and
• how to ensure that trade contributes fully to the economic empowerment of women.

Your engagement here, through the Trade Dialogues process, was a major factor in launching and informing these conversations. As you know quite well, some of these issues were priorities identified by the business community in our Trade Dialogues session with business in 2016.

So this process is already seeing real results.

At the second Trade Dialogues event, here at the WTO in June, we took the conversation to another level of depth and detail. I am glad to see that many of the participants of that meeting are here today.

It was a very rich debate back in June. The participants discussed a number of areas where they believed WTO work could help tackle the challenges they face.

And I am very pleased that, under the leadership of the ICC and the B20, the participants continued their discussions after the meeting itself. And that conversation has resulted in the statement that is being presented at today’s session.

I look forward to hearing those outcomes. I will also attend the B20 meeting in Buenos Aires later this week, where we will have the opportunity to continue this conversation.

But let’s remember – reaching consensus amongst businesses is just one element of the equation. You also have to bring your ideas and suggestions to the members themselves, and work with them to drive your issues forward.

For that to happen, it is vital to engage with governments directly, and with other stakeholders who also inform members’ positions. This must be a constant process. Therefore, I am delighted you are using the Public Forum for this continued exchange.

And you should also engage outside the WTO. You should engage in capitals and everywhere where we can develop this dialogue.

This engagement is essential for another reason as well.

These are challenging times for trade. Escalating tensions between major trading partners risk undermining the system. So we can’t just cross our arms. We need everybody who believes in the system as a force for good to stand up for it – and speak up for it.

In my experience governments listen to the private sector. Yet, I think that many are not making their views heard. Or they are not speaking loud enough. This has to change. Silence is interpreted as agreement.

We can’t take the global trading system for granted.

The WTO’s track record shows that we can deliver. The stability and predictability that the system provides – along with the new agreements that we strike – underpin the growth, development and job creation that we all want to see.

So I look forward to your support, and to seeing what more this partnership can achieve in the years to come.

Thank you.

Source: wto.org

 

69/ High-level session highlights need for closer links between trade and environment policies

Linking trade and environment policies closer together can deliver benefits for prosperity and sustainability around the world, panellists said at a high-level session hosted by WTO Director-General Roberto Azevêdo and UN Environment Executive Director Erik Solheim during the WTO’s Public Forum on 2 October. Key leaders from business, government and civil society called for stepped-up action to deliver pro-environment and pro-trade outcomes that propel the world towards the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals.

“A healthy environment is essential to building prosperous and resilient economies. This is one key reason why we need to bring the trade and environmental agendas closer together. Today’s dialogue is an important step in that direction. Trade is a powerful tool to make green technologies more affordable and to help sustainable business expand. I look forward to continuing working alongside all stakeholders, including the private sector, to ensure that trade delivers benefits for people and the environment everywhere,” WTO Director-General Roberto Azevêdo said.

Mr Solheim in turn highlighted the essential role trade plays to support long-term green solutions that are beneficial for the economy and job creation as well as the environment.

“We already have many champions and pioneers that are showing us every day how the economy of the future can work. Innovation can help us overcome environmental challenges. We must do everything we can to support these frontrunners to unlock trade in green sectors and move us towards more sustainable ways of consuming and producing. When we do this, we will find huge opportunities for prosperity and jobs,” Mr Solheim said.

Panellists called for trade policies that support the widespread dissemination of environmentally friendly technologies such as those needed for renewable energy. Noting that “protection of the environment is profitable”, Bertrand Piccard, the visionary behind the first solar-powered plane to circumnavigate the world, highlighted the role that the WTO could play in supporting the dissemination of profitable, clean and efficient technologies, which need to be better known, brought to market and implemented widely.

Jérôme Pécresse, GE Renewable Energy CEO, said that free trade is critical to the cost competitiveness of renewable energy: “We are at a point where people do new renewable energy projects not because it is good for the planet, but because it is a rational economic decision. To keep along this path, we need to continue to be able to leverage efficiently our global supply chains. Things like tariffs and local content requirements will hinder our ability to keep pushing down the costs of wind and solar energy and are going to limit the planet’s ability to move towards the Paris Agreement targets.”

Aisa Mijeno, co-founder and CEO of SALt (Sustainable Alternative Lighting Group), said duty-free imports are vital for her start-up enterprise in the Philippines and that they were exploring the possibility of extracting hard-to-source materials from scrap circuit boards. Lucia Bakulumpagi-Wamala, CEO & founder of Bakulu Power in Uganda, noted the importance of open trade policies for renewable energy technologies, while emphasizing that electrification was key in helping local communities participate in trade.

Panellists also debated approaches to eliminating fossil fuel subsidies. For Kimmo Tiilikainen, Finland Minister of the Environment, Energy and Housing,  efforts are needed to level the playing field by putting a price on carbon in order to make environmental alternatives more viable. He also highlighted the role of trade in supporting new business models that create value by redesigning and optimizing products for multiple cycles of use, in line with a circular economy. As a first step, he encouraged WTO members to fully realize that the shift to a circular economy was unavoidable.

The discussion further emphasized the wide leeway governments have in the face of WTO rules to implement sound regulations that protect the environment.

The event also featured the launch of a co-publication by the WTO Secretariat and UN Environment titled “Making trade work for the environment, prosperity and resilience.” The event also drew attention to the new WTO Environmental Database, an online tool that compiles almost 20 years of information from environment-related notifications and Trade Policy Reviews of WTO members. A sustainability exhibition of green innovations was also opened on the same day as part of the Public Forum. These efforts follow the announcement by DG Azevêdo and Mr Solheim in January of a joint initiative to bring the trade and environmental agenda closer together.

Source: wto.org

 

70/ Toilets that save lives: a new International Standard to help

More than 2.3 billion people across the world lack access to basic sanitation services, including 892 million who defecate in the open. Hundreds of thousands of young children die each year from diseases as a result¹⁾. New technology is shaping up to provide safe sanitation systems in places that don’t have sewerage treatment plants, offering the potential to save lives and improve the well-being of many. The highly anticipated ISO standard to support this development has just been published.

For far too many people across the globe, lack of clean sanitation and drinking water is a way of life. Every day, they are exposed to life-threatening disease and illness, not to mention the risk of violence this poses to women and girls who have to wander into unprotected areas to go to the toilet. In March 2013, the United Nations launched a global call to eliminate open defecation by 2025 and made “access to adequate sanitation and hygiene for all” the target of one of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) of the UN Agenda 2030.

To this end, exciting new technology is emerging, with the development of stand-alone sanitation systems that safely treat waste without the need to be connected to a traditional sewerage system.

New international guidelines for such technology will help to catapult the industry to a new level by providing safety and performance requirements that will not only enable their effective manufacture, but the development of the sector as a whole.

ISO 30500, Non-sewered sanitation systems – Prefabricated integrated treatment units – General safety and performance requirements for design and testing, is much awaited both by the industry that produces the systems and the countries that need them.

The treated outputs from systems meeting ISO 30500’s requirements will be free of bacteria, viruses and other harmful pathogens, thus protecting people and valuable resources, such as drinking water, from outbreaks of potentially fatal disease.

Dr Doulaye Koné, Chair of the ISO project committee that developed the standard, said ISO 30500 will demonstrate to manufacturers, governments, regulators and end users of the non-sewered facilities that they are safe, reliable and of good quality. This, in turn, will lead to the development of even better toilets in areas where infrastructure such as plumbing and electricity are just not feasible.

“ISO 30500 was developed by a wide range of experts from more than 30 countries, including representatives from the industry that is developing the technologies and those from governments in countries where there is a need,” he said.

“The manufacturers have expressed that the standard is greatly needed as a tool to drive innovation and help accelerate their products to market, while numerous governments are looking at the relevance of the standard as a basis for public policy.”

Lansana Gagny Sakho, CEO of the Senegalese Sanitation Utility ONAS, said Senegal is planning to adopt ISO 30500 and ISO 24521, Activities relating to drinking water and wastewater services – Guidelines for the management of basic on-site domestic wastewater services, as part of a policy to outsource the operation of non-sewered sanitation to private utilities.

“This latest standard will help speed up the professionalization of key private-sector stakeholders involved in this extraordinary revolution in on-site sanitation,” he said. “The impending adoption in Senegal of ISO 24521 and ISO 30500 will also play a part in the realization of the SDGs.”

Attawut Kumkrong, Head of Open Innovation and Partnership Management SCG Chemicals, a large petrochemical company in Thailand, said: “ISO 30500 can be considered a tool or guideline for sourcing and engaging proven technologies from research institutes to develop and manufacture them into commercialized off-grid sanitation solutions. Moreover, standardization allows for fair market competition by producing sanitation solutions with the same quality level, resulting in improved quality of life.”

ISO 30500 was developed by ISO project committee ISO/PC 305, Sustainable non-sewered sanitation systems, whose secretariat is jointly held by ANSI, ISO’s member for the USA, and ASN, ISO’s member for Senegal.

ISO 30500 is available from your national ISO member or through the ISO Store.

1) United Nations World Health Organization: Billions around the world lack safe water, proper sanitation facilities, reveals UN report

Source: iso.org

 

Ngày 03/10

71/ Getting the packaging right: international guide just updated

Packaging has come a very long way since its humble beginnings of gourds and clay pots. These days, the world of packaging is much more complex, needing to be safe and sustainable whilst remaining appealing and functional. An international guide has just been revised to help organizations ensure their packaging meets growing consumer needs.

Some things never change. Did you know that the humble glass bottle – now making a comeback thanks to its facility for recycling – was first commercialized by the ancient Egyptians some 3 500 years ago?¹⁾ About 1 300 years later, the Chinese gave us paper, but it wasn’t until the 19^th century that branding started appearing on packaging, leading to bar codes, nutrition facts and a whole lot more.

These days, packaging must not only conform to legal requirements, it needs to appeal to consumers as well, helping them make informed choices. ISO/IEC Guide 41, Packaging – Recommendations for addressing consumer needs, an international document published jointly by ISO and the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), provides guidance to product designers, manufacturers, regulators, and others involved in decision making regarding packaging – including standards developers.

Christine Heemskerk, Co-Convenor of the ISO working group that developed the guide and Chair of the Consumer and Public Interest Network of BSI, ISO’s member for the UK, said the newly revised version features more detailed information on risk assessment, vulnerable consumers’ needs, cost reduction, use of resources, suitability for intended purpose, and recycling.

“Consumers will directly benefit from industry use of the revised guide, with safer, more appropriate and informative packaging,” she said.

Fellow Convenor, Sandra Herrera, a standards specialist at ICONTEC, ISO’s member for Colombia, agrees.

“ISO/IEC Guide 41 will optimize product packaging by providing international best practice and guidance on everything from ensuring the packaging protects the product effectively, to labelling information and environmental impact, such as reuse and recycling.”

ISO/IEC Guide 41, Packaging – Recommendations for addressing consumer needs, was developed by ISO/COPOLCO, the ISO Committee on consumer policy. It is available from your national ISO member or through the ISO Store.

1)   Digimarc: The History of Packaging

Source: iso.org

 

72/ World Trade Report 2018 highlights transformative impact of digital technologies on trade

The 2018 edition of the WTO’s flagship publication, the World Trade Report, finds that digital technologies — namely the Internet of Things, artificial intelligence, 3D printing and Blockchain — will have a profound impact on global trade, adding up to 34 percentage points to trade growth by 2030 thanks to lower costs and higher productivity. However, they could also create a challenging environment for those seeking to keep up with the latest innovations. The Report was launched today (3 October) at the WTO Public Forum.

The report shows that digital technologies are likely to further reduce trade costs and boost trade significantly, especially in services and for developing countries. Global trade is projected to grow by an additional 2 percentage points annually between 2016 and 2030 as a result of digitalization, falling trade costs and the increased use of services. This corresponds with a 31-34 percentage point higher trade growth over 15 years.

The share of services in global trade is projected to grow from 21 per cent in 2016 to 25 per cent in 2030. The report also finds that the reduction in trade costs could be especially beneficial for micro, small and medium sized enterprises (MSMEs) and firms from developing countries, provided they have the ability to keep up with the adoption of digital technologies. In the best scenario, developing and least-developed economies’ share in global trade is predicted to grow to 57 per cent by 2030, from 46 per cent in 2015, whereas if they cannot keep up, this share is predicted to rise to 51 per cent.

The report discusses how digital technologies can unlock savings, such as through better route planning, autonomous driving and smart inventories made possible by artificial intelligence and robotics. Blockchain solutions — a system of decentralized, digital transactions — can reduce time spent on customs compliance and logistics. The Internet of Things, the networking and processing capabilities of everyday objects, can help to improve operational efficiency through better preventative maintenance of machinery and products. These technologies can therefore reduce transportation and storage costs, which represent a major share of overall trade costs.

Digital technologies can also significantly affect what the world trades. For example, remote controlled robotics have led to revolutionary advances in trade in services and the emergence of new services such as telesurgery. Enhanced technological capacities which allow faster and simpler processing of traded products could also foster trade in time-sensitive, certification-intensive and contract-intensive goods.

The report argues that new technologies are likely to change the established ways the world trades, with comparative advantages predicted to change across economies. AI, 3D printing and advanced robotics could reduce the role of labour as a source of comparative advantage, while factors such as the quality of digital infrastructure and market size as well as institutional and regulatory determinants of comparative advantage, including intellectual property protection, might become more relevant. 3D printing, furthermore, may to some extent reduce the need for outsourced assembly, the number of production steps and other factors related to global value chains.

The report identifies certain areas which may warrant international cooperation. These include key initiatives being undertaken by multilateral organizations such as facilitating a favourable legal and regulatory framework, competition-related issues, intellectual property rules, supporting MSMEs, promoting digital inclusion, and addressing challenges related to trade facilitation and infrastructure for information communication technology. The report concludes that, overall, the expansion of digital trade holds the potential to generate considerable benefits if it takes place under conditions that adequately address important public policy challenges. Issues concerning inclusiveness, privacy protection and cybersecurity are likely to figure prominently in debates on the future governance of digital trade.

The report can be downloaded from the WTO website and printed copies are available through the WTO Online Bookshop.

The report also features for the first time opinion pieces from external contributors who provide their own perspectives on the future of world trade.

Launch of the World Trade Report

At the launch of the World Trade Report, panellists debated what the future of trade would look like in the face of upheavals brought on by digital technologies. Some panellists questioned whether services would indeed take up a larger share of trade and whether developing and least developed countries (LDCs)  would truly benefit from the projected trade growth. All panellists nevertheless agreed that digital technologies pose challenges to global trade regulation and that governments must work hard for coordinated solutions.

“Trade and technology are closely interlinked — and they always have been. From the invention of the wheel, to the railways, to the advent of containerization, technology has shaped the way we trade.  Today this phenomenon is accelerating as never before. We are living through an era of unprecedented technological change. Some call it the 4th Industrial Revolution; others the New Industrial Revolution or even the New Digital Revolution. But the common theme is clear — this is a revolution. These technologies are reshaping the economy before our eyes,” WTO Director-General Roberto Azevêdo said at the launch.

“These technologies are becoming ubiquitous. Increasingly they are shaping every element of the economy and every element of our lives. We can’t simply leave our future to chance, or simply trust it only to market forces. We have a duty to make this technological revolution work for everyone. So we can’t shy away from this debate,” DG Azevêdo said.

WTO Chief Economist Robert Koopman provided a summary of the Report. He encouraged WTO members to take a close look at the section on how to prepare for the technology-induced reshaping of trade and reflect on how they would want to take related discussions in the WTO forward. The rapid development of digital technologies that are making use of the internet is expected to transform the world economy more deeply than other technologies have before, Mr Koopman said.

Caroline Freund, World Bank Director for Macroeconomics, Trade and Investment Climate, said she was optimistic of strong trade growth in the future given that the world had already seen hyperglobalization in the mid-1990s and early 2000s alongside the rise of the internet and mobile computing. However, history has also shown other things to be “remarkably consistent”, she said, citing the stagnant share of services in global trade, the continued importance of geographical distance in determining trade patterns, and the lagging share LDCs have of world trade. More data, particularly on services, would be helpful in charting the future of trade, she said. Governments, she added, would do well to look at new areas of trade such as e-commerce, investment and MSMEs instead of the traditional “smokestack” industries of the past.

Susan Lund, McKinsey Global Institute Partner, stated a similar view that technology could have an “ambiguous impact”, specifically in terms of developing countries’ participation in world trade. Digital technologies such as robotics could replace manufacturing workers and allow businesses to keep their factories closer to the end-consumer. Business process outsourcing located in developing countries, such as back office operations like call centres and data entry, could be taken over by automation and artificial intelligence.

Abdoullah Cisse of Carapaces Stratégies & Conformités highlighted the situation in Africa where a large number of people are still not connected to the internet. For him, it is important that digital technologies are used to bridge development gaps among economies instead of widening the divide. Mr Cisse also drew attention to issues of data ownership and environmental impacts that stem from new digital technologies, which the other panellists likewise raised.

“The future is hard to predict. There’s optimism generally on the panel and in our report but there are different emphases on where the optimism will make its way into economic activities,” Mr Koopman said in closing the discussion. “There is a challenge for our governments to come together and have a serious discussion on this fundamentally important economic phenomenon that’s going to change how we live.”

Source: wto.org

 

73/ World Trade Report launch 2018

Remarks by DG Azevêdo

Good morning everyone.

Welcome to the launch of this year’s World Trade Report, our flagship publication on key issues in global trade. It is great to have you here today.

The Public Forum is all about sharing knowledge, sparking new conversations, and hearing new perspectives. So I think this is an ideal platform to launch this publication.

Every year our World Trade Report looks at an emerging trend in global trade policy. It aims to shed light on how the trading system is developing, and therefore to inform our debates and deliberations in Geneva and beyond. This year is no different. We have an excellent report to discuss today.

The topic this time is how digital technologies are transforming global commerce, and the challenges and opportunities that this will create. The focus is on internet-enabled technologies such as the Internet of Things, artificial intelligence, 3D printing and Blockchain.

I want to thank Cosimo Beverelli and Emmanuelle Ganne as the co-coordinators of this year’s report, as well as colleagues from our Economic Research and Statistics Division, and other divisions, who made very important contributions to it. You’ve done a great job.

Trade and technology are closely interlinked – and they always have been. From the invention of the wheel, to the railways, to the advent of containerization, technology has shaped the way we trade.

Today this phenomenon is accelerating as never before. Just think of the transformation that each of us have seen in our lifetimes – and not just my generation, this applies to the millennials too. We are living through an era of unprecedented technological change.

Some call it the 4th Industrial Revolution; others the New Industrial Revolution; or even the New Digital Revolution. But the common theme is clear – this is a revolution. These technologies are reshaping the economy before our eyes; and these are structural changes.

This was clear from the opening session yesterday. And I am glad we have the chance to continue to develop this conversation today.

In a moment Bob will guide you through the findings of the report. But first, I want to give you a few highlights to illustrate how these technologies are interacting with trading practices – and what effects this could have.

Take Blockchain. We all know the term. And it has sparked huge debate. But what exactly does it mean for trade? Well, there is a wide range of potential applications.

Blockchain is essentially a tamper-proof, decentralised digital record of transactions. It is a tool to create trust and it is said to be highly resilient.

It could therefore support smaller businesses to start trading by helping them to build trust with partners around the world. It could enhance the transparency of supply chains, accelerate the digitalization of trade operations and automate contractual transactions. In this way it could deliver significant cost reduction and revenue gains. In fact, studies estimate that by 2030, the gains from Blockchain could deliver 3 trillion dollars of value worldwide.

Similarly, AI and the Internet of Things have a huge number of potential applications.

They will enable significant efficiencies for traders. They will, for example, help companies to track products along the supply chain and optimize route planning.

3D printing could transform what we buy. Instead of a finished good, we would be buying the code needed to reproduce it. This could democratize manufacturing by giving everyone the ability to produce goods. This will certainly lower the barriers to entry to smaller companies and entrepreneurs.

The effects of all these changes will be significant.

The report estimates that, by cutting trade costs, these technologies could boost trade by up to 2 percentage points per year until 2030. That amounts to growth of 31 to 34 percentage points over 15 years.

The report also shows that the reduction in trade costs driven by these technologies can be especially beneficial for smaller businesses and for firms from developing countries. But, as ever, this depends on appropriate complementary policies being put in place.

If that is the case, then developing countries’ share in global trade could grow from today’s 46% to 57% by 2030.

The report also highlights potential changes in the structure of trade.

Beyond easing trade in goods, digital technologies can facilitate services trade and enable new services to emerge. The report predicts that the share of services trade could grow from 21% to 25% by 2030.

For example, Blockchain could give rise to a new generation of services, particularly in areas such as financial services, transportation, logistics and retail distribution. In this way, Blockchain could be to the services sector what robots are to manufacturing.

However, this also throws up important policy questions.

These technologies are blurring the distinction between trade in goods and trade in services. Between data flows and intellectual property. And they are giving rise to a number of concerns. This includes the effect of these technologies on market concentration, loss of privacy, productivity and the digital divide.

Will these technologies empower smaller economies and smaller producers to compete? Or will they fuel greater exclusion?

Will the changes lead to an expansion in global value chains, further shifting production activities to developing countries? Or will we see the opposite effect as it becomes more efficient to bring production activities back together in so-called “smart factories”?

How can we ensure that we have the right policies in place to spread the opportunities provided by this revolution and overcome the challenges?

These are very important questions, which deserve our close attention.

These technologies are becoming ubiquitous. Increasingly they are shaping every element of the economy and every element of our lives. We can’t simply leave our future to chance, or simply trust market forces. We have a duty to make this technological revolution work for everyone.

So we can’t shy away from this debate. Not least because it is linked with a broader ongoing debate about trade and globalization.

These are challenging times for trade. Trade tensions are on the rise. This is extremely serious.  Continued escalation risks a major economic impact.

All this requires an urgent response. There is a responsibility on the whole international community to help resolve all these issues.

And we must listen to the concerns which stand behind the moves to restrict trade. History has shown that jobs are being lost in manufacturing and in agricultural production. The anxieties felt by workers are real and must be addressed.

But the majority of the jobs that are lost – around 80% – are being lost due to automation and new technologies – not trade. And we know that with technological advance, new jobs are also created – jobs that we hadn’t imagined before.

We have to respond to these accelerating structural changes – and we have to do so in full possession of the facts.

If we misdiagnose the situation and think that choking off global trade is a solution, we will only bring greater harm.

We need an informed debate about trade and technology, and the World Trade Report is a significant contribution to these efforts.

The fact is we are entering a new economic era. It demands new thinking. How we will respond is the defining question facing governments around the world today.

There is much to discuss – and much to do. Unfortunately I cannot stay for the debate this morning, but I look forward to receiving a full report of the proceedings. And I know that we have a fantastic set of panellists here today to discuss all these questions.

So thank you all for joining us. I wish you a very productive event. And I urge you all to read this report!

Thank you.

Source: wto.org

 

74/ Trade can make a vital contribution to meeting the Sustainable Development Goals – Azevêdo

International trade and the WTO have a crucial role to play in helping to accelerate progress in achieving the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), highlights a WTO publication launched at the Public Forum today (3 October 2018). In his opening remarks, Director-General Roberto Azevêdo stressed the need to strengthen the multilateral trading system to support efforts to achieve the SDGs and to underpin growth and development in the poorest countries. This is what he said:

Minister di Malila,

Excellencies,

Ladies and gentlemen,

Good morning.

I am pleased you could join us this morning to launch this publication on trade and the Sustainable Development Goals.

Three years ago, world leaders came together to set these 17 ambitious goals – including ending poverty by 2030.

I applaud that vision. I think targets like these are essential. No one has ever climbed a mountain without first fixing their eyes on the summit.

Now we are all sherpas on that climb. And I think that trade, and the WTO, can bear its full share of the load.

Combined with the right financing and capacity-building assistance, trade is a vital catalyst for development. This is demonstrated by the experience of recent decades, as greater trade cooperation has helped to transform the welfare and living standards of so many people around the world.

The figures tell the story.

Developing countries’ share of global trade has jumped from 28 to 46 per cent over the last 20 years.

In turn, this progress helped to lift one billion people out of poverty, and it delivered on the Millennium Development Goals.

We must ensure that trade continues to play this positive role.

To focus our minds on this task, we have prepared this publication. I was pleased to present an advance copy to UN Secretary-General Guterres when we met earlier this year.

The report highlights the contribution that we think trade can make in meeting the SDGs.

It emphasizes the importance of mainstreaming trade into national policies to expand economic opportunities. And it looks at the role that international cooperation and the multilateral trading system can play in these efforts.

The report also puts forward ten recommendations which would help to ensure that international trade contributes to accelerating progress in achieving the SDGs. These range from continuing to reduce trade costs, to enhancing trade in services.

One key recommendation is strengthening the multilateral trading system to support efforts to achieve the SDGs.

There is no doubt that a strong trading system is essential here. The stable, predictable, rules-based framework that the system provides helps to underpin growth and development. It provides everyone with a seat at the table.

It also helps to ensure that everybody can participate by providing developing countries with the necessary practical support to build capacity and trading skills. This is a key pillar of our work.

The WTO runs a range of training programmes, tailored to the needs of developing country officials, so that they can successfully navigate the system. The WTO is also host to the Standards and Trade Development Facility, the Enhanced Integrated Framework and the Trade Facilitation Agreement Facility. These are partnerships in the trade area that help countries better take advantage of trade opportunities.

And of course, we have the Aid for Trade initiative, where we cooperate with UNCTAD and other partners, to ensure that developing countries receive targeted assistance to improve their trading infrastructure.

Since it was launched just over a decade ago, over 300 billion dollars has been disbursed under the Aid for Trade initiative, reaching 146 countries. Each dollar has been targeted at helping those countries to build their trading infrastructure and capacity.

This work is mentioned in SDG 17 on partnerships aimed at increasing participation of developing countries and LDCs in world trade. And it is also referenced in SDG 8 on decent work and economic growth where increasing Aid for Trade flows is a specific target.

In fact, beyond the overall impact that trade can make in SDG 1, cutting poverty, and SDG 8, fuelling economic development, there are a range of specific trade elements in the SDGs.

Members have already delivered a key part of SDG 2, on ending hunger, with their 2015 decision to abolish agricultural export subsidies.

They have also made progress on achieving SDG 3, on health and well-being. This happened last year when members brought into force the amendment to the TRIPS Agreement which helps developing countries to access generic medicines at more affordable prices.

And now discussions are underway on fisheries subsidies. Members have committed to securing a deal to limit harmful subsidies by the end of 2019. Success here would deliver on a key target of SDG 14 on the sustainable use of our oceans. So we must keep working to that end.

Other elements of our work connect to the goals as well:

• the decisions taken to help least developed countries to better integrate into the trading system
• our efforts to make progress on issues such as domestic support in agriculture and food security
• closing the gaps in trade finance provision is another key step
• and we must keep advancing the implementation of the Trade Facilitation Agreement. This deal can help to make trade more inclusive by dramatically cutting trade costs, particularly for the poorest countries.

We need to keep advancing on all of these fronts.

However, we should also guard against anything that could imperil this work.

If we continue to erect trade barriers in the way we are seeing today, this is the outcome that we risk.

Further escalation could do serious economic harm, hitting the poorest economies the hardest and setting back efforts to achieve the SDGs.

Our challenge is to respond urgently to resolve the broader tensions in global trade, while also keeping up our work.

This publication is a welcome and timely reminder of the importance of this work, and of our shared goal of building a more prosperous and peaceful world for all.

Trade has proved to be a transformative force in the lives of many, many people. We know what can be achieved. And we have achieved a lot in recent years.

So let’s redouble our efforts to continue this work. Let’s build a more inclusive trading system, which supports the SDGs, keeps pace with the evolving nature of trade, and which paves the way for a better world.

We have an excellent panel with us today to discuss these important issues. I wish you all an excellent discussion.

Thank you.

Source: wto.org

 

Ngày 04/10

75/ Qatar requests WTO consultations with Saudi Arabia on intellectual property rights protection

Qatar has requested WTO dispute consultations with Saudi Arabia to discuss certain Saudi measures concerning intellectual property rights owned by Qatari nationals. The request was circulated to WTO members on 4 October.

Qatar claims the measures at issue are inconsistent with the provisions of the WTO’s Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPs).

Further information is available in document WT/DS567/1

What is a request for consultations?

The request for consultations formally initiates a dispute in the WTO. Consultations give the parties an opportunity to discuss the matter and to find a satisfactory solution without proceeding further with litigation. After 60 days, if consultations have failed to resolve the dispute, the complainant may request adjudication by a panel.

• More on consultations
• Current status of disputes

Source: wto.org

 

76/ WTO and ICC announce new Small Business Champion

The International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) and the WTO announced at the Public Forum today (4 October) that the Institute of Export and International Trade is the second company to be recognized as a Small Business Champion. This follows the successful completion of the Institute’s proposal, under the Small Business Champions Initiative, to run a competition entitled the “Open to Export International Business Award” aimed at encouraging small businesses around the world to begin trading internationally.

During a session at the Public Forum, 12 finalists pitched their “Export Action Plans” to a panel of judges for the chance to win a package of financing and assistance from the Institute of Export and International Trade designed to help the winning small business implement their export plan. The competition was launched in May and attracted plans from small businesses worldwide. The Institute provided support, webinars and online tools to help the small businesses put together a “global growth action plan”.

Lesley Batchelor, CEO of Open to Export and Director General of the Institute of Export and International Trade announced that the winner of the competition was Dytech Ltd, a honey producer from Zambia.

At the award ceremony, Deputy Director-General Yi said: “I would like to congratulate the Institute of Export and International Trade on the completion of their project. Developing the skills of SMEs and giving them the necessary guidance is essential if we want them to increase their participation in international trade. I would also wish to congratulate all the finalists for the great ideas they have presented today.”

Chris Southworth, Secretary General of ICC United Kingdom, said: “Making world trade more inclusive means enabling more SMEs to trade — like the 12 finalists of this International Business Award — and expand into global markets. In helping SMEs design and implement global growth plans, the Institute of Export and International Trade is playing an important role in bringing the indisputable benefits of open trade to a wider cross-section of companies and workers. Congratulations.”

Ms Batchelor said: “Running this competition and working with inspiring MSMEs from around the world has been both humbling and truly inspirational. Thank you to the WTO and ICC for supporting it.”

The 12 finalists were:

1. Andean Beauty: exporter of  salt-based soap – Peru
2. Be Bio: bio soap producer – Viet Nam
3. Bit Bait Infinity: organic pesticide producer – Algeria
4. Crùbag: fashion inspired by marine biology – Scotland
5. Dytech Limited: honey producers –  Zambia
6. For the Record: vinyl clock exporters – Trinidad and Tobago
7. Hot Mama’s Belize Ltd.: pepper sauce products –  Belize
8. Lhamour (Natural Essentials LLC): manufacturer of skin care products – Mongolia
9. Macedonia-Export: advertising and marketing services – former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia
10. Old Bridge: Winery – Armenia
11. Sugar Town Organics: manufacturer of beauty and wellness organic products – Saint Kitts and Nevis
12. Teenah.org – producer of cotton tote bags – Jordan

The panel of judges were:

• Lesley Batchelor, CEO of Open to Export and Director General of the Institute of Export and International Trade
• Arne Mielken, Young President of the Institute of Export and International Trade
• Yi Xiaozhun, WTO Deputy Director-General
• Nicholas Niggli, Head of the Economic, Finance, Science and Innovation Section at the Embassy of Switzerland
• Chris Southworth, Secretary General, ICC UK
• Shaun Lake, Senior Adviser: E-Learning, International Trade Centre

The ICC-WTO Small Business Champions initiative provides a platform for companies and private sector organizations around the world to propose innovative, practical ideas designed to encourage MSMEs to do business across borders. The call for proposals for the initiative was closed in December 2017.

The initiative is delivering projects with a range of business including Argentina’s Chamber of Commerce and Services and Mercado Libre, eBay and Brazil’s National Confederation of Industry. Once the projects have been successfully completed, the businesses will be recognized as ICC-WTO Small Business Champions.

Google was recognized as the first Small Business Champion in December 2017

Source: wto.org

 

77/ Public Forum explores new ways to achieve inclusive trade in era of technological revolution

Director-General Roberto Azevêdo underlined at this year’s Public Forum the need for all sectors of society to benefit from the new technologies that are increasingly shaping everyone’s lives. “We can’t simply leave our future to chance, or trust it only to market forces. We have a duty to make this revolution work for everyone,” he said. This sentiment was echoed in many sessions across the three days of the Public Forum, with participants exploring new approaches to addressing inclusive trade.

For Jack Ma, founder of Alibaba, e-commerce has gone beyond being a platform and represents what the future holds. “E-commerce is not a new way of doing business; e-commerce is the business because 90% of business will be online by 2025,” he said. He foresees that the global economy will be largely driven by a myriad of small companies mostly from developing countries instead of being driven by 6,000 multinational companies as we see today. In this way, e-commerce will unleash tremendous opportunities for young people and women, leading to truly inclusive global trade, he said.

In an e-commerce session co-organized by the WTO and the World Economic Forum, Mr Ma stressed the need for rule-making at the WTO so that all e-commerce activities can be regulated by one set of rules. At the same time, rules and policies must leave flexibilities as technological innovation will always be faster than policy development. Policy space is imperative for providing some latitude for innovation and for continuing to push boundaries, he said.

Blockchain technology, one of the core new technologies identified by the 2018 World Trade Report as critical for future trade, generated intense discussions in many sessions, such as “Will technology help developing countries have easier access to trade finance”, co-sponsored by the Mission of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan and the WTO Secretariat. Mohammad Q. Haqjo, Ambassador of Afghanistan to the WTO and Chair of the WTO Working Group on Trade, Debt and Finance, asked participants to explore ways to use Blockchain as a promising solution to closing the trade finance gap that currently prevents women and small businesses in developing countries from participating fully in global trade.

Vinay Mandonca, from HSBC, confirmed that Blockchain technology can result in more loans being released by banks as it can provide more quality and timely information and allow the bank to go beyond the usual risk assessment exercise.  Some speakers also pointed out that Blockchain helps to build trust between buyers and sellers, a vital currency in global trade.

Emmanuelle Ganne, Counsellor at the WTO, highlighted some of the obstacles facing the application of Blockchain technology to the banking system – for example, incorrect information in the Blockchain, data privacy issues, communication between different Blockchain platforms and different standards applying to various blockchains.  Once these questions are answered, she said, “blockchain technology has the potential to foster the emergence of new business models, it will allow SMEs to have more trade finance, and the good news for women and SMEs is that they do not have to build a platform by themselves, they just need a mobile phone to connect and trade.”

For Peggy Hicks, from OHCHR, the new approach hinges on thinking out of the box and embracing key human rights principles of equality, non-discrimination and participation.  At the heart of this, she said, is the fundamental right to work with new technology. “Technology is essential to the livelihood of the community,” she stressed  at an “Africa goes digital” session. Only when government and business work together to put ICT infrastructure where it is most needed by the resource-poor people and when every single entity ensures the representation of women can the new technology serve the cause of digital equality and gender equality, she said.

In Africa, governments are looking at how to harness digital power for inclusive development at various levels. David Luke, from the Economic Commission for Africa (ECA), said that apart from some very small steps in certain countries, the African continent is considering a common approach on e-commerce in future strategies. At the international level, the African Group is engaging in discussions at the WTO on the e-commerce initiative.

The WTO´s relevance in the new digital era was repeatedly alluded to by a number of  participants. A strong voice of support was heard particularly from least-developed countries at the session entitled “Towards an inclusive trading system: Integrating smaller developing and least-developed countries”. Uganda’s Ambassador Christopher Onyanga and Nepal´s Ambassador Deepak Dhital reaffirmed the importance of robust multilateral rules which are vital for stimulating business activities and promoting cross-border trade among developing countries.

Source: wto.org

 

78/ High-level panel highlights potential of e-commerce as driver for growth and inclusion

E-commerce is an increasingly growing force in global trade, with the potential to make the world economy more inclusive and provide opportunities for micro, small and medium-sized enterprises (MSMEs), women and young people. However, many challenges must be addressed in a collective manner in order to pave the way towards a more inclusive e-commerce landscape in 2030. Keynote speakers addressed this issue at the WTO Public Forum in a debate involving governments, the private sector and civil society.

The WTO, the World Economic Forum (WEF) and the Electronic Trade Platform (eWTP) opened the debate on this issue with a high-level panel session titled “E-commerce 2030: enabling an inclusive future for e-commerce”, organized as part of the “Enabling E-commerce” initiative launched on the margins of the 11th WTO Ministerial Conference in Buenos Aires in December 2017. This initiative attempts to galvanize debate on e-commerce issues among a wide range of stakeholders, encouraging the sharing of ideas and best practice.

WTO Director-General Roberto Azevêdo called on the international community to ensure that the digital revolution now underway is fully inclusive and leaves nobody behind. He stressed that e-commerce provides a springboard to overcome some of the traditional obstacles to trade but warned that without the right approach, big players could easily dominate this market at the expense of smaller business.

“If we cross our arms and do nothing, that is precisely what is going to happen. Poorer countries could also be left behind. We know that around 4 billion people do not yet have internet access – and of course this is concentrated in developing and least-developed economies. But even when you are connected, there are still many other barriers. We need also the right policy infrastructure, such as regulatory and payment systems – as well as the appropriate skills and expertise. So if we want this digital revolution to be inclusive, we have to work on all of these areas,” he said. His full speech is available here.

DG Azevêdo led the debate, where speakers agreed on the need to urgently face the variety of challenges needed to ensure that the benefits of e-commerce are more widely shared around the world as well as to reduce and eliminate the existing digital divide which particularly affects least-developed countries (LDCs).

Borge Brende, President of the World Economic Forum (WEF), noted that e-commerce offers new opportunities that can contribute to the development of regional and global value chains for both goods and services, while playing a key role in reducing inequalities. Brende said that new thinking, regulatory coherence, policy space for governments, security for workers, flexibility for business and sustainable choices for consumers are the main ingredients to achieve results.

“We need to come together to shape responses and create the appropriate supporting global architecture. The Fourth Industrial Revolution can be a very good thing for humankind, but there are currently very few protocols and regulations to secure this. We definitely need traffic rules,” he said.

Speaking on behalf of the Electronic World Trade Platform, Jack Ma, Executive Chairman of Alibaba Group, said that less talk and more action is needed to face the new trade reality born as a result of the e-commerce boom. He called for an upgrade to existing trade rules, not the creation of new ones, and to open the debate on this matter beyond governments.

“Nobody can stop the technological revolution, so all the rules have to be forward-thinking. We have to be sure that rules and laws are flexible because businesses always develop much faster. Innovation always develops much faster and I think future laws should not be driven only by governments; they should be driven by private sectors and all stakeholders together,” he said.

UNCTAD Secretary-General Mukhisa Kituyi spoke of the main challenges faced by the international community when dealing with this new form of trade: measuring e-commerce, identifying where the gaps are, and raising awareness on the need to close the digital divide. He also noted that governments in LDCs have to be clear about what they intend to do in terms of e-commerce before seeking assistance – “broadband connectivity without the skills and capacities is a wasted opportunity” – and underlined the importance of visibility.

“Taking into account that 90 per cent of businesses will be online in the future, our main developmental challenge is how much we can make SMEs, women’s businesses in rural areas and young people have visibility in the digital market place,” he said.

Ambassador Robert Dufter Salama of Malawi said that LDCs are aware of the opportunity for job creation, business expansion and thriving economies the digital revolution offers. However, they face major challenges in jumping on the bandwagon of e-commerce – 62 per cent of the population without access to electricity, high illiteracy rates and high prices for IT products as well as few internet service providers and inadequate financial services.

“In Africa, there will be 1.1 billion people in 2030. We know that there is a need for us to create jobs, and we are aware that traditional businesses, that is manufacturing and exporting, will not be enough to meet the aspirations of the young people,” he said.

Ambassador Frances Lisson of Australia noted that digital trade in e-commerce is the future of international trade and is also an increasingly powerful economic enabler. To capture the opportunities offered by digital trade at all levels, she said, all stakeholders involved need to get the policy settings right. In this context, she stressed that “the growing call by consumers and businesses, including MSMEs, to move towards setting global standards for digital trade in the WTO have been heard.”

“At MC11, a group of 71 members representing 77 per cent of global trade and all the regions of the world, agreed to initiate exploratory talks towards future WTO negotiations. And as chair of this process, my priority has been to encourage and facilitate a substantive discussion on the trade-related e-commerce issues raised by members, and to ensure that the process is open, transparent and inclusive, and member-driven. All WTO members are encouraged to join these exploratory talks. It is clear that there is real appetite for substantive discussion and engagement in this initiative has exceeded expectations,” she said.

Source: wto.org

 

79/ Chairs Programme session at Public Forum focuses on challenges of adapting to digital era

A session organized by the WTO Chairs Programme (WCP) at this year’s Public Forum provided a holistic look at the impact of digital technology on trade and what countries may have to face when adapting to the new trade era. The panel for the session — entitled “Adapting to the Digital Era: Challenges and Opportunities” — included WTO chairholders and representatives from the Geneva trade policy community and the WTO Secretariat. The session was moderated by Jean Marie Paugam, Permanent Representative of France to the WTO.

Robert Teh, Chief of the Economic Modelling and Quantitative Analysis Unit at the WTO, highlighted some of the key messages from the 2018 WTO Trade Report, “The future of world trade: how digital technologies are transforming global commerce”. He said that digital technologies such as the Internet of Things, artificial intelligence, 3D printing and Blockchain could have a transformative impact on domestic economies and trade.

Keith Nurse, WTO Chairholder from the University of the West Indies, Barbados, underlined the rapid growth of digitalization and blockchains and their profound impact on the creative economy, the music business and copyright administration. He examined the potential benefits for developing countries and how they may seize these opportunities.

Riza Noer Arfani, WCP Chairholder from the Universitas Gadjah Mada, Indonesia, discussed issues resulting from the adoption of Indonesia’s e-commerce road map and its implications for the future of the country’s digital economy.

Lorraine Ferreira and Ermie Steenkamp from North-West University, South Africa, discussed the current obstacles to intra-regional trade in Africa and how technology enabled trade can be a powerful driver for the region’s inclusive and sustainable development.

Ambassador Alvaro Cedeño Molinari, Permanent Representative of Costa Rica, stated that the WTO should update its rule book, making trade frictionless and borderless through strengthened multilateral rules. He stressed that the digital agenda for trade and development should also take environmental issues into consideration.

During a general discussion at the end of the session, a member of the audience said that “cultural barriers” were one of the obstacles to intra-regional trade in Africa. Another audience member asked questions about the current level of connectivity in Africa. In response, Ambassador Cedeño highlighted the importance of inclusiveness when it comes to sustainable development.

Source: wto.org

 

Ngày 05/10

80/ DG Azevêdo welcomes B20 support for the WTO

WTO Director-General Roberto Azevêdo welcomed the support of the business community to strengthen the multilateral trading system during his visit to Buenos Aires on 4 October 2018, where he attended the B20 Summit.

The Director-General participated in a panel discussion on the “Present and Future of Multilateralism” together with  Argentina’s Minister of Foreign Affairs Jorge Faurie, the Minister of Treasury Nicolás Dujovne and the Chair of the B20 Trade and Investment Task Force Paolo Rocca.

The Director-General said:

“As the international community responds to rising trade tensions around the world, we are seeing growing calls for reform to strengthen the WTO to help meet these challenges. As this conversation evolves, I urge the business community to make their voices heard. It is vital that everybody who believes in trade and the trading system as a force for good speaks up – including the private sector.

“In this context, the B20′s strong emphasis on the importance of the WTO is very welcome. I believe that this organization is essential for stability, growth and job creation around the world. Therefore I will continue to work with all our members and stakeholders to make the case for the WTO and to discuss how we can make the system even more inclusive and responsive in the years to come.”

The B20 (or Business 20) is the private sector’s voice in the G20. It aims to build consensus among business leaders and civil society on how major global challenges and priorities should be addressed.

Source: wto.org

 

81/ DDG Wolff: “The future of the WTO and the world trading system is bright”

In a speech to the Graduate Institute in Geneva on 5 October, Deputy Director-General Alan Wolff said that while the multilateral trading system is more likely to be subject to greater stress, conflicts can give rise to improvements in the system. “It is my belief that the system will continue to evolve. It will be improved, because it can be, it should be, and inevitably, ineluctably, it must be.” The text of his remarks is below:

A disclaimer at the outset.  There is no single view shared by all WTO Members of the subject we are discussing today.  I do not speak for the WTO Membership or any member.  Second and equally important, the provocative title of this series of panels, attributing to one member an attack on the international trade regime, is not one that I would choose.  The current situation is more nuanced.  Third, if I were to fault WTO members, it would not be only one, and I see no value in condemning any. That is a matter for dispute settlement.

Now as to the subject of our panel:

The future of the WTO and the world trading system is bright.  That this is true, I freely acknowledge, is a faith-based assessment.  That faith is based on many decades of laboring in the vineyard of trade policy, of experiencing with joy and dismay some of the high and low points of the system, and of having seen the WTO from the inside for the last 13 months.  It is also based on certain hard facts.

First fact:  WTO members have interests.  A primary interest shared and acknowledged by all Members is that the multilateral trading system be maintained and, for most, there is a desire to see it improved.  None would say that this system, or any other, national or international, is perfect.

Predicting the future is always a chancy endeavor.  Douglas Irwin, in his excellent treatise on U.S. trade policy, written in March 2017, a few months into the current American Administration, gave an assessment based on over 200 years of American history.  He concluded that U.S. trade policy: 1) was characterized by stability due to domestic counterpoised interests and power centers; 2) that U.S. trade measures are used solely to serve the objective of either domestic protection or to gain reciprocity; and 3) that continuity is assured by being imbedded international institutional arrangements.  Eighteen months later calculations based on these loadstars⁽¹⁾ require revisiting.  None can be fully relied upon.

As for forecasting, the temptation is to engage in simple extrapolation.  The alterative methodology is more scientific, developed by Pierre Wack, an executive of Shell Oil Company who predicted with accuracy the two oil embargoes of the 1970s. He employed a decision tree approach.  It operated without complexity:  Is A more likely than B?  If it is, is A1 more likely than A2, and so forth?  This methodology can be applied to our topic this morning.

As an initial matter, the starting point should be to assess the state of the health of the WTO at present.  Senator John McCain was fond of using a line that he attributed to Mao Tse-tung, which was as follows:   “It is always the darkest before it becomes pitch black”.  While the system is more likely to be subject to greater stress before there is improvement, the jocular line attributed to McCain and Mao is not, I believe, applicable to the WTO.  I prefer the motto of the Canton of Geneva, which got it from Calvin, Post tenebras lux, “after darkness light”.  This is from the Old Testament, from the Book of Job, and some days some here at the WTO may feel a bit of affinity with Job.

But that is not my attitude.  It is not the middle of the night at the WTO, far from it.   We are not navigating from the bottom of a well, mired in a slough⁽²⁾ of despair or despondency, seeing just a few stars overhead.  The extensive machinery of the WTO, committees, reports, negotiating sessions, dispute settlement – all continue as they had before, with full participation of all Members to the extent that each wishes.  The line at the door of acceding countries seeking to enter the WTO has grown longer and the enthusiasm of these countries for the organization is undimmed.  By far most of world trade is still governed by the WTO rules, and there is no indication that this will change.  Inertia, in a positive sense — like the force that causes the earth to rotate on its axis and to revolve annually around the sun — persists.  It is a very strong force.

That is not to say that everything is well.  There are some very substantial discontinuities, disturbances in the prior equilibrium:

• First:  The rise of a new major economy always results in friction.  Following the Second World War, this occurred with the rise of Japan and it occurs now with the continued rise of China.  The phenomenon is exacerbated by differences among trading countries how they organize their economies, the size of the Chinese economy and the rapidity of China’s rise.  An open question is where the equilibrium point is to be found between China and its trading partners.
• Second: The change in Administration in the United States has caused something between a series of ripples and a tsunami, depending on the issue and trading relationship involved.  No one would argue with the fact that this Administration’s policies and measures toward international trade differ from those of the preceding dozen or so administrations.  Other countries have not yet adjusted fully to this change, but this is beginning to occur.
• Third:  Income inequality and wage stagnation, the movement of peoples across borders, job displacement due to automation and the consequent rise of populism, all contribute to stress on the existing international economic arrangements.  Almost without exception, national policy responses have been wholly inadequate, and sometimes misguided.

The reaction at the WTO has been slow in coming. But now a growing number of WTO Members have begun an inquiry into what changes might be made in existing international structures and rules.  This can be a very positive development.  Conflicts led to the creation of the GATT, to the current system of floating system of exchange rates and to the creation of the WTO itself⁽³⁾.  Conflicts now can give rise to improvements in the system.

The current situation is highly fluid.  As opposed to the preparations for the prior great rounds of major multilateral trade negotiations, the Kennedy, Tokyo and Uruguay Rounds, there has not been the development of texts of new codes of conduct over an extended period of years.   Participation in the process is more unstructured and diverse.  The outcome is not fully or, perhaps, even partially predictable, but the spirit is one of inquiry and an increasing openness among those participating to consider how best to improve the trading system.

Substantive candidates for change include improving compliance with international rules in part through providing incentives to provide notification of trade measures, including subsidies, thus increasing transparency; making the trading system of greater value and more accessible to small and medium enterprises; dealing with the rapidly evolving world of electronic commerce; and yes, making sure that dispute settlement has legitimacy for all and works better.  An examination of the accessibility to trade related to gender is also underway.  This is a partial list.  A careful balance must be struck between Members’ domestic needs and enhanced international exchanges of goods and services.  This has always been the case and it always will be.  Striking that balance is far from impossible.

Throughout this process, there must be an increasing recognition on the part of all participants that they bear an individual and a collective responsibility for the system.  The system is in the hands of its Members. There needs to be flexibility, agility and goodwill to succeed.  This is essential to maintain the best elements of the system and to make improvements in it.

Whatever happens, the WTO will endure.  As one prominent critic of the current system, a trade minister, is reported as having said “if the WTO did not exist, it would have to be created”.

It is my belief that the system will continue to evolve.  It will be improved, because it can be, it should be, and inevitably, ineluctably, it must be.  It is in the interests of all participants, without exception, that it be made better.

A few years ago, on behalf of the Board of Science, Technology and Economic Policy of the U.S. National Academies, I met with the Director of the U.S. National Aeronautics and Space Agency (NASA).  He said that a central challenge for NASA was the need for invention of a computer that was based on biological components rather than electronics, because for travel in deep space lasting decades, an onboard computer would have to re-invent itself, as it could no longer be re-programmed from Earth.  Similarly, institutional arrangements need periodic updating.  Governments and their representatives, ministers and delegates, need to take a pragmatic approach.  An overly legalistic approach will be counterproductive. The system must adapt — to respond to international and domestic imperatives as these change over time.  A good dose of pragmatism, of creative (but realistic) proposals, are needed.  A sense of urgency is also in order.  Drift will not accomplish what is required.

Source: wto.org

 

82/ High-level panel calls for integration of fragile states into the global economy

A high-level panel at this year’s Public Forum examined the link between peace and trade, focusing on the opportunities and challenges that conflict-affected states face in developing their capacities to trade. These countries need to be integrated into the global economy, the panellists stressed, so that they can contribute to and benefit from economic growth. The session was moderated by WTO Deputy Director-General Alan Wolff.

The session was organized by the WTO Secretariat, the Executive Secretariat of the Enhanced Integrated Framework, the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and the g7+ WTO Accessions Group, a grouping launched at the 11th Ministerial Conference at the end of 2017 and constituting 20 “fragile” states.

Countries that have long been isolated by years of conflict are yet to fully realize their trade potential and reap the benefits, participants highlighted. Thirteen out of 22 governments currently acceding to the WTO are considered “fragile” countries.

In his opening address, H.E. Kay Rala Xanana Gusmão, former President and former Prime Minister of Timor-Leste, stressed that over 1.5 billion of people are suffering as a result of decades of wars and conflicts. “While the world has been increasingly integrated and connected through trade, cooperation and technology,” he said, “these fragile post-conflict countries are left out or are the farthest behind. Yet, these countries have the potential to provide the fuel for the economic prosperity of the world.”

Mr Gusmão said that “trade war” is the current “buzz phrase” among the big economies but for g7+ countries, trade can help them to achieve peace. He called on the richer countries, such as the G20, to do more to help change the current state of affairs, not only by helping fragile states to increase their trading capacity but also by taking greater responsibility for monitoring and tackling illicit outflows and international tax evasion. Mr Gusmão called for multilateral organizations to help build the necessary infrastructure in these countries.

Hon. Deng Deng Hoc Yai, Minister of General Education of the Republic of South Sudan, the youngest nation in the world with huge natural resources, stressed that trade is a fundamental pillar of South Sudan’s growth strategy. The minister firmly believes that multilateral trade will allow South Sudanese firms to participate in a larger market that offers economies of scale and productivity gains. The country’s desire to join the WTO stems from this strong belief. The first step towards realising this desire has been fulfilled, he said, with the establishment of the Working Party on the Accession of South Sudan at the Ministerial Conference in Buenos Aires.

Kamila Sidiqi, Afghanistan’s Deputy Minister for Commerce, expressed the view that opening to international trade will have a direct positive impact on increasing the country’s national income and promoting its efforts to achieve an equitable balance of trade. This will allow Afghanistan to use its resources more efficiently by specializing in the production of the goods and services that the country can produce more cheaply while importing the others. Integrating into the global trade framework will also have a positive effect on Afghanistan’s long-term growth since it will give access to more advanced technological inputs available in the global market and enhance incentives for innovation.

Ms Sidiqi said that, as a former entrepreneur and businesswoman in Afghanistan, she strongly believes that trade can contribute to women moving out of unpaid labour in agriculture and into more lucrative sectors such as manufacturing and services. This will increase their income and generate more formal employment opportunities for women.

Ms Maryan Hassan, Chief Negotiator for the Accession of Somalia to the WTO, highlighted that her government is currently undergoing a process of rebranding, engaging with the private sector which understands the potential of what the WTO can do. She also stressed the role of other international organizations in the WTO accession process. “While these mandates touch on issues such as humanitarian disasters and gender-based violence,” she said, “they do not encompass everything that a post-conflict country needs. We also require trade experts and economists who can help our economies transition out of war.”

Ms Hassan underlined the importance of hiring more Somali nationals within international organizations as they are best placed to understand the struggles that their country faces and can therefore deliver tailored solutions. The Federal Government of Somalia is embodying this philosophy — for example, the Ministry of Planning has set a deadline of January 2019 for all international organizations with Somalia country offices located outside of Somalia to relocate to Somalia.

Sara Sekkenes, Conflict Prevention and Partnerships Advisor at UNDP, underscored the importance of investing in conflict prevention while addressing fragility and conflict and the need for investments to be sustained over a period of time. She highlighted the value of partnerships such as the Aid for Trade initiative and the Enhanced Integrated Framework for least-developed countries because they shine a spotlight on the importance of mainstreaming trade at the national level and galvanizing support for more effective institutional and trade capacity development. The complex and comprehensive reform efforts brought about by acceding to the WTO represent an opportunity to build a policy and regulatory framework that advances inclusive growth and sustainable development.

Will Martindale, Director of Policy and Research at the UN Principles for Responsible Investment, an initiative set up by Kofi Annan, said: “Private capital flows dwarf development finance. The World Bank’s annual commitment to development is around $50 billion. The United States commits around $30 billion to overseas aid. Meanwhile, every single day, $40 billion is traded on the New York Stock Exchange. Meeting the UN Sustainable Development Goals implies much greater flows of private capital to low-income countries — in particular, SDG 16: Peace, justice and strong institutions.”

Mr Martindale recommended that investors should require that their investment companies implement and publish policies in line with international frameworks. Policies should include issues such as tax, recruitment and working conditions, human rights, and ethical and local sourcing. Investors should advocate data collection and monitoring of different policies related to trade. Investors should carry out full risk assessments, he said, before initiating operations in conflict regions that include issues such as human rights, including modern slavery and the environment.

DDG Wolf highlighted that the g7+ contribution to the work of the WTO is what is intrinsically needed for the organization to thrive. Such efforts bring the multilateral trading system closer to meeting the Sustainable Development Goals by 2030.

In conclusion, he reminded the audience that the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) was founded to aid recovery from war and to avoid a repeat of the destructive trade tensions that existed before the Second World War. Europe moved towards a customs union and then a single market to foster peace and growth, he said. That is what many of the currently acceding countries seek — Bosnia-Herzegovina, Serbia, Sudan, South Sudan, Timor Leste, Somalia and Iraq, to name a few. He highlighted that the last two countries to join the WTO were Afghanistan and Liberia, the latter having suffered the consequences of not only war but also disease with the devastating effects of Ebola.

Source: wto.org

 

Ngày 08/10

83/ Liechtenstein gives CHF 40,000 to deepen negotiating skill-set of developing countries

The government of Liechtenstein is contributing CHF 40,000 to help developing countries and least-developed countries (LDCs) participate more fully in multilateral trade negotiations.

This donation to the WTO’s Doha Development Agenda Global Trust Fund will finance training workshops for officials in Geneva and elsewhere to help them better understand and implement WTO agreements. Over 2,600 workshops have been organized since the fund was created in 2001.

WTO Director-General Roberto Azevêdo said: “Liechtenstein’s donation is very welcome. It will help to promote the participation of developing countries and LDCs in multilateral trade negotiations, thereby furthering their integration into the global economy.”

Liechtenstein’s Ambassador, Peter Matt, said: “Liechtenstein is pleased to be renewing its support for the WTO’s trade-related technical assistance activities aimed at strengthening the participation of developing countries and LDCs in international trade. An inclusive and sustainable multilateral trading system is more important than ever in view of the increasing challenges the WTO is facing.”

Overall, Liechtenstein has donated CHF 600,000 to this trust fund over the last 15 years.

Source: wto.org

 

84/ “The importance of the rules-based multilateral trading system cannot be overestimated”

At a speech delivered to the University of Western Cape in South Africa on 8 October, Deputy Director-General Alan Wolff highlighted the importance of trade as an engine of economic growth and the benefits of WTO membership to the African continent. He also underlined the need for governments to create an enabling domestic environment in order for Africa to thrive in an increasingly open world economy. The text of his remarks is below:

The Vice-Chancellor, Dean of the Faculty of Law, Professors, Students and Distinguished Guests:

I will start by thanking the University of Western Cape for inviting me to speak to you today on “Africa’s Stake in the Multilateral Trading System”.  This University has had a long collaboration with the WTO through the joint UWC/UP Joint LL.M Programme in Trade and Investment Law. The WTO has provided resource persons to teach in the programme.  It is a Pan-African programme which brings together the best students from the continent. Some of the past graduates are working for the WTO and others are working for their national governments in the field of trade policy and also regional economic organizations.  There is no more important contribution to the world trading system than training the next generation of leaders.  That is what you are accomplishing here, and you are to be congratulated for doing so.

The Importance of Trade

Most in this audience will think it unnecessary to make the case for trade.  But in the world today, with the rise of populism in many countries, it is worth reiterating a basic truth.  For this I will use not my words but those of Chiedu Osakwe, Nigerian Chief Trade Negotiator and Director-General Nigerian Office for Trade Negotiations:

“The classical case for trade stands on the basis of an abundance of empirical evidence.  Trade plays a key role in supporting strong growth in the domestic and global economy.  Trade openness and its underpinnings of competition and innovation drive growth.  Countries that trade and are open have consistently demonstrated stronger, sustained growth and resilience in times of crises, in ways that are superior to closed and insular economies with high barriers and restrictions.”

Importance of the WTO

My purpose today is to set out in very broad strokes the benefits of the WTO and the challenges that exist, with particular reference to the interests of Africa in the multilateral trading system.

The importance of the rules-based multilateral trading system cannot be overestimated. It has made a positive contribution to the expansion of the global economy and in the process lifted several millions of people out of poverty Since its establishment on January 1, 1948,  world trade has expanded by 20 times, and world GDP has grown by 15 times.  Despite current negative headlines about the imposition of trade restrictions and increased tariffs, which bombard us almost daily, in fact most of world trade continues to take place in accordance with agreed multilateral rules. These rules have made a valuable contribution over seven decades, and recently proved their worth in the severe economic test of the Financial Crisis and Recession beginning in 2008.

Africa and the WTO

Today, 44 African countries are WTO Members, constituting more than a quarter of the entire membership.

Two African countries were original parties to the GATT in 1947, namely South Africa and present-day Zimbabwe.  By the end of the GATT era, which extended from 1947 through 1994, 41 of the 54 African countries had become GATT contracting parties. Since the founding of the WTO in 1995, an additional three African countries have joined it (Cape Verde, Seychelles and Liberia).

Nine African countries (Comoros, Somalia, Sudan, South Sudan, Ethiopia, Equatorial Guinea, Libya, Sao Tomé and Principe, and Algeria) are in the accession process. This demonstrates a profound shared belief in the potential of the WTO and the rules-based multilateral trading system as a tool for poverty alleviation and economic development.  The system underwrites the effort to attain and maintain peace, much as it did for the original GATT members following the devastation of the Second World War.

In providing reasons for the accession of Liberia to the WTO, Mr. Axel Addy, the then Trade Minister noted that:

“Liberia sees the WTO accession as a process that provides an acceding government with a powerful instrument for domestic reforms to accelerate growth [and] strengthen institutional capacity. [It]…provides a unique opportunity to show the power of trade for poverty reduction; to show that development is not sustainable without trade; to show that trade can trigger economic transformation that is inclusive and sustainable; and, with the right support, the right reforms, the right innovations, we can transform lives using companion policies that support trade.

. . [A]s a post-conflict LDC, Liberia was in a fantastic position to use the accession, as one [with] the domestic reforms, to emerge from the trinity of conflict, health crisis and youth unemployment.”

Countries are willing to go through a process of rigorous domestic reform do so not just to gain better access to the world’s markets but to reduce poverty,  foster domestic growth and attract foreign direct investment.  For many, those that are now or were not long ago affected by conflicts, it is a chance to bolster stability and enjoy better prospects for attaining and maintaining peace.

Notwithstanding the engagement of African countries their share of world trade has fallen, not least because of commodity-dependency in many economies and unfavorable price movements.  But it is also a failure to create a domestic environment that enables their societies to thrive in an increasingly open world economy.

Involvement in the WTO and adherence to its disciplines facilitates a badly needed transformation. Africa’s population is estimated to increase from 1.2 billion persons today to 2.5 billion by 2050 and 4 billion by 2100. While this presents considerable challenges, it also provides opportunities for Africa. The continent can benefit from a demographic dividend and with the right policies can harness its enormous resources.  Economic growth and sustainable development on the African continent will be greatly assisted through increased intra-African trade as well as trade with the rest of the world. Intra-African trade is only around 10% of total trade, which is a very low figure compared to other regions.

The African Continental Free Trade Agreement (AfCFTA) is expected to create an integrated market with harmonised customs and trade rules, facilitating the cross-border flow of goods and services and making Africa more attractive to foreign investors. Trade costs in Africa are among the highest in the world.  This has a negative impact on the competitiveness of African firms and also deters domestic and foreign investment.

The continent is also in need of greatly improved infrastructure to enhance connectedness.  Investments in this area are beginning to make a difference, but there is a long way to go.  Connectedness needs to exist not simply in a physical dimension.  In an increasingly digitalized world, information technology will determine the extent of participation of countries in the global economy.  There is already evidence of technological progress in this respect. Africa is a pioneer in the use of mobile phones to conduct financial transactions. This has benefitted farmers and small businesses who have to contend with information asymmetries.

How the WTO is Supporting African Countries?

The WTO is committed to assisting African countries to harness international trade as a tool for alleviating poverty and achieving robust economic growth and sustainable development. African countries, in their turn, must make an essential contribution to strengthen the trading system at a time when its ideals are being questioned amidst rising populism around the world. The power of trade has been central to lifting several millions of people out of poverty, particularly in China and India.  Why should it not be Africa’s turn next?

The Participation of African Countries at the WTO

Thirty-three out of 54 countries in Africa are officially classified as least developed countries (LDCs) by the United Nations. The development challenges that this implies will not be met overnight, but steady progress in raising living standards, diversifying production structures and engaging in the global economy will be greatly facilitated by the progressive embrace of the disciplines enshrined in the WTO.  Individual WTO members, based on need, can benefit from certain flexibilities in respect of disciplines and commitments.  But that is not the heart of the matter.  Adherence to the rules and disciplines should be the objective.  For this capacity building is essential.  But so is market-opening.  A closed economy stunts the growth of the country that follows that policy, especially in this digital age.   Development needs to be enabled through tailored arrangements not exemptions, and through appropriate domestic policies.  They are intended to empower developing economies and render them more capable of reaping the benefits of specialization through trade.  Preferential margins are eroding.   African countries, and those of other regions need to concentrate on how to make the trading system better for all.

The future economic potential of WTO membership lies in living up to the best practices and the evolving enhanced requirements of the WTO.  It also is to be found in actively considering making positive contributions to leading edge issues, such as E-Commerce and Investment Facilitation.  The potential contribution of E-Commerce to African economies is very great. It offers African exporters the opportunity to gain access to new markets and increase the sales of their products without incurring significant costs.  With respect to investment facilitation, it is beyond argument that African countries need a substantial inflow of foreign direct investment if they are to use international trade as a tool for economic growth and sustainable development. Issues of critical importance to African countries are being addressed by many WTO members. These efforts must be carefully and constructively considered by all WTO members, by no means excluding the nations of Africa.

WTO Technical Assistance and Capacity Building Programs

African countries are significant beneficiaries of WTO technical assistance programmers.  These activities aim at building and strengthening the capacity of African countries to take advantage of current WTO Agreements and also to negotiate more actively to promote and defend their legitimate interests. They are also aimed at enabling African countries to use effectively WTO dispute settlement procedures to protect their interests. Furthermore, the WTO Secretariat has been providing targeted assistance to the nine African countries engaged in accession negotiations to join the WTO.  The WTO is supported by and works closely with other development partners, both international agencies and governments.

Beyond regular technical assistance programs, there are a number of dedicated mechanisms such as the Standards and Trade Development Facility (the STDF) and an Aid for Trade initiative – the Enhanced Integrated Framework (EIF). These bring together partners and resources to support least developed countries in harnessing trade for poverty reduction, inclusive growth and sustainable development.

(i)   The STDF

Standards can either open or close a market to African exports.  While tariffs may slow trade, inability to meet standards can stop trade entirely.  To help developing countries meet international standards, the Standards and Trade Development Facility was formed. It is a joint venture of the WTO, UNCTAD, the World Health Organization, the OIE and the WTO, and is administered by the WTO. I serve on the steering committee of the STDF.

The assistance begins with grants for the preparation of projects.  Africa is the largest beneficiary region of these grants.  Examples include:  reducing aflatoxin contamination in maize (Burkina Faso), improving the safety and quality of pepper (Cameroon), improving capacity to meet market requirements for sesame (Sudan), improving sanitary capacity for livestock exports (Ethiopia), the possibility of creating a foot and mouth disease free zone (Tanzania), fresh meat production (Zimbabwe), strengthening plant health capacity (Zambia, Guinea), improving the safety of fruits and vegetables (Uganda), addressing fruit fly challenges (Mozambique, South Africa), digitalizing pest surveillance (Nigeria), prioritizing sanitary and phytosanitary investments (Madagascar), and developing a national SPS strategy (Togo).

(ii) EIF and Aid for Trade

The Aid for Trade program aims to help developing countries, overcome supply-side and trade-related infrastructural obstacles which constrain their ability to fully engage in international trade.  In adopting the Aid for Trade initiative at the Hong Kong Ministerial Conference in 2005, the WTO membership recognized that investments from both the private and public sector are vitally important to complement access to international markets secured through the multilateral trading system.

A new Aid for Trade work program for 2018-2019 adopted in May 2018 seeks to further develop analyses of how Aid for Trade can contribute to economic diversification and empowerment, with a focus on eliminating extreme poverty, particularly through the effective participation of women and young people in the economy. It will include issues of relevance to African countries such as addressing supply-side capacity and trade-related infrastructure constraints for micro, small and medium-sized enterprises (MSMEs), particularly in rural areas. Industrialization and structural transformation, digital connectivity and skills development, as well as sustainable development and access to energy, are all components of these activities.

The WTO houses a programme specifically dedicated to Aid for Trade, owned and implemented in LDCs. This programme, the Enhanced Integrated Framework, or EIF, channels more than a quarter of a billion dollars into these countries, the majority of which are in Africa. The predominant focus of the program is supporting agribusiness, with over two-thirds of projects being implemented here. For instance, Zambia, one of Africa’s largest exporters of honey to the EU, has increased exports of honey by 700% in the last five years. A key ingredient in this success has been the implementation of a project dedicated to training and equipping around six thousand beekeepers and connecting them to processors and markets. In Malawi, effectively connecting agricultural producers to markets increased sales by more than $47 million last year. At the same time, investments in small-scale soya and groundnut producers has resulted in a doubling of farmers’ incomes.

Recent WTO Agreements and Negotiations of Importance to African Countries

The WTO has delivered significant outcomes of critical importance to African countries in recent years.

With respect to agriculture, an agreement was reached in December 2015 in Nairobi to ban agricultural export subsidies and discipline export measures with equivalent effect, including international food aid. (This makes a substantial and early contribution to United Nations Sustainable Development Goal 2 — ending hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition.

The Trade Facilitation Agreement, which was signed in December 2013 and entered into force in February 2017, when fully implemented, could reduce trade costs by around 15% and boost global trade by up to $1 trillion per year. The biggest gains will accrue to developing countries, including those in Africa. Streamlining, simplifying and standardizing customs procedures and reducing red tape alleviate administrative burdens and the duplication of functions. This will, in turn, increase trade flows, ultimately creating jobs and making a positive contribution to growth.

Cotton.  There have also been some notable achievements on the trade front for cotton at the WTO since the Cotton 4 (Benin, Burkina Faso, Chad and Mali) Sectoral Initiative on Cotton launched in 2003. Under the December 2015 Nairobi Ministerial Decision on Cotton, developed countries and developing countries in a position to do so have committed to grant duty-free and quota-free market access for exports of cotton and cotton-related products from least-developed countries (LDCs). They also agreed on an accelerated timetable for the elimination of export subsidies for cotton. While WTO Members continue to negotiate the critical issue of limiting trade-distorting support to cotton, Ministers have also agreed to enhance transparency on all policy developments affecting cotton through biannual dedicated discussions.  Funds are being raised for cotton-producing African countries to develop the cotton sector by, inter alia, improving local processing capacity and expanding cotton-to-textile value chains at the regional level.

Fisheries subsidies.  WTO Members have recommitted themselves to reach before the next ministerial meeting in 2020 an agreement to limit fishery subsidies.  This has particular importance for the coastal countries of Africa, whose fishermen rely on the ocean for their livelihoods.  With good management policies, Africa could be a leading exporter of fish.  This effort also is related to the core benefit of the WTO, the creation of peace and stability, in that depriving fishermen in some parts of Africa of their livelihoods is seen as one motivation for some turning to piracy.  Where there is a uniform African position it must fully take into account the need of these coastal states.

Recent Developments in the International Trading System and Their Impact on African Countries

Crises can be an engine for positive change.  The history of trade over the last century is often portrayed as an unbroken and immutable march of progress.   In reality, there are cycles, periods of great stress followed by outpourings of energy, that in the end have led to positive outcomes. The greatest improvements in international economic governance appear to be born in upheaval.

Modern trade history begins with the building of high tariff walls in the early 1930s.  This was followed by a burst of negotiating dynamism to sharply reduce tariffs on a reciprocal basis. The Second World War was followed by creation of the international economic institutions that fostered economic recovery and laid the foundations for remarkable world growth.

A quarter century later, in 1971, there was another economic crisis.  The international monetary system proved to be unsustainable. The crisis ultimately led to the creation of the current floating exchange rate system, and for trade, the Tokyo Round of Multilateral Trade Negotiations which yielded the first successful nontariff barrier agreements in the GATT.  In 1993, the then GATT Director General, Arthur Dunkel, concluded that the perceived need for strengthening the world trading system, which resulted in the creation of the WTO, should be attributed to the aggressive use of unilateral measures by the United States in the 1980s.⁽¹⁾

That brings us to the present.  The world trading system is experiencing yet another upheaval.  It can be attributed to reactions to a series of causes – rising income inequality, changes in trade patterns, the movement of peoples, and above all technological change – all forces giving rise to populism and nationalism.  Whatever the causes, it is clear that this is a time of systemic flux.   The results again are unforeseeable. The open question is whether this generation of leadership can find and exploit whatever opportunities may exist for positive ends.

There is reason for optimism that the present challenges to international trade can be overcome.  However, a positive result cannot be achieved through drift and indecision.  It will take an enormous conscious effort on the part of all WTO Members, including African countries, to assure a positive outcome.

The Need for Engagement

The current circumstances must be met by WTO Members and other stakeholders with agility, intelligence and adaptability.  It is not quite the case that whoever does not help set the menu ends up being on the menu, but those WTO Members failing to make a positive contribution to the attempt to shape change will be unlikely to derive benefit to the extent they would have from any changes made in existing trading arrangements had they made a positive contribution to the effort. African countries should support a strengthened multilateral trading system to facilitate world economic growth and be responsive to their needs.

The post-1945 international order, characterized largely by market economies, the rule of law, and rules-based global trade, is of great and continuing value. There is growing recognition among WTO Members of the necessity to update the system in terms of 21st century realities.  Even the strongest critics of the current system conclude that if the WTO did not exist it would have to be created.  A recent article by two analysts – Robert Kagan and Ivo Daalder – sets out a conclusion that many, but perhaps not all Members, have reached.   “The strategies to sustain the present international order are much the same as the strategies that created it. But they need to be adapted and updated to meet new challenges and take advantage of new opportunities”.

What are the present challenges (and opportunities):

• The rise of a major new economic power creates trade friction.  In the last quarter of the last century, this was Japan.  This time it is an even larger nation, China, that has rapidly become a major factor in world trade.
• The discontent with, and consequent threatened disruption, of the WTO dispute settlement system by a major trading country, the United States.
• The growing recognition of the need for an updating of the existing rules by the four largest trading entities – the EU, the US, Japan and China — and a number of mid-sized and smaller economies.
• The dissatisfaction of many developing countries, particularly African countries, with the progress that has been made to spur development through trade.

There will be intensive discussions among WTO Members in the coming months of appropriate responses to current challenges.  The world will not wait for change that unfolds at what has become the norm in international negotiations, measured in decades rather than a few intense years.  And even that may be too long.

The GATT was, at least from this vantage point, characterized by pragmatism, a willingness at key moments of participants to understand the needs of others, and by a good deal of creativity.  Each member must decide for itself what course it will support.  What is certain is that greater contributions will be needed from all countries for the good of the trading system, contributions that go beyond the swapping of product and services concessions on a reciprocal basis.

Nelson Mandela and Kofi Annan, in separate speeches delivered at WTO meetings, emphasized above all that trade is needed to assist economic development in Africa.  In 1998, Nelson Mandela spoke at the WTO, a relatively new organization, then in its fourth year.  In his speech President Mandela stressed the importance of countries working together to ensure benefits for all. The occasion was the WTO’s celebration of the 50th anniversary of the founding of the GATT. His clear-eyed narrative was sober.  Trade was not a panacea.  He said, “trade does not of itself and in itself bring a better world.”  Trade enables it.

In his speech to the WTO Members at the WTO’s 2005 Hong Kong Ministerial Conference, Kofi Annan noted that “the development case for open, equitable trade is not yet won”.

If either of these two remarkable leaders were standing here today, talking to you about the international trading system, I suspect that each would acknowledge the importance of the system and still be dissatisfied.  In fact, all WTO Members should to some extent be dissatisfied.  Constructive discontent can be an agent of positive change.

The hallmark of great leadership is never to abandon one’s aspirations. Nelson Mandela is perhaps best known for the fact that he never gave up, never gave in.  African countries have a lot to gain from the multilateral trading system and they should not give up their aspiration to use international trade to address their numerous development challenges.

Trade is not a zero-sum game. It can make a positive difference for the economic betterment of all peoples.  It can create the conditions for peace. That should not only be an aspiration, it must be a work plan.  African countries should have the opportunity to take advantage of the rules-based multilateral trading system to achieve robust economic growth and sustainable development. This would not only be equitable but would also greatly benefit the world at large.  British Prime Minister, Theresa May, before embarking on a recent trip to Africa, said that “Africa stands right on the cusp of playing a transformative role in the global economy” and that “a more prosperous, growing and trading Africa is in all of our interests”.   I agree.

The potential for Africa to become a leading participant in world trade has long been recognised.  Now is the time to work hard to make this a reality. African countries need to deepen their reforms to improve transparency, reduce trade costs, enhance competitiveness and make the continent attractive to foreign investors, particularly in the non-extractive sectors.  The international community will welcome a stable and prosperous Africa and the WTO stands ready to do its part to ensure the full integration of African countries into the rules-based multilateral trading system.

In the present, those of us who are engaged in working with the international trading system have to make it function as well as we can.  It is then our job to hand over to the next generation, the generation being trained here, in at least as good a condition as how we received it.  Then the future will be in your hands, whether in business, civil society or in public policy in government or in international organizations.  You can carry the multilateral trading system to levels that we can only imagine.

I will close with the words of Nelson Mandela,

“In commemorating the 50th Anniversary of the GATT …, South Africa chooses to look forward rather than deal with the imperfections of the past.

The extent to which all countries benefit will depend on how we, the Member States act in concert to shape the processes. . . .

We are firmly of the belief that the existence of the GATT, and now the World Trade Organization, as a rules-based system, provides the foundation on which our deliberations can build in order to improve”.

I cannot improve upon that sentiment.

Thank you.

Source: wto.org

 

85/ Madagascar launches two safeguard investigations: on pasta and on blankets

On 8 October 2018, Madagascar notified the WTO’s Committee on Safeguards that it initiated on 20 September 2018 two safeguard investigations: one on pasta and another on blankets.

In both notifications Madagascar indicated, among other things, that:

“Any entity wishing to be considered as an interested party must register with the ANMCC [i.e. investigating authority] within 30 days of the date of initiation of the investigation. Any comments, information or requests that interested parties wish to forward to the investigating authority should be submitted within 30 days of the date of initiation of the investigation.

[…]

The address of the investigating authority to which correspondence should be sent is:

Monsieur Le Directeur Général de l’Autorité Nationale chargée des Mesures Correctives Commerciales (ANMCC)
Enceinte Ex-Conquête Antanimena, Antananarivo 101 – Madagascar
E-mail: dg.anmcc@gmail.com; site web: http://www.anmcc.mg/ ”

Further information is available in G/SG/N/6/MDG/1 and G/SG/N/6/MDG/2.

What is a safeguard investigation?

A safeguard investigation seeks to determine whether increased imports of a product are causing, or is threatening to cause, serious injury to a domestic industry.

During a safeguard investigation, importers, exporters and other interested parties may present evidence and views and respond to the presentations of other parties.

A WTO member may take a safeguard action (i.e. restrict imports of a product temporarily) only if the increased imports of the product are found to be causing, or threatening to cause, serious injury.

Source: wto.org

 

86/ Trade turns growth engine for globalizing Vietnam

Vietnam’s trade as a percentage of GDP topped 200 percent last year, highest for any country with over 50 million people.

This data, compiled by the World Bank, shows that the country is reaping the benefits of an open economy at a time that protectionism is on the rise, as can be seen by the U.K’s exit from the E.U. and the rising trade tensions between the U.S. and China.

The figure of trade as a percentage of GDP is calculated by dividing the value of exports and imports by GDP, and the proportion of Vietnam is higher than that of China, Germany, Japan, the Philippines, Thailand and the U.S.

From 2011 to 2016, world’s trade as a percentage of GDP went down from 60.5 percent to 56.2 percent, according to World Bank.

In the same period, that figure in the U.S. decreased from 30.8 percent to 26.5 percent, while in China, it fell from 50 percent to 37 percent.

Since the Vietnamese government began pursuing its open door policy in 1986, foreign direct investment (FDI) has flowed in, attracted by the advantage of low-cost manufacturing.

Since then, Vietnam has entered many bilateral and multilateral free trade agreements including the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) and the EU – Vietnam Free Trade Agreement (EVFTA).

Vietnam has been reaffirming its open economy policy consistently. Last month, Prime Minister Nguyen Xuan Phuc said Vietnam’s development demonstrated that trade was an important driver for growth and employment.

“Protectionism is not the answer for the prosperity of nations,” he told Singaporean newspaper The Strait Times.

Vietnam’s trade turnover reached $312.1 billion in the first eight months this year, up 14.5 percent year-on-year, according to Vietnam Customs. The country also enjoyed a record-high trade surplus of $4.69 billion in this period.

The U.S. was the largest export market for Vietnam in the period, with a value of $30.8 billion, followed by the E.U. at $27.8 billion and China at $24.4 billion.

The World Bank has forecast that the Vietnamese economy will grow by 6.8 percent this year.

Source: VnExpress

 

Ngày 09/10

87/ IFC-WTO event: “Financial inclusion in trade: Reducing the global trade finance gap”

Remarks by DG Azevêdo

Excellencies,
Ladies and gentlemen,

Good afternoon.

It’s a pleasure to co-host this event on trade finance with the IFC today. Thank you for joining us.

Over the past few years our institutions have strengthened our dialogue on trade finance. This initiative today is another important addition to those efforts.

There is no doubt that trade finance is a very important policy issue.

80% of global trade transactions require some sort of financial credit or a guarantee.

This means that, to finance 18 trillion dollars in annual flows of trade, there needs to be a well-functioning trade finance market of about 14 trillion dollars.

This is about a quarter of the world’s short-term capital movements. Around 9 trillion of this market is served by banks, the rest is inter-company lending.

Despite the importance of trade finance, a number of problems have emerged since the financial crisis. Supply and demand have become unbalanced. Perceived regulatory risk, combined with the low capacity of the financial sector in some countries, has resulted in big gaps in provision.

Today, the Asian Development Bank estimates that the global gap in trade finance is about $1.5 trillion. This represents the amount of trade finance that has been requested by importers and exporters, but rejected.

The World Economic Forum estimates that the trade finance gap could widen further still, reaching 2.5 trillion dollars by 2025 as supply chains move away from China to poorer developing countries.

The gap we see today already represents a significant barrier to trade. Surveys suggest that in half of the countries of the world, trade finance represents one of the top three obstacles to exporting. (Other key obstacles include transport infrastructure and efficiency of border administration.)

It is of particular concern that this gap affects developing countries and smaller businesses the most. Today, 60% of trade finance requests by SMEs are rejected.

In many developing countries, and especially in least-developed countries, the alternatives to bank financing are scarce. When rejected by banks, the transaction is abandoned.

We had a WTO team in Cambodia just a few weeks ago, helping the government look at the situation in trade finance. And it provides a useful illustration.

In Cambodia, SMEs account for 90% of exports. However, those who want to export have to pay for their inputs in advance, and lending locally is collateralized by land. This means that land-less, cashless businesses end up excluded from access to essential trade finance.

This is just one example, but the same story plays out in many other economies. Opportunities for growth and development are being lost.

So it’s clear to me that action is needed. And over recent years we have been building a coalition to that end.

Philippe and I joined forces and started reaching out to the heads of the regional development banks, the Chair of the Financial Stability Board, and many others. Together I think we’ve taken some important steps.

Let me highlight some specific areas where progress has been made.

Firstly, we have enhanced existing trade finance facilitation programmes.

In 2016, these programmes supported around 22 billion dollars in trade transactions. In 2017, this amount increased to 30 billion. And in 2018, it is estimated that over 35 billion dollars of trade will be supported by these programmes. This would amount to an increase of more than 50% compared to just two years ago.

That is important progress.

The Asian Development Bank supported trade transactions of more than 2,500 SMEs last year – covering countries such as Myanmar, Pakistan and Bangladesh. And they continue to see very strong demand. In fact, the Board of the Asian Development Bank has increased the limit of guarantees to be provided under the bank’s programme by 350 million dollars. This is an increase of around 20%.

I understand that the African Development Bank is also seeking an enhancement of its guarantee programme for trade.

In addition, we are seeing banks working more closely together to provide better coverage. In July 2017, the heads of Islamic Trade Finance Corporation and IFC met at the WTO and signed a memorandum of understanding to pursue joint financing in Africa.

All of this is very positive. We need to keep making progress on enhancing these programmes.

So that’s the first area.

The second area we need to tackle is addressing knowledge gaps in local financial institutions.

Again we have some encouraging news.

We have been working with partners to pool existing efforts. Multilateral development banks have boosted their capacity building work on trade finance, in collaboration with the International Chamber of Commerce. Together they trained nearly 2,600 people in 2017, across 85 countries.

This is very impressive. I hope that we can further expand the reach of these programmes by bringing new partners on board.

And that brings me to the third area I wanted to highlight – which is increasing dialogue with regulators.

A renewed regulatory dialogue could help build capacity in smaller, local banks to respond to the trade finance demand. And it could help to encourage larger banks potentially to return to markets that they withdrew from after the financial crisis.

The heads of the FSB, IFC and I agreed that our organizations should work together to see how we could address some of these aspects.

In fact, the FSB has made progress in the past couple of years in updating and clarifying regulatory expectations – notably on anti-money laundering and know-your-customer regulations. We are also looking at the possibility of joint technical assistance missions, helping to build knowledge on trade finance and on compliance requirements.

We should also explore ways to help overcome issues related to trust and confidence-building between SMEs and financial operators. New technologies can be important here – such as blockchain for example. Innovations such as the FSB’s new legal entity identifier may also make a difference here.

So that’s where things stand today.

We have made huge progress, but of course, there is still a lot of work to do.

We need to make global trade more inclusive. But trade inclusion needs financial inclusion.

So we need to continue developing concrete ideas and solutions that make a real difference.

Working with a range of partners – including the private sector – can help provide momentum to this work. So I’m glad to have you all here today.

I look forward to our discussions – and to seeing what more we can achieve by working together.

Thank you.

Source: wto.org

 

88/ WTO joins with IFC, regional development banks and IMF to boost financial inclusion in trade

The World Trade Organization and six other international organizations* pledged today (9 October 2018) to deliver greater financial inclusion in trade.

At a special session during the Annual Meetings of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) in Nusa Dua, Bali, Indonesia, the organizations committed themselves to finding ways to close the gaps in trade finance provision.

During the event Director-General Roberto Azevêdo said:

“Despite the importance of trade finance, a number of problems have emerged since the financial crisis. Supply and demand have become unbalanced. Perceived regulatory risk, combined with the low capacity of the financial sector in some countries, has resulted in big gaps in provision. Today, the Asian Development Bank estimates that the global gap in trade finance is about $1.5 trillion. This gap represents a significant barrier to trade. It is of particular concern that this gap affects developing countries and smaller businesses the most. Today, 60% of trade finance requests by SMEs are rejected.

“Opportunities for growth and development are being lost. So it’s clear to me that action is needed. Over recent years we have been building a coalition to that end. Philippe (Le Houérou, CEO of the International Finance Corporation) and I joined forces and started reaching out to the heads of the regional development banks, the Chair of the Financial Stability Board, and many others. Together I think we’ve taken some important steps.”

DG Azevêdo outlined the significant progress that has already been made in recent years, including to enhance the trade finance programs of key institutions. These programs are expected to support over $35 billion of trade this year, which is an increase of more than 50% over two years. He also outlined progress in addressing the knowledge gaps in local financial institutions, and in increasing dialogue with regulators to ensure that necessary financial regulations do not have unintended consequences for trade finance, which is a very low risk form of lending. He pointed to further actions which are needed in each of these areas.

“We need to make global trade more inclusive. But trade inclusion needs financial inclusion. So we need to continue developing concrete ideas and solutions that make a real difference. Working with a range of partners — including the private sector — can help provide momentum to this work,”  DG Azevêdo said.

* International Finance Corporation (a member of the World Bank Group), International Islamic Trade Finance Corporation (a member of the Islamic Development Bank Group), the International Monetary Fund, the Africa Export-Import Bank, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development and the Financial Stability Board

Source: wto.org

 

89/ Members exchange experiences with implementing the Trade Facilitation Agreement

At the 9-11 October meeting of the Committee on Trade Facilitation, WTO members held discussions on their respective policies and experiences in enhancing the efficient movement of goods across borders in order to help each other fully implement the Trade Facilitation Agreement (TFA). Members also took stock of progress made, and of activities being organized, to support the Agreement’s implementation.

A number of delegations delivered presentations on their experiences with screening “authorized economic operators” eligible for eased customs procedures. Members were also given presentations on transit policies for goods destined for third countries, the implementation of “single windows” for traders to accomplish multiple transactions with several agencies through one contact point, and the benefits of providing advance rulings to traders who may want clarity on the duties they will be expected to pay at the country of destination before the goods are shipped.

Members welcomed the richness of the discussions, the high number of questions and comments, and the attendance of capital-based experts at the meeting. The Committee chair, Ms Dalia Kadišiene (Lithuania), said the discussions were valuable and that there would be more opportunities for such exchanges at the next meeting.

Members also considered an update from the WTO Secretariat on the progress made in ratifying and implementing the TFA. As of 9 October, 84 per cent of the membership, or 138 members, had submitted their acceptance instruments for the Agreement, which entered into force on 22 February 2017, when the WTO crossed the required threshold of 110 member ratifications. Uganda and Burkina Faso were the latest to ratify the TFA since the last Committee meeting in June.

The current rate of implemented commitments under the TFA stands at 60.8 per cent. Broken down by level of development, this equates to a 100 per cent rate of implementation by developed members, 59.6 per cent among developing members and 22.3 per cent among least developed countries (LDCs). Developed countries committed to implement the Agreement in full upon its entry into force, while developing and least-developed members set their own timetables for implementing the TFA, taking into account their respective capacities. These commitments have been communicated to the WTO in a series of notifications.

Under the Agreement, developing countries will immediately apply the TFA provisions they have designated as Category A commitments. For the other provisions of the Agreement, they must indicate when these will be implemented and what capacity-building support is needed to help them implement these provisions, known as Category B and C commitments. These can be implemented at a later date, with LDCs given more time to notify these commitments.

So far, the WTO has received notifications from 114 members of Category A commitments, approaching the overall number of notifications in this area that is expected to be received. The current number of Category B notifications stands at 71, and at 60 notifications for Category C.

The Committee reviewed a total of 21 new notifications from members regarding their respective timetables and assistance needs to implement provisions of the TFA, import and export procedures and other information helpful for traders and governments, and details of available and requested technical assistance and support for capacity building. Members debated how to improve discussions of notifications for future meetings. Norway said it would be soon circulating to members a proposal on formalizing the Committee’s rules of procedure.

Members also heard updates on recent and upcoming activities and discussed the administration of the Trade Facilitation Agreement Facility, which was set up to help developing and LDC members assess their specific needs and to identify possible development partners to help them meet those needs.

The next meeting of the Committee on Trade Facilitation will be held in February.

Source: wto.org

 

90/ Vietnam plays important role in Mekong-Japan cooperation mechanism

Vietnam has participated proactively and made significant contributions to the Mekong-Japan cooperation mechanism, which was set up ten years ago by Japan and five Mekong nations of Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, Thailand, and Vietnam.

In the past decade, Vietnam has affirmed its increasingly important role in the cooperation mechanism by actively involving a line-up of activities like the Green Mekong Forum, and cooperative programmes in environment, clean water, disaster prevention, among others.

The country is drawing up a plan for the cooperative activities in 2019-2021 period.

Vietnamese ministries and sectors have involved in some 100 projects carried out in the framework of the mechanism. Among them, Lach Huyen deep-water port, Noi Bai International Airport’s terminal 2, O Mon thermal power plant, and Nghi Son 2 thermal power plant are important projects to Vietnam’s infrastructure system. Thanks to the mechanism, the country has already built and operated an electric customs clearance system and produced measles-rubella vaccine.

Besides, it has put forth projects to connect the Sub-Mekong region and integrate the Mekong water resources management into the cooperation mechanism.

Japan recommended the Japan-Mekong partnership programme at the 12th ASEAN Summit in 2007. Since then, member countries of the cooperation mechanism has organised nine high-level meetings, 11 ministerial meetings and economic ministers’ meetings, reaching various agreements.

During 2009-2012, their cooperation focused on soft and hard infrastructure, sustainable development, narrowing development gap, environmental protection, response to challenges like diseases and natural disasters, and enhancing exchanges between Mekong countries and Japan.

Meanwhile, they worked together to bolster connection within the Sub-Mekong region, between the Sub-Mekong region with other parts of the world, and between Mekong countries and Japan during 2013-2015. Also, the Mekong development roadmap for 2012-2015, and the Mekong-Japan Economic and Industrial Cooperation Initiative were carried out.

For 2016-2018 period, aiming to attain the “quality growth”, and continue sustainable economic development, the countries joined hands to branch out industrial infrastructure as well as develop transport links between Mekong countries and other regions. In addition, they worked to expand industrial sectors and regional value chain, improve human resources, foster institutional and economic connection and people-to-people exchanges, and accelerate sustainable development towards a green Mekong.

At the 7th Mekong-Japan Summit Meeting in Tokyo on July 4, 2015, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe announced the official development assistance of about 750 billion JPY, or US$7 billion, to the five Mekong countries to carry out the New Tokyo Strategy 2015 for Mekong-Japan Cooperation. Japan also prioritised the Sub-Mekong region when carry out the “Partnership for Quality Infrastructure” initiative in collaboration with the Asian Development Bank. The US$110 billion project aimed to developing high-quality infrastructure in Asia-Pacific.

Furthermore, the Mekong Industrial Development Vision for the 2016-2018 period has been carried out under the Mekong-Japan cooperation mechanism.-

Source: VNA

 

Ngày 10/10

91/ WTO, IMF, World Bank and OECD heads call for new focus on trade as a driver of growth

At a meeting in Bali, Indonesia, on 10 October, the heads of four international organisations issued a strong call to ease trade tensions and refocus on the importance of trade and the multilateral trading system in fuelling economic growth. This call was made by Director-General Roberto Azevêdo, together with IMF Managing Director Christine Lagarde, World Bank President Jim Kim and OECD Secretary General Angel Gurria, at a jointly-organised conference under the theme “How global trade can promote growth for all.”

DG Azevêdo said:

“The trading system is not perfect — but it represents the best efforts of governments around the world, working together for 70 years, to find ways to cooperate on trade issues. It took a lot of people and a lot of time to push the boulder this far up the hill. Even keeping it in place requires constant effort.

“Today the WTO covers around 98% of global trade. It is has overseen a historic opening of markets and integration of economies. Since 1980, average tariffs have been cut by two thirds. The system has provided stability and predictability in global trade — holding firm even during the financial crisis. And, as a result, it has helped to fuel unprecedented growth and development around the world, as well as a dramatic reduction in poverty. The system has real value. So we have to keep working at it.

“We have to explore all avenues which could ease the current tensions and strengthen the trading system. We all know the risks of further escalation — risks to the economy and risks to the trading system itself, which would multiply the economic risks over the long term. We can’t let that happen. We need trade and the trading system to play their part in fuelling growth — just as they have done so effectively for seven decades.”

Source: wto.org

 

92/ IMF-WB-WTO-OECD Conference ‘How global trade can promote growth for all’

Speech

Ladies and gentlemen, good morning.

It’s a pleasure to be here – and to be joining forces with Christine, Jim and Angel for this important conference, at this crucial moment in global trade.

Today’s event is intended to reinforce some economic fundamentals – specifically the importance of trade for growth.

It seems that we have a disconnect here.

New polling presented at the WTO last week shows that most people believe trade is positive. In advanced economies, on average, 88% of people said ‘trade is good’. In emerging economies it was 83%. Even in the US it was 74%.

But despite this broad and instinctive support for trade in principle, it seems that people still doubt its specific benefits for them.

This raises a range of issues for domestic policy. But it also raises questions about how we see trade and its role in the economy. For example, very few people believe that trade lowers prices. Yet most economists would say that this is among the clearest benefits that trade delivers.

This is important because if we start to doubt these fundamentals of why trade matters, then gradually we will stop valuing and safeguarding the mechanisms that make trade possible in the way we know it today.

And of course one such mechanism is the multilateral trading system.

Now, let me be clear, the trading system is not perfect – but it represents the best efforts of governments around the world, working together for 70 years, to find ways to cooperate on trade issues.

It took a lot of people and a lot of time to push the boulder this far up the hill. Even keeping it in place requires constant effort.

Today the WTO covers around 98% of global trade.

It is has overseen a historic opening of markets and integration of economies. Since 1980 average tariffs have been cut by two thirds.

The system has provided stability and predictability in global trade – holding firm even during the financial crisis.

And, as a result, it has helped to fuel unprecedented growth and development around the world, as well as a dramatic reduction in poverty.

The system has real value. So we have to keep working at it.

We should acknowledge that progress in delivering new trade reforms has been slow in recent years. In fact, between the creation of the WTO in 1995 and 2013 when we met right here in Bali there were virtually no new reforms at all. With that meeting we began to change that story.

We delivered a run of major deals with significant economic impact, including:

• The Trade Facilitation Agreement, which was struck here in Bali,
• The expanded Information Technology Agreement,
• The deal to abolish export subsidies in agriculture,
• And a number of other steps – on food security and in support of LDCs for example.

This is very positive. But it is not enough. Progress in many key areas has been stalled for some years. And in the meantime the world hasn’t stopped. New economic priorities have emerged. Technology is transforming how we produce and how we trade. Geopolitics continue to evolve.

All of this has given rise to a new debate about how to make the WTO more effective.

This debate has taken off in recent months. Many leaders have committed to working together on this reform agenda.

And in this context it is vital that everyone who believes in the system raises their voice.

We all have a role to play here – and that includes the private sector. I very much welcome the new ‘Global Dialogue on Trade’ which the ICC is launching here in Bali later today.

We have to explore all avenues which could ease the current tensions and strengthen the trading system.

We all know the risks of further escalation – risks to the economy and risks to the trading system itself, which would multiply the economic risks over the long term.

We can’t let that happen.

We need trade and the trading system to play their part in fuelling growth – just as they have done so effectively for seven decades.

So I look forward to our debate today – and to your support in this effort.

Thank you.

Source: wto.org

 

93/ Market Access Committee sees considerable increase in activity

The Committee on Market Access saw a considerable increase inactivity at the meeting held on 10 October. The committee noted the substantial progress made on the updating of WTO members’ schedules, examined a number of notifications on quantitative restrictions (QRs), and considered ten specific trade concerns raised by delegations.

WTO schedules of concessions have been regularly changed and updated since 1995, so it is important for the Committee on Market Access to keep track of them (a list of the changes can be found here). These include a series of modifications necessary to reflect amendments to the Harmonized System (HS), an international classification nomenclature administered by the World Customs Organization (WCO) which is updated every 5-6 years.

Updating these legal instruments is critical to properly monitor the hundreds of thousands of tariff concessions that have been negotiated in the WTO context, as schedules are intended to provide security, transparency and predictability to the multilateral trading system.

WTO members took note of progress made on five ongoing HS transposition exercises (HS96, HS2002, H2007, HS2012 and HS2017) and welcomed the announcement by the chair of the committee, Zsófia Tvaruskó of Hungary, that the special procedures for the transposition into HS96 of the schedules of 64 developing countries and least-developed countries (LDCs) had been finally concluded.

The committee agreed to forward to the General Council, through the Council for Trade in Goods (CTG), the extension of four collective waivers relating to the HS2002, HS2007, HS2012 and HS2017 transposition exercises, and discussed the specific HS2017 transposition methodology that will be used by the Secretariat.

In addition to taking note of the revised report by the Secretariat concerning Article XXVIII renegotiations, which allows WTO members to modify or withdraw concessions from their schedules through negotiation and agreement with other members, and adopting the Draft Report (2018) of the Committee to the Council for Trade in Goods, members discussed a number of trade concerns.

Members reviewed 11 notifications on quantitative restrictions (QRs), including seven new submissions.  Note was taken of five notifications, and members agreed to revert back to the remaining six, which have remained outstanding for some time because either they relate to specific trade concerns or members have requested additional information. Quantitative restrictions generally refer to prohibitions and restrictions other than tariffs and taxes that members implement to take account of certain concerns, such as the protection of human, animal and plant health, the environment, or even national security concerns (more on the issue here).

The Committee on Market Access also oversees the tariff and import data administered by the WTO. In this regard, members heard a report by the WTO Secretariat concerning the Consolidated Tariff Schedules (CTS) database and notifications to the Integrated Database (IDB). Since the decision by the General Council to establish the IDB dates back to more than 20 years, the committee agreed to launch discussions on possible ways to improve it.

Some of the specific issues discussed by the Committee include:

European Union — renegotiation of tariff rate quotas (TRQs)

Several members expressed concern over the methodology and the accuracy of the import data that had been provided by the European Union to justify its proposal to modify its current WTO commitments as a consequence of the upcoming exit of the United Kingdom from the EU. These statistics do not meet the requirements of Article XXVIII and the relevant procedures, because they include trade with preferential partners and non-WTO suppliers, according to those members that requested the EU to submit corrected statistics. They also questioned whether a renegotiation can be undertaken based on an “uncertified” schedule for the 28 EU members. The EU replied that having an uncertified schedule did not prevent it from engaging in Article XXVIII negotiations and that it would be addressing bilaterally the concerns over the statistics. It also stressed its intention is to analyze any claims submitted by WTO members as part of the ongoing negotiations and in full conformity with its obligations

Rectifications and modifications of Schedule XIX – United Kingdom

Members acknowledged the difficulty of the Brexit process and called for a mutually acceptable solution that is as close as possible to WTO rules. The lack of compensatory adjustment and the fact that the UK was copying an uncertified EU-28 schedule, which may contain errors, was a concern expressed by delegations.

Members also shared concerns over the approach proposed for determining post-Brexit goods trade commitments as, in their view, they could result in substantial reductions in market access commitments, especially with regards to TRQs, as well as the UK’s large farm subsidy claim. Moreover, they went on, the UK proposal does not identify how the EU would be treated in the UK’s market access commitments. In the view of these members, these are matters of general and systemic concern, and Brexit should not result in a loss of market access that was established through previously negotiated outcomes.

The European Union took the floor to indicate that it was not in a positon to respond to questions on the UK’s proposed goods schedule, which will take effect when the EU’s schedule stops applying to the UK.  It also invited members having expressed concerns to engage directly with the UK government.

Other trade concerns brought up in the Committee on Market Access included India’s duties on telecommunication and other products, Australia’s market access prohibition on 5G telecommunications equipment, the enlargement of the EU to include Croatia, India’s quantitative restrictions on certain pulses, a selective tax on energy drinks, carbonated drinks and other products applied by three GCC countries, Oman’s customs duties on cigarettes, and the Russian Federation’s QRs on birch logs.

Next meeting

The next formal meeting of the Committee is provisionally scheduled for 28 May 2019, and the next HS Multilateral Reviews are scheduled for 6 November 2018 and 5 February 2019.

The Committee also elected Mr. Diego Nunes Oger Fonseca of Brazil as new vice chair.

More information about market access for goods and the work of the Committee on Market Access is available here.

Source: wto.org

 

94/ Poorest countries call for review of preferential access for exporters of services

At a meeting of the Services Council on 12 October 2018, least-developed countries suggested steps to help their exporters of services use the preferential treatment made available as per a WTO 2011 Ministerial Decision aimed at supporting their development objectives. In addition, a seminar held on 10 October discussed the temporary access to foreign markets for individuals travelling to supply services, also known as “mode 4”.

LDC Services Waiver

At the meeting on 12 October, the WTO group of least-developed countries (LDCs) called on the Services Council to review the operation of the preferential treatment notified by 24⁽¹⁾ WTO members in favour of LDC services and services providers. The notifications relate to the “LDC Services Waiver” approved by ministers at the 2011 WTO Ministerial Conference, which gives WTO members a waiver from their obligation of non-discrimination under WTO rules to support the development needs of LDCs through increased participation in trade. The list of notifications is available here.

On behalf of the LDC group, Chad said that despite increasing revenue generated from tourism exports — USD 18 billion in 2017 from USD 10 billion in 2010 — LDCs’ share of world services exports in 2017 remained critically low, at 0.6%. LDCs highlighted once again the importance of services trade as a source of revenue and for realizing their social and sustainable development objectives.

LDCs called on members to reflect on ways to support the implementation of the waiver and to share information on their technical assistance programmes to promote LDC participation in services trade.

E-commerce

Several WTO members shared information about technical assistance programmes they carry out in developing countries related to the digital economy, including to address the digital divide between developed and developing countries. One member provided information about a new legislative initiative related to e-commerce. Some members underscored that the WTO discussions on e-commerce were not intended for rule-making and called on members to focus on assessing the challenges faced by the poorer economies when participating in e-commerce.

A representative from the United Nations International Telecommunication Union announced the endorsement in July of Best Practice Guidelines on New Regulatory Frontiers by 93 member states, which aim at supporting innovation and progress throughout the digital transformation.

Services suppliers seeking to access foreign markets through “mode 4”

A seminar held at the WTO on 10 October 2018 provided an overview of the scope of mode 4, offering also a snapshot of the specific commitments undertaken by WTO members. Participants also discussed the challenges of measuring mode 4 trade and its economic impact and mode 4 access and pertinent regulatory disciplines negotiated in regional trade agreements. The regulatory measures that may impact mode 4 commitments scheduled⁽²⁾ by WTO members were also discussed, along with the challenges of realizing the benefits that stem from existing mode 4 bindings. Presenters included WTO members, the WTO Secretariat, academia, the private sector and other international organizations.

Members’ concerns about certain services-related measures

Cybersecurity — measures by China

The United States and Japan — supported by Australia, Canada, the European Union, New Zealand and Chinese Taipei — reiterated concerns about existing and proposed cybersecurity measures by China. Concerned members fear these measures could significantly impair cross-border transfers of even routine information and would place foreign suppliers operating in China at a competitive disadvantage compared to their Chinese counterparts.Members asked China to provide further information and responses to the concerns raised.

China said it has addressed members’ concerns and questions in the past and asked that each member’s right to regulate to safeguard cyberspace sovereignty and national security be respected, particularly as other members’ related regulations may also be a source of concern. It added that its legislative process was ongoing and that stakeholders, including foreign ones, have been consulted throughout.

Cybersecurity — measures by Viet Nam

The US and Japan — backed by Australia, Canada, the EU, New Zealand and Chinese Taipei — reiterated their concerns about the cybersecurity law recently adopted by Viet Nam.  The law imposes data localisation and local presence requirements on certain service suppliers which, according to these members, add disproportionate financial and administrative burdens on foreign services providers, thus placing them at a competitive disadvantage compared to their Vietnamese counterparts.

Viet Nam said that the law was designed to meet legitimate national public policy objectives related to cybersecurity in a WTO-compatible manner. Viet Nam also said its legislative process has been open and transparent.

Request for transparency

For increased transparency, India requested that the EU notify to the Council its new General Data Protection Regulation aimed at protecting data privacy across the EU, which came into force on 25 May 2018.

Source: wto.org

 

Ngày 12/10

95/ Indonesia Launches Safeguard Investigation on Aluminium Foil

On 11 October 2018, Indonesia notified the WTO’s Committee on Safeguards that it initiated on 9 October 2018 a safeguard investigation on aluminium foil.

In the notification, Indonesia indicated, among other things, as follows:

“(i)       Those having substantial interest and wishing to be considered as interested parties in this investigation should submit written request within a period of 15 days in Indonesia from the date of initiation to the Investigating Authority. All submissions and request made by interested parties must be sent both in written letter and in electronic format, and must indicate the name, address, e-mail address, telephone and fax number of the interested parties.
(ii)        In Accordance with article 3.1 WTO Agreement on Safeguard, the Government of the Republic of Indonesia will conduct a hearing in order to provide opportunities for those Members who having a substantial interest to present their evidence and views, Hearing is scheduled to be held on Monday, 29 October 2018 at 10.00-12.00 am. All interested parties, who wish to participate in the hearing and present their evidences and views, should submit related documents to the Investigating Authority not later than 25 October 2018. Registration on the day of the hearing (29 October 2018) will start at 09.00 am and only authorized representatives will have access to the hearing.”

Further information is available in G/SG/N/6/IDN/29.

What is a safeguard investigation?

A safeguard investigation seeks to determine whether increased imports of a product are causing, or is threatening to cause, serious injury to a domestic industry.

During a safeguard investigation, importers, exporters and other interested parties may present evidence and views and respond to the presentations of other parties.

A WTO member may take a safeguard action (i.e. restrict imports of a product temporarily) only if the increased imports of the product are found to be causing, or threatening to cause, serious injury.

Source: wto.org

 

96/ Workshop promotes comprehensive approach to trade, IP and health disciplines

Government officials from 28 developing and least developed country (LDC) WTO members and one observer participated in the 14th Workshop on Trade and Public Health, which took place in Geneva from 8 to 12 October 2018.

The “Trade and Health Workshop” is an advanced and multidisciplinary activity. It was organized by the WTO Secretariat, in close collaboration with the secretariats of the World Health Organization (WHO) and the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). It followed the approach developed in the WHO-WIPO-WTO Trilateral Study “Promoting Access to Medical Technologies and Innovation: Intersections between Public Health, Intellectual Property and Trade”.

The programme of the workshop has evolved over the last 13 years to cover the link between trade and public health in a comprehensive and multidisciplinary manner in order to build the capacity of governments in developing countries and LDCs to take effective and coherent policy decisions.

The aspects covered by the workshop included: public health determinants; the intellectual property system; pricing and procurement policies; competition policy and rules; tariffs, quotas and licensing; health services; and regulatory issues.  Under regulatory issues, participants looked at approval, quality control and effectiveness of medicines, the protection of clinical trial data under the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS), and health-related measures in the Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) and the Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS).

Thirty-four speakers from international organizations and the private sector shared their experience and facilitated interactive debates on cross-cutting themes linking trade agreements to topical issues, such as antimicrobial resistance and non-communicable diseases. Participants also contributed actively to case studies over the course of the week. For the first time, this year’s programme included a field visit to a manufacturer of medical devices.

The 28 participants are currently working in health, trade or intellectual property areas and came from: Brazil, Burkina Faso, Chile, Costa Rica, Cuba, Egypt, Guatemala, Haiti, Indonesia, Jamaica, Jordan, Mauritius, Myanmar, Nigeria, Oman, Peru, Philippines, Samoa, Serbia, Singapore, Suriname, Tanzania, Thailand, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Togo, Turkey, Uganda, Ukraine and Vanuatu. The group also included one participant from Canada and one from Estonia, as well as one from the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria. In their feedback, participants welcomed the workshop as a useful tool to look at public health challenges through different lenses.

The next Trade and Public Health Workshop will be organized in the autumn of 2019. To respond to demands by members, the WTO also holds tailor-made regional activities on issues at the crossroads between trade and health. The first regional activity took place in Brazil for countries from the Latin American region (21-23 November 2017); the second will be jointly organized with WHO and WIPO in Kuwait, for Arab and Middle Eastern countries (8 to 22 November 2018); and the third is envisaged to take place in Burkina Faso for the West African Economic and Monetary Union (UEMOA) member states, in early 2019.

Source: wto.org

 

97/ World Standards Day 2018 puts the spotlight on the Fourth Industrial Revolution

We are living in a digital age where the traditional boundaries between the physical and virtual spheres are becoming increasingly blurred. This has given rise to the Fourth Industrial Revolution, which is characterized by disruptive technologies such as artificial intelligence, robotics, nanotechnology and the Internet of Things. On World Standards Day, we highlight the crucial role of International Standards.

The Fourth Industrial Revolution affects almost every industry in every country as innovative cyber-physical systems evolve. The convergence of technologies holds immense opportunities, but also presents an array of ethical, economic and scientific challenges. The rapid pace of change has no historical precedent and society cannot help but question the issues related to long-term sustainability.

International Standards can help shape our future. Not only do standards support the development of tailor-made solutions for all industries, they are also the tools to spread best practices, knowledge and innovation globally. International Standards have always had a pivotal role in enabling the smooth adoption of technologies.

In the same way that standards were crucial during the First Industrial Revolution, supporting the specialized mass production of manufactured goods, they will continue to play a critical role in this new era. Standards will ensure compatibility and interoperability around the globe, helping society to adopt technologies seamlessly as they emerge in the future.

That’s why today, 14 October, we dedicate World Standards Day to “International Standards and the Fourth Industrial Revolution”. Each year, under the banner of the World Standards Cooperation (WSC), the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) joins ISO and the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in celebrating the collaborative efforts of the thousands of experts worldwide who develop International Standards.

Source: iso.org

 

98/ European firms upbeat about free trade pact with Vietnam

Nine out of ten European companies want the European Union-Vietnam Free Trade Agreement (EVFTA) to be implemented next year, or as soon as possible thereafter, according to a report released by the European Chamber of Commerce in Vietnam (EuroCham).

EuroCham disclosed the information at an event in Brussels, Belgium on Monday during the release of its latest report, “The EVFTA: Perspectives from Vietnam,” together with amfori and BusinessEurope. This launch event, with 70 participants, is part of a EuroCham mission to the European Parliament and European Commission to push for a quick ratification of the EVFTA.

EuroCham’s report includes the results of a new survey of the Chamber’s members, who were asked how the EVFTA will affect their business operations. Over 130 responded – more than 10% of EuroCham’s membership – and the results were striking.

Just under 80% of EuroCham members believe that the trade pact will have either a ‘significant’ or ‘moderate’ impact on their business in the medium and long-term.

Meanwhile, over 80% believe that the pact will result in Vietnam becoming more competitive compared to other regional countries, and 72% said that it will help Vietnam to become a hub for European business in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations region.

On top of the positive economic benefits, EuroCham members believe that the EVFTA will help improve a range of social and environmental issues in Vietnam, from welfare and environmental protection to transfers of knowledge, the advancement of the local workforce and workers’ rights.

Of note, 33% of EuroCham members believe that the pact will have a ‘significant’ impact on improving sustainable development and environmental protection.

The report also includes the reflections of business leaders, non-governmental organizations, economists, entrepreneurs and workers. In their own words, each contributor shares their personal perspective on Vietnam’s progress since the Doi Moi economic renovation reforms first opened up Vietnam to foreign investment, along with how the EVFTA will help Vietnam to further integrate within the international community and global economy.

Vietnam is now one of the fastest-growing economies in the world, with an annual gross domestic product per capita growth of 5.3% since Doi Moi – the second-strongest growth in the region, behind China. That strong economic growth has created new jobs and raised standards of living for millions of people.

The EVFTA represents an historic change in EU-Vietnam relations. It will boost trade and investment on both sides, EuroCham stated in the report.

The agreement is expected to eliminate almost all tariffs between the EU and Vietnam, removing tariffs on 65% of the value of EU exports when the pact enters into force, with the remaining tariffs being phased out over the next decade.

Meanwhile, 71% of EU imports from Vietnam will become tariff-free once the trade pact enters into force, rising to more than 99% over the following seven years.

Also, customs duties will be largely eliminated over a transitional period of seven years for Vietnamese goods, and ten years for EU goods. This will be a ‘win-win’ for business and consumers, in the form of lower prices and greater competitiveness, according to EuroCham.

“This report provides clear evidence that the EVFTA is a ‘win-win’ for Europe and Vietnam. Our members paint a positive, optimistic picture of the agreement, with 85% anticipating a significant or moderate impact on their business and investment plans in the long-term,” said Nicolas Audier, Co-Chairman of EuroCham Vietnam.

In the EVFTA, Vietnam has gone further than the World Trade Organization in terms of market access granted to EU service providers. Additional sub-sectors will be opened up, giving the EU the best possible access to Vietnam’s market. The FTA also contains a ‘most favored nation’ clause.

The EU is the fifth-largest foreign investor in Vietnam. Data from the Vietnamese Ministry of Planning and Investment shows that European firms had almost 2,500 foreign direct investment (FDI) projects, valued at some US$44 billion in Vietnam last year, making up 10% of total FDI projects and 14% of FDI capital.

In 2017, trade in goods between the EU and Vietnam was worth over EUR47 billion (US$53.8 billion). European imports from Vietnam accounted for EUR37 billion, including products such as footwear, textiles and clothing, coffee, rice, seafood and furniture. Meanwhile, European exports to Vietnam reached EUR10 billion, including electrical equipment, aircraft, vehicles and pharmaceutical products.

Source: SGT

 

Ngày 15/10

99/ Canada launches safeguard investigation on certain steel products

On 12 October 2018, Canada notified the WTO’s Committee on Safeguards that it initiated on 11 October 2018 a safeguard investigation on certain steel products.

In the notification, Canada indicated, among other things, as follows:

“4  Provide a point of contact for the investigation and identify the preferred means for corresponding

CITT address for correspondence:

Registrar

Canadian International Trade Tribunal

5th Floor

333 Laurier Avenue West

Ottawa, Ontario

K1A 0G7

E-mail address: citt-tcce@tribunal.gc.ca

5  Provide the deadlines and procedures for importers, exporters and other interested parties to present evidence and their views, including (i) deadlines and procedures for members and exporters to identify themselves as interested parties, if so required, to participate in the investigation and (ii) the date of an intended public hearing as provided for in article 3.1.

Deadlines and procedures related to the participation of interested parties in the inquiry are set out in the Notice of Commencement of Safeguard Inquiry published by the CITT, submitted to the Committee and available on the CITT’s website (www.citt.gc.ca/en/node/8405). Importers, exporters and other interested parties will be able to present evidence and their views during the inquiry, up to and during the hearing to be scheduled by the CITT.

The CITT will issue questionnaires to domestic producers, importers and foreign producers of each of the steel products concerned to request relevant statistical and other information. Replies to the questionnaires should be received within 20 days of the date of publication of the Notice of Commencement of Safeguard Inquiry. Interested parties will also be able to file case briefs and reply briefs, as per the schedule set out by the CITT.

Interested parties wishing to participate in the inquiry as a party must file a notice of participation with the CITT by 29 October 2018. This deadline must be strictly observed. Submissions filed after the deadline will only be accepted in demonstrably extraordinary circumstances and with leave of the CITT.

The dates and other details on the hearing will be published on the CITT’s website.”

Further information is available in G/SG/N/6/CAN/4.

What is a safeguard investigation?

A safeguard investigation seeks to determine whether increased imports of a product are causing, or is threatening to cause, serious injury to a domestic industry.

During a safeguard investigation, importers, exporters and other interested parties may present evidence and views and respond to the presentations of other parties.

A WTO member may take a safeguard action (i.e. restrict imports of a product temporarily) only if the increased imports of the product are found to be causing, or threatening to cause, serious injury.

Source: wto.org

 

100/ WTO members review use, application of preferential rules of origin for LDCs

At a meeting of the Committee on Rules of Origin on 15-16 October, WTO members further reviewed the use and application of preferential rules of origin programmes for least developed countries (LDCs) in line with commitments made at the WTO’s 2013 Bali and 2015 Nairobi ministerial conferences. Members in particular examined utilization rates of the preferential schemes by LDC exporters and how members granting preferences have applied the change of tariff classification criterion in drafting “substantial transformation” rules of origin.

The Nairobi Decision on Preferential Rules of Origin for LDCs builds upon the earlier 2013 Bali Decision by setting out, for the first time, a set of multilaterally agreed guidelines to help make it easier for LDC exports to qualify for preferential market access granted by WTO members in favour of LDCs. When a product is manufactured in two or more countries, it qualifies as “made in” an LDC — and thus for preferential access — when it undergoes substantial transformation in the LDC.

The Bali Decision cites three main types of criteria that can be used to determine substantial transformation, one of which is change of tariff classification (CTC) between the inputs and final product. The subsequent Nairobi Decision requires WTO members to allow for a simple change of tariff heading or sub-heading to meet substantial transformation, avoid exclusions and restrictions wherever possible, and allow appropriate tolerance for inputs that do not fulfil the requirements.

A background note prepared by the WTO Secretariat for the committee meeting noted that some preference-granting members (China, India, Japan, Norway and Switzerland) apply the CTC as a general or main rule, or in product-specific rules of origin (the European Union) for determining substantial transformation, while other members that have notified their rules of origin to the WTO do not apply this criterion at all (Australia, Canada, Republic of Korea, New Zealand, Russia, Chinese Taipei, Thailand and the United States).

Moreover, most preference-granting members applying the CTC criterion still maintain various exclusions or restrictions, primarily in the form of excluding materials of specific tariff chapter headings, or provisions setting additional requirements to the change in tariff classification, the Secretariat report found.

Tanzania, on behalf of the LDC Group of WTO members, made a presentation which outlined the latest developments regarding the use of CTC by preference-granting members. Tanzania highlighted the matter of exceptions from CTC rules, noting that some preference-granting members granted exceptions for whole chapter headings or key sectors, making the rules extremely stringent. It also noted that many preference-granting members use the CTC rule in their free trade agreements (FTAs) but not in their application of duty-free/quota-free commitments, meaning that rules for the latter may sometimes be more stringent than those under FTAs.

In regard to the way forward, Tanzania said the LDC Group is urging preference-granting members to reform these stringent rules, which were hindering the fuller utilization of trade preferences, such as abolishing “double requirements” (applying both CTC and ad valorem percentage rules to qualify for substantial transformation). The ultimate objective, Tanzania noted, is to make preferential rules of origin as simple and transparent as possible in order for LDCs to use trade to help lift them out of poverty.

Preference utilization

Members also reviewed a separate WTO Secretariat note on preference utilization rates, based on a methodology calculating the value of imports that reportedly benefitted from preferences with the value of total imports eligible for such trade preferences.

The note underlined that preference under-utilization can be very significant for some product categories. For example, close to 50% of all LDC exports of “fruits, vegetables, plants” and “chemicals” do not receive preferential treatment despite being eligible for preferences. This proportion reaches close to 80% in the case of “sugar and confectionary products”.

All in all, the Secretariat noted, LDCs paid tariffs on more than $7 billion of trade in 2016 that should have benefitted from tariff preferences.

Low preference utilization could indicate that rules of origin requirements are too demanding and cannot be met in a number of cases, the Secretariat said.  However, other factors not related to rules of origin may also explain low rates of preference utilization. One very significant factor is the existence of several competing preferential schemes; in fact, sometimes exporters have the choice between different preferential schemes: one or more non-reciprocal schemes (such as a Generalized System of Preferences for LDCs) and one or more reciprocal schemes (regional trade agreements). For this reason, it is important to interpret utilization rates considering other such factors.

Several members then took the floor to comment on the Secretariat note. Some said WTO members needed to consider further steps to simplify origin rules and improve utilization in light of the findings, while others said that more studies were needed before drawing any conclusions.  All agreed that more work needed to be done on the issue.

Tanzania, on behalf of the LDC Group, also provided members with a detailed rundown of utilization rates by preference-granting country as well as LDC recipient country. Tanzania said it was clear some preference-granting countries have low utilization rates across all product sectors, and that even for countries with high utilization rates, there were large pockets of under-utilization, with a significant share of LDC imports subject to most-favoured nation (MFN) tariffs even though these imports were eligible for lower preferential rates. Tanzania said utilization rates were critical in assessing the stringency of rules of origin, and that the LDC Group would be circulating a paper analysing the link between low utilization rates and rules of origin in advance of the next committee meeting.

Several members called for further work to better understand the causes behind under-utilization of tariff preferences.

Implementation of the Nairobi and Bali ministerial decisions

China updated members on progress to implement the two ministerial decisions on preferential rules of origin for LDCs; more than 8,200 tariff lines for imports from 43 LDCs now enjoy preferential access, with 97% receiving duty-free treatment, thus reducing the overall tariff bill for LDC exporters by $7 billion. Top beneficiaries of these preferences were Bangladesh, Ethiopia, Sudan, Tanzania and Senegal, China noted. Speaking for the LDC Group, Tanzania asked China to notify tariff and trade data to the Secretariat so that members could better assess preference utilization for China-bound exports; China said it would forward the data shortly.

The European Union also updated members on implementation of its Registered Exporters (REX) scheme, which will replace the current system of certifications of origin issued by governments with self-certification by exporters. The EU (together with Norway and Switzerland) started applying the new system at the start of 2017 and will completely phase in self-certification for registered firms by mid-2020.

Non-preferential rules of origin

The Secretariat made a presentation before the committee on the transparency and notification aspects of the non-preferential rules of origin. The presentation provided a brief overview of the existing notification obligations in the WTO’s Agreement on Rules of Origin (ARO), focusing on “non-preferential” rules of origin, a summary of the status of notifications, and an assessment of existing information gaps.

According to the Secretariat’s data, 35.8% of members have notified that they apply non-preferential rules of origin, while 41.6% of members have notified that they do not apply them, and 22.6% have not submitted a notification under Article 5 of the ARO. Article 5 states that members must notify the Secretariat its judicial decisions and administrative rulings of general application relating to rules of origin, including those that do not apply non-preferential rules. (See presentation here.)

The committee also heard a presentation by the World Customs Organization (WCO) on the availability of information regarding non-preferential origin requirements. The lack of information translates into lack of predictability and transparency, undermining the ability of customs to collect revenue and subsequently putting at risk economic prosperity and social development in many countries, the WCO said. In addition, the lack of harmonized rules of origin and reliable data when dealing with cross-border trade, as well as procedures and standards that are enforceable and binding, represent significant obstacles in modernizing, streamlining and simplifying customs procedures. (See presentation here.)

The International Trade Centre (ITC) presented members with its new “Rules of origin facilitator”, a useful gateway to rules of origin that was launched in June this year. The gateway — https://findrulesoforigin.org — aims at increasing the quality and transparency of origin-related information, translating it into trade intelligence. It provides tariff and origin information at the most detailed tariff-line product level, including: tariffs applied by 201 countries (MFN and preferential); rules of origin and origin procedures in 87 trade agreements and preferential schemes of more than 100 countries; and non-preferential rules of origin for the EU, the United States and Switzerland. The gateway is the result of a collaboration between the ITC, the WCO and the WTO. (See presentation here.)

Further information on the WTO’s work regarding rules of origin can be found at www.wto.org/origin

Source: wto.org

 

101/ DDG Wolff: “There is reason for optimism about the future of the multilateral trading system”

In a speech delivered to the Council on Foreign Relations in Washington D.C. on 15 October 2018, Deputy Director-General Alan Wolff acknowledged there are enormous stresses on the multilateral trading system at present and the challenges posed should not be minimized. However, he stressed there are also a lot of positive signs, including that 22 countries seek to join the WTO to integrate into the world economy and that active discussions are under way on WTO reform. “The outlook is far from dismal,” he concluded.

The WTO and the Future of the Global Trading System

Alan Wm. Wolff, Deputy Director General, World Trade Organization (WTO) at the Council on Foreign Relations, Washington D.C., October 15, 2018

There is reason for optimism about the future of the multilateral trading system.  This does not mean to quote Dr. Pangloss from Voltaire’s novel Candide that this is now or ever has been “the best of all possible worlds”.  The world of trade could always be better.  However, the daily committee work of the WTO continues, dispute settlement is still functioning, the new Joint Initiatives are meeting, proposals are being tabled in the regular committees, and by far most of world trade flows within the WTO’s rules.  Importantly, various groups are actively considering WTO reform.

The post-World War II effort to organize the world economy has been a grand and highly successful endeavor.  It has within it the potential to make progress toward fewer trade distortions, fewer trade restrictions, in short, greater openness, inclusiveness and, generally — fairness.

It is true that world trade could slip backward toward a very much worse place.  There are enormous stresses on the system at present and the challenges posed should not be minimized.   However, while seasoned negotiators recommend it, I do not assume the worst with respect to any given Member’s intentions.  It is true that ultimate objectives of key Members on what they are willing to contribute and what they are willing to live with are unknown.  It is both unwise and unnecessary to reach dire conclusions about the future of the system based solely on conjecture.

At the top of the list of current challenges are that:

• The two largest trading nations are imposing reciprocal rounds of tariffs on each other’s trade with threats of more of the same —with neither justifying their actions under the trading systems rules.
• The earlier measures and countermeasures resulting from steel and aluminum tariffs imposed by the United States may spread to automobiles.
• The United States has blocked the appointment of new Appellate Body members.  Exactly one year ago today the European Union’s chief trade spokesperson famously accused the United States’ position risking “killing the WTO from inside”.⁽¹⁾ The natural consequence of dispute settlement becoming inoperative is to return trade relations, where no agreed solution is found by the parties, to a state of nature — combat without rules.
• And last, but not least, the United States, the guarantor and lead sponsor of the multilateral trading system, has not given explicit assurance that it intends to continue in that role.   Its words and actions are seen as being inconsistent with it wearing that mantle.

Robert Kagan in his newest book, “The Jungle Grows Back” warns that the international geopolitical and global liberal economic order that we currently have requires active maintenance.  He points out that the last 70 years of global economic growth and general peace were based on a liberal international order built by the United States and its allies that included open trade. He concludes that these conditions are not the norm in human experience but an historical aberration.  The fact that from where I sit in Geneva, I see a lot of positive signs — including that 22 countries seek to join the WTO, to integrate into the world economy to help gain better lives for their peoples and to support peace, and that no current WTO Member has formally declared its departure, does not justify complacency.  To ignore current challenges would be to invite severe peril to global economic well-being.  It is not just that the multilateral system is being tested by measures of enormous magnitude that are not even claimed to be justified by the rules and by other measures that are accompanied by justifications that are greeted in major instances with skepticism.  It is also the fact that the last few years the WTO has been characterized by a loss of momentum.  It has been over two decades since the WTO members committed to a program of general trade liberalization.  The concern goes deeper, in that the system may become eroded by exceptions, by discriminatory trading arrangements, and by exploitation of trade measures and distortions not yet covered by rules.

What we cannot foretell is whether, if solutions to current challenges are not found, the effectiveness of the current system will decline, nor at what rate.  That is not a risk worth taking.  In short, there is an urgent need for prompt and vigorous efforts to find broadly agreed paths forward.

Seismic events

A storm is not a crisis.  Failing to deal effectively with a storm foments a crisis.  That said, three major historic changes have come together to create the current sense of impending if not actual crisis:  the rise of a major new economic actor, China; the policies of the new U.S. administration; and increasing populist pressures in many parts of the globe.

Addressing each of these in turn:

Dramatic shifts in trade patterns.

A sweeping change in trading patterns causes disruptions.  In geologic terms, the interface of a major new economy and the pre-existing ones is very much like tectonic plates colliding and moving with great friction against one another.  Pressures build up and find an outlet, often in the form of earthquakes.

During the last half of the 19th Century, a Great Depression in British Agriculture occurred.  Britain had opened its market to American grain and meat.  The size and efficiency of American productive capacity in these commodities was enormous.  The British countryside was depopulated.  The pressure was moderated by the industrial revolution.  Britain adjusted by its agricultural workers moving into manufacturing.  This is not to say that free trade was a mistake, it was not.  Britain would have been far worse off it had it remained a rural economy raising much of its own food.

In more recent history, in the last four decades of the 20th century, the economic rise of Japan likewise disrupted the economies of its trading partners.  Competition from Japan, for example, eliminated much of the production of consumer electronics in the United States and depressed American production of autos and steel.  There were a series of seismic events — in 1971 a global U.S. import surcharge that had as a significant element the management of U.S.- Japan trade relations; in 1987 the first imposition of trade retaliation against Japan since the 1930s (this was over market closure and the dumping of semiconductors); and throughout this period, threats from the U.S. Congress to impose a broad range of import restrictions.  Pressures were alleviated by Japan agreeing to a number of major voluntary export restraint agreements and they ultimately dissipated by Japan’s evolution toward an economy more open to being shaped by market forces.

The latest experience has been and is with China, principally over the last two decades.  There are some parallels between the rise of China and the rise of Japan. Both economies differed in important respects from those of other major trading partners.  A comparison with the rise of Japan only goes so far, however: China’s economy is much larger, the effects have been felt more broadly across industrial (and some non-industrial) sectors, and these effects occurred simultaneously with even larger global disruptions of production due to automation and other forms of technological change.   In the case of China compared with Japan, the role of the state and the use of subsidies is more pronounced than was the case with respect to Japan, and there are other measures of concern to the China’s trading partners — such as forced technology transfer, alleged to exist by a number of China’s trading partners and whose existence is denied by China.  Another difference: VRAs have not been a tool of choice by either China or its trading partner to slow changes in trading patterns (with the possible exception of calls for reduction of steel-making capacity).  Adjustment has largely taken the form of economic dislocations in importing countries, attributed by importing countries to competition from China, and again, not a view shared by China.  The situation became unstable and solutions are now being sought.

The U.S. election of 2016

No one would argue that the trade policies of the Trump Administration do not differ from those of its predecessors.  The election was largely about making dramatic changes from prior policies, and there has been a consistent effort to implement that campaign pledge with respect to trade.  Pre-existing trade agreements were labeled as at best flawed.  Upon the new Administration taking office, the U.S. withdrew from the 12-nation Trans Pacific Partnership.  Bilateral agreements were heralded as being superior to multilateral trading arrangements.  The new Administration, following in the footsteps of its predecessors but more insistently, leveled an extensive list of criticisms at the WTO’s dispute settlement system, with particular reference to the role and findings of the WTO Appellate Body.  Given even greater press attention is the current U.S. approach to China, and China’s responses in kind, consisting of the imposition of successive rounds of increased tariffs.  This pointed bilateral exchange of salvos has no precedent.

All of America’s pronouncements and actions taken together indicate an American view that insofar as it is within its control, international trading rules and relationships will change.  The extent to which it wishes to do so is not yet clear.  The United States is a highly active participant in the regular work of the WTO and has tabled proposals that are not radical, they are contributions to institution building⁽²⁾.  In negotiations that have been concluded outside the WTO and with respect to the Appellate Body, there have been stark differences in the American approach.  In regional and bilateral agreements, accommodations have been reached by the United States with Korea, Mexico and Canada.   In each of these cases, where prior agreements existed, actions have taken the form of adjustments in those existing agreements rather than their being scrapped.  Negotiations are just beginning with the EU and Japan, against the backdrop of the recent U.S. bilaterals, the renounced TPP, the stalled TTIP, the G7 meeting, and the Trump-Juncker meeting.

The impact of technological change

Just as the industrial revolution had an immense impact on workforces across much of the world, the information technology revolution, bringing with it automation has caused profound changes, both in terms of creating major new opportunities for entrepreneurial activity and in terms of dislocations of employment.  Further transformations are now occurring in a variety of fields driven by the arrival of artificial intelligence, big data, biological and manufacturing breakthroughs, and other technological inventions and applications, the impact of which cannot be clearly foreseen.

Add disruption due to technology to the stresses caused by the movement of peoples and the sum of all fears has resulted in a rise in populism (e.g. Brexit) and a rejection of the status quo by substantial parts of the populations of many countries around the world. These forces of discontinuity increase pressures for adjustments in the rules of the global trading system.

Standing on the threshold of further change in the multilateral trading system

In several important respects, the world of international trade policy is starkly different than it was a year ago:

• The U.S. and China were on the verge of a trade war, not in one.
• The complement of Appellate Body members was at five (of seven), not three.
• A period of stasis in broad international negotiations persisted following the failure to conclude the Doha Development Agenda, and the end of the harvest of low hanging trade negotiating fruit (consisting of a ban on agricultural export subsidies, the expansion of the coverage of the Information Technology Agreement and the conclusion of the Trade Facilitation Agreement).

The present attempts at finding solutions

The situation changed at the Buenos Aires WTO Ministerial last December.  Members who wanted to discuss new issues, addressing E Commerce, investment, domestic regulation of services, the participation of micro, small and medium enterprises in trade, and gender in trade, found a way to do so.  These joint initiatives are open to all, but all have not welcomed them.  Also, at Buenos Aires, the U.S. Trade Representative called for three substantial reforms of the WTO — differentiation among those labeling themselves as developing countries, compliance with existing rules particularly with respect to transparency and a complaint that litigation had replaced negotiation in WTO rulemaking.  The room full of trade ministers applauded.  There were no audible jeers.

At Buenos Aires, on the side of the Ministerial meeting, the EU, Japan and the United States announced that they were going to engage in a cooperative effort with respect to several issues:

We shared the view that severe excess capacity in key sectors exacerbated by government-financed and supported capacity expansion, unfair competitive conditions caused by large market-distorting subsidies and state-owned enterprises, forced technology transfer, and local content requirements and preferences are serious concerns for the proper functioning of international trade, the creation of innovative technologies and the sustainable growth of the global economy.

The call for WTO reform was taken up by French President Emmanuel Macron in March.  In recent weeks the European Union circulated a detailed paper on reforms it would suggest be considered.  The Canadian trade minister called a meeting of the trade ministers of twelve WTO members interested in reform who will meet in Ottawa next week.  The invitees are Australia, Brazil, Chile, the European Union, Japan, Kenya, Mexico, New Zealand, Norway, Singapore, South Korea and Switzerland. The meeting does not include the United States or China.  A very useful analytical background paper has been prepared in advance of the meeting.  Last week the EU held its first bilateral meeting with China to discuss WTO reforms.

Past crises have led to systemic reforms.  The devastation of World War II led in 1947 to the creation of a new international order, including the GATT.  The imposition by the United States of a 10% import surcharge in 1971 led ultimately to the creation of the floating exchange rate system and the first broad GATT negotiation, the Tokyo Round, to address nontariff barriers.  In the mid 1980s, U.S. unilateralism (use of section 301) in the view of the then GATT Director General, Arthur Dunkel, provided the needed motivation to create the WTO.  In short, past crises have led to improvements in the world trading system.  Whether the shock and awe of Trump Administration trade policy can be channeled into making the trading system better is an open question.  But WTO members are actively contemplating what systemic improvements they might consider.

Where solutions may be sought

a. China

On October 4, U.S. Vice President Pence condemned a series of what he took to be unacceptable forms of trade competition practiced by China.  China rejected the allegations.  The press considered the Pence statement to be official U.S. recognition that a state of trade war existed between the two countries.  While the end of the strategic competition is not foreseeable, it suggests that there will be no near-term solution, one based on some additional purchases by China of U.S. goods and statements by the two sides about working matters out later.

It that is indeed how matters stand, working now for a concluding an end game, a complete solution, may not be feasible.  For those who care about preserving a liberal (a term which conservatives should support in this context) international order, leading to a form of détente between China and the United States, this suggests that there is a need to focus on the middle game — that which is within the realm of the achievable.  I assume that this is a subject that is under current active consideration in a number of capitals, including Beijing, Brussels and Tokyo, and perhaps among some in Washington policy-making positions.

The middle game consists of trying to get more of the trade relationship within international rules.  Whether obtaining some rollback of trade restrictions is possible is an unknown.  An interim solution would at a minimum include a standstill committing to avoid succeeding rounds of retaliation and counter-retaliation.  The Cold War with the Soviet Union provided scope for arms limitations and reductions, so finding some solutions on major issues even in a serious geopolitical competition is possible.  Given current circumstances, the scope of an understanding might well have to include both trade and investment issues as well as cybersecurity.  Of course, if the end game in either Beijing or Washington is decoupling of the two economies — known as non-intercourse in the 19th century⁽³⁾, there may not be enough trust to work on a middle game.  It is nevertheless worth the effort.  A total severing of economic relations is in the interest of neither country, nor of the world.

Solving the Appellate Body impasse

The first step is to recognize the problem.  Then it is worth thinking about the best path to a solution.  Hostage-taking is not unusual in negotiations, whether in the Senate on approving nominations, or in trade negotiations in Geneva, although this is seen by most WTO members as an extreme case.  While this issue is politically charged, it is logically possible to seek to resolve differences without acknowledging validity of any position.  The situation is unusual in that there has been no meaningful engagement to my knowledge between the United State and other WTO members on working out a solution. Rather, the U.S. has listed problems that it believes to exist — with the conduct of the Appellate Body, its decisions and its processes.  But it has not stated what the solution is that it could accept.

As with the U.S.-China trade conflict, the end game is unknown.  It is clear that there is a mismatch of expectations as to what the Appellate Body should have been.  Neither side is likely to convince the other that its concept of the Appellate Body was and is the correct one, based on legal reasoning, through interpretation of the Dispute Settlement Understanding or citing informal recollections of negotiating history.  Some would just suggest working around the United States with an alternative structure.  Tabling this alternative prematurely can endanger coming to a better solution.  An appellate function is very important to preserve, for consistency of decisions and to correct panel errors, but also to avoid risking a situation in which every trade dispute devolves into small and not so small trade wars, consisting of retaliation and counter-retaliation.

The problem at this point is not primarily technical, it is political. Whether the U.S. view of what it was getting at the end of the Uruguay Round with binding dispute settlement, that there would be some latitude for national decision-makers to interpret compliance with international obligations with respect to its trade remedies, or the EU view is correct that only the Appellate Body could decide the scope of the obligations and rights, is not likely to play a role in finding a solution.  The question is whether a balance can be struck that those on each side of the argument can live with.  Pragmatism, creativity and agility, if applied to this issue, can provide WTO dispute settlement with an appellate function having a legitimacy that will find general support.

Income inequality, inclusiveness and the world trading system

It is easy to say that this is a matter for national authorities alone to deal with.  This may be largely true, but it is not the whole picture.  International trade rules matter.  Where protection becomes widespread, national incomes drop in the protected economy, creating inequality between it and more open economies.  Conversely, protection for a particular sector will improve profitability for the beneficiary industry at the expense of downstream users and consumers.

Subsidized and other unfair foreign competition deprives workers in competing sectors of their incomes.  This is true whether the market is at home or abroad, whether the measures involved apply to exports or imports.

The liberal international trading order was designed not only to lift global and national GDP for participants on the whole, but also at the level of an individual, a small business, or a large concern, to create opportunities to enhance income through access to world markets.  Today the goods and services that support the internet and E commerce have opened up literally a world of opportunities.  Governments can work to enhance these opportunities, providing capacity, infrastructure and education, among other supporting policies, or they can stifle participation in the world economy.

Nelson Mandela at the 50th anniversary of the GATT came to the WTO and called for engagement to assure that national policy initiatives for shared growth had support from the multilateral trading system.

A basis for optimism.

I have the happy assignment within the WTO of overseeing the work of the Accessions Division.  At the WTO Public Forum held the week before last, I moderated a program which featured speakers from Somalia, South Sudan, Afghanistan and East Timor.  The subject was bringing fragile, conflict-affected economies into the WTO.  None of the speakers take WTO membership for granted.  Not Afghanistan which was the last to join the WTO two years ago, and not those countries starting or those more deeply involved in the domestic reform process that is required of applicants.   They want their countries to become integrated into the world economy, to provide an economic basis for a greater assurance that it is possible to maintain peace.  I asked our keynote speaker, the first President of East Timor, Xanana Guzmao, to make some closing remarks.  He spoke slowly and carefully, asking the packed room for indulgence for this halting English, which he said was learned in prison dating from the struggle for the birth of his new country.  He spoke with an eloquence, an elegance, that none of us could have equaled, about the need for his country to engage in world commerce, which was why the WTO was so important to his country’s future.

The WTO emerged from the GATT almost a quarter century ago.  It has to a large extent fulfilled its promise.  It grew in size, bringing in an additional 36 countries.  Its rules withstood the global financial crisis of a decade ago, and it made substantive progress through conclusion of a Trade Facilitation Agreement.

Perhaps to some extent because of its accomplishments, the WTO came to be largely taken for granted by most heads of state, corporate leaders, and much of civil society.  A short two years, had you asked any of them what their top ten priorities were, support for the WTO or enhancing it would be highly unlikely to make their lists.  In February, I was in Paris and among others met with a senior French economic official, and she asked, provocatively, what value the WTO had — as if it were a wine that had been stored past its peak.  Yes, she said, it had had an era of great accomplishments, but the newest thing was bilateral agreements — Paris was regularly briefed by Brussels on the 96 bilateral trade agreements it had or were under negotiation, and the news from the WTO was that the Buenos Aires WTO meeting of trade ministers just over a month earlier had failed to even agree on a joint declaration.  The dispute settlement system was hobbled, was it not, by the U.S. blocking appointment of new Appellate Body Members and last but not least, no new trade negotiations of great promise were underway.  True, the official was not directly engaged in trade policy or negotiations, multilateral trade was not at the center of her policy universe. But clearly for her, the WTO did not hold much promise.  Her well-intentioned taunt: “Make the WTO Great Again”.

Times have changed.  Last month, Philippe Etienne, diplomatic advisor to French President Macron, spoke at Chatham House, of France’s interests.  National security was of course first.  Second was the preservation of a rules-based international order.⁽⁴⁾  There is probably not a government official, legislator, or company executive who is not reading avidly about efforts to maintain and improve the trading system.

What comes next?

We will see what comes out of the Ottawa meeting next week on WTO reform.  In addition, soon the United States, together with at least the EU and Japan, will table a proposal to increase obligations to provide transparency under the WTO agreements.  We will also see further reactions to the extensive list of EU reform proposals.  Going forward, I believe that there will be substantial attempts to enhance the WTO’s dispute settlement system

The responsibility for the liberal world order, the multilateral trading system included, cannot be shirked without causing great harm to the world as we know it.  The United States has been the indispensable country for 70 years.  We do not know the extent to which it will continue to carry this burden as completely as it has done.  And we do not know whether its allies in this endeavor will be willing and able make up for any shortfall.

The outlook is far from dismal.  In my job, I get to speak with graduate students around the world.  Last June in Bern, last month in Almaty, Kazakhstan, and two weeks ago in Cape Town.  The students are strongly motivated to make the world a better place.  They are focused on possibilities not limitations.  I believe that they will leave the world of international trade better than how they found it. They intend to make a difference.  The open question is, I suppose, will we?  I believe that we can, that we should, that we must, and most likely that we will.

Source: wto.org

 

102/ Feeding the world with ISO standards on World Food Day

Zero Hunger is one of the ambitious United Nations Sustainable Development Goals and the theme of this year’s World Food Day. ISO International Standards are stepping up to the plate by demonstrating that they are valuable tools in achieving it.

According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), 815 million people in the world go to bed hungry while 1.9 billion people are overweight¹⁾. Yet achieving a world with zero hunger by 2030 is not only possible, it is the theme of this year’s FAO World Food Day, celebrated annually on 16 October.

ISO has more than 1 600 International Standards for the food production sector that directly help to end world hunger by creating confidence in food products, improving agricultural methods and promoting sustainable and ethical purchasing. These include nearly 850 standards from one of ISO’s most established technical committees, ISO/TC 34, Food products, that encompass everything from animal welfare to food products, such as cereals and milk, and ingredients testing. It is also responsible for the ISO 22000 series on food safety management that covers standards related to food manufacturing, farming, packaging, catering and animal foodstuffs and feed production.

The key to sustainable food systems is ensuring the livelihoods of everyone in the food supply chain and ISO is currently working on a number of standards that do just that. A case in point, the upcoming ISO 34101 series on sustainable and traceable cocoa beans is intended to facilitate effective agricultural practices that also protect the environment and improve the social conditions of the 14 million smallholder cocoa farmers in developing countries.

Also in the pipeline is technical specification ISO/TS 26030, a food-sector application of ISO 26000, one of the world’s most referenced International Standards for social responsibility. It will give guidance on how to integrate the core issues of social responsibility into the food chain, thereby contributing to many of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals by providing recommendations to businesses on how they can operate in an ethical, transparent and sustainable way.

To learn more about how ISO International Standards can help feed the world, see the dedicated page on our Website.

Source: iso.org

 

107/ The challenges facing APEC leaders

The Asia-Pacific Economic Conference (APEC) Summit is being held at a time of enormous global and regional geopolitical uncertainty.

It is a tumultuous time for the region, and APEC 2018 provides a real opportunity for leaders to agree on the kinds of reforms that could make a positive difference. Will the host, Papua New Guinea, be able to steer the summit to achieve its stated goals?

On Saturday, leaders from 21 APEC member countries will meet in Port Moresby, following this week’s business leaders’ forum and a year of preparatory meetings. According to its website, APEC’s overall goal is “to create greater prosperity for the people of the region by promoting balanced, inclusive, sustainable, innovative, and secure growth by accelerating regional economic integration.”

It aims to do so by, inter alia, liberalising and facilitating trade and investment at the border, across the border, and behind the border; reducing the costs of cross-border trade to assist businesses; and simplifying regulatory and administrative processes.

APEC decisions are reached by consensus and commitments are made on a voluntary basis.

Yet tensions between the US and China are making it increasingly difficult for Asia-Pacific countries to maintain what has always been a delicate diplomatic balancing act – especially for those concerned about or with competing claims in the South China Sea.

Several countries such as Sri Lanka, Indonesia, and Malaysia have been reconsidering existing infrastructure deals with China. President Rodrigo Duterte in the Philippines uses language emphasising his meek and humble attitude towards China, and working on cooperation in the South China Sea. At the same time, he maintains robust security cooperation with the US.

The dynamics between the US and China are also affecting how countries in the region interact with each other, and how they view regional and global institutions. The apparent thaw in relations between China and Japan is a good example. Fears over deepening global trade tensions are further encouraging some countries, such as South Korea, Thailand, and Indonesia, to actively consider joining the revamped Trans-Pacific Partnership. Concern over how to mitigate the fallout of the trade war has galvanised increased interest in the China-backed Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership.

The rising US dollar, which has affected economies like Indonesia, and the existential crisis of adapting to and mitigating climate change also loom menacingly on the horizon for many Asia-Pacific countries.

In addition to global and regional instability, like much of the rest of the world, countries in the Asia-Pacific are also facing profound domestic challenges, many of which are related to the regional or global trends that are outside of their control. And, like the rest of the world, leaders in these countries are balancing political and economic demands as they make their policy decisions.

For example, as the ANU’s Stephen Howes points out, in PNG, the “Taskforce Sweep” campaign has been abolished, economic growth has stalled, one in two children under the age of five are stunted from malnutrition, and eradicable diseases like polio that were virtually wiped out are now returning.

In this tense geopolitical environment, how will the host country lead participants to negotiate the kinds of policies that can lead to positive outcomes? PNG will need to steer participants towards a focus on broader and longer-term agendas for the region as a whole.

There are also significant politics around how the agenda and discussions at the summit will be steered. As is well known, US President Trump and Russian President Putin are not attending – reportedly to the great dissapointment of the host country. China’s President Xi Jinping, however, is arriving a day early, clearly demonstrating China’s interest in the region. Australia, too, is, of course, trying to ensure its voice is heard.

This year’s APEC provides a real opportunity for Asia-Pacific leaders to grapple with issues that are affecting countries all around the world. The PNG Summit could be where Asia-Pacific leaders get together to craft solutions that are designed to promote sustainable and equitable growth and development according to the specific circumstances of the Asia-Pacific region. Ideally, Pacific island countries will work together to ensure their collective and individual interests are best represented.

There are some fairly uncontroversial economic policy reforms that many accept will – if implemented properly – be able to make a real and positive impact. But as this summit shows, it is the tumultuous swirl of geopolitics that surrounds the economics that will really determine the region’s future. The host nation PNG has its work cut out for it in the days ahead.

Source: Iowy Institute

 

 

Ngày 16/10

103/ DG Azevêdo: Debate on WTO reform should reflect all perspectives

At a meeting of the full WTO membership today (16 October), Director-General Roberto Azevêdo noted the emerging debate on ‘WTO reform’ and highlighted the importance that this discussion is inclusive. He said: “The state of this organization is an issue in which everyone has an interest, so it is important for all members to engage — whatever your perspectives may be.” DG Azevêdo pointed to the links between this debate and efforts to solve the rising trade tensions between some major trading partners.

The Director-General said:

“One element which is at the root of current frictions is the argument that the trading system is allowing distortive trade practices to go unchecked — and that therefore the system needs to change. In this context, so-called WTO reform or modernisation has increasingly been on the minds and in the speeches of many. It’s clear that this discussion is gathering significant momentum, with more leaders becoming engaged and talking to each other about this. So this is something we can’t ignore.

“Such a modernising effort is being seen as a way to ease some of the trade problems that some members have identified. Precisely which issues are taken forward, and how, is for members to determine — and I would suggest that there are also members who are not convinced that a reform is needed at all.

“I would encourage members to engage with each other and exchange views through a range of channels and formats. The state of this organization is an issue in which everyone has an interest, so it is important for all members to engage — whatever your perspectives may be. As ever, I remain available for consultations with individual members and groups of members on this issue — or any other issue. I am here to facilitate whatever conversations members want to have.”

DG Azevêdo also provided an update on the situation regarding the impasse in appointments to the Appellate Body. He stated that despite continuing discussions, there is no progress to report. He cited the warnings of Appellate Body chair Ujal Singh Bhatia on the potential delays in processing appeals which could arise from this impasse, and urged members to continue working to resolve the situation and maintain this “essential pillar” of the WTO’s work.

In addition, the Director-General reflected on the state of play in negotiations at the WTO. He noted the intensive work being done on fisheries subsidies and stated that “this is an area where progress can be made”. However, he also noted that in most areas, very little progress is being seen, and that this can only be changed by members themselves driving issues forward. He urged members to continue work in all areas of negotiations.

Source: wto.org

 

104/ New standard in the cookstoves series just published

Polluting stoves and open fires kill millions every year. A new standard dedicated to clean and safe cookstoves has just been published, providing a valuable platform for the industry to grow.

Some four million people die prematurely each year thanks to polluting stoves using kerosene or solid fuels such as coal¹⁾. Respiratory diseases, heart disease and stroke are just some of the killers that result, not to mention the danger to women and children in less secure environments while gathering fuel.

To try and combat this, the United Nations Foundation launched the Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves, with whom ISO has been collaborating to develop standards that will help drive the market for safe and efficient cooking solutions.

The result, so far, is three documents dedicated to testing protocols and laboratory measurement procedures to assess the performance of cookstoves under controlled laboratory conditions, with others in development.

Technical report ISO/TR 19867-3, Clean cookstoves and clean cooking solutions – Harmonized laboratory test protocols – Part 3: Voluntary performance targets for cookstoves based on laboratory testing, provides voluntary performance targets for cookstoves used for small-scale household applications. It supplements ISO 19867-1, Clean cookstoves and clean cooking solutions – Harmonized laboratory test protocols – Part 1: Standard test sequence for emissions and performance, safety and durability. The two documents join ISO/TR 21276, Clean cookstoves and clean cooking solutions – Vocabulary, a technical report on terminology which was published earlier this year.

Ranyee Chiang, Chair of the ISO committee that developed the standards and former Director of Standards, Technology and Fuels at the Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves, said this latest addition, ISO 19867-3, will provide a common way of measuring the potential performance of cookstoves and how laboratory test results can be interpreted.

“These voluntary performance targets for cookstoves will thus facilitate international trade in household energy technologies and fuels, as well as driving improvements in technology quality and performance,” she said.

“In this way, they support the development of the industry for cookstoves, fuels, and other clean cooking solutions, so we can make progress on this important issue that impacts millions of people and the environment.”

ISO 19867-1, ISO/TR 19867-3 and ISO/TR 21276 were developed by ISO technical committee ISO/TC 285, Clean cookstoves and clean cooking solutions, comprised of some of the world’s leading specialists from the clean cookstoves and fuels sector, with special expertise on testing, design, business and policy.

The committee is jointly led by ANSI, ISO’s member for the US, and KEBS, ISO’s member for Kenya, with a strong involvement from other developing countries for whom clean cookstoves are most relevant.

The documents are available from your national ISO member or through the ISO Store.

Source: iso.org

 

Ngày 17/10

105/ DG Azevêdo: “We must preserve what we have, even as we work to improve it”

In a speech delivered in London on 17 October, Director-General Roberto Azevêdo said that despite its imperfections, the multilateral trading system has delivered stability and predictability in commercial relations and helped fuel unprecedented growth and development around the world. “Let’s work together to shape the trading system that we want to see — one which can meet the challenges of today, and which continues to serve our economies and communities for generations to come,” he declared. The DG spoke at the inaugural International Trade Banquet hosted by the Lord Mayor of London, together with Secretary of State Liam Fox. This is what he said:

My Lord Mayor and Lady Mayoress,
Secretary of State,
Ladies and gentlemen,

It is an honour to join you this evening.

We meet at a crucial moment for global trade. Some of the core, fundamental principles on which the trading system has been based for seven decades are being questioned.

Tensions are rising between major trading partners.

At the same time, new technologies are set to revolutionise trading patterns and practices.

This poses a number of challenges.

So if we believe in the power of trade for good, this is the moment to speak up for it. This is the moment to work together to champion international cooperation on trade, and to strengthen it for the future.

I know that I’m in the right place to be making this case. As the Lord Mayor has indicated, London is synonymous with global trade.

Think of the pioneering free trade battles which were fought and won in parliament in the 19th century.

Consider the first meetings, held in Church House in 1946, to prepare the ground for what was then to be called the International Trade Organization. With a few twists and turns, those efforts led to the creation of today’s WTO.

Or just look at the evidence — all around us — of London’s heritage as one of the world’s foremost trading ports: the prime meridian; the historic docks; the weather vane on the roof of the Bank of England which was installed to tell traders whether the winds were favorable; or even the Cutty Sark. In fact, I think London is one of the few places where trading vessels are a popular tourist attraction.

Trade is part of the fabric of this city. And, as we have heard, London is now a world leader in services trade.

Of course, trade is high on the agenda for other reasons in the UK today. I doubt it has been such a prominent topic of conversation since the days of Peel and Gladstone.

This is welcome. And I know that in the UK we have a strong advocate for trade and the trading system. I am grateful for that, and I thank the Secretary of State for his efforts to this end.

But if we truly want to champion trade, it is important to consider how people view trade — especially in this moment of challenge and change.

New polling presented at the WTO earlier this month showed that 89% of people in the UK think that trade is good.

However, despite this broad and instinctive support for trade in principle, it seems that people still doubt its specific benefits for them.

For example, according to the same poll, less than a third of people believe that trade lowers prices. This may come as a surprise — most economists would say that this is among the clearest benefits that trade delivers. Yet only a small fraction of the public recognises this benefit, which has a direct, positive impact on their purchasing power.

We see the same pattern of opinion in many advanced economies. People are not connecting trade with their jobs, or lower prices and greater choice on the shelves.

If we start to forget these fundamentals of why trade matters, then gradually we will stop valuing and safeguarding the mechanisms that make trade possible in the way we know it today.

So I think we need to remake this connection.

This raises questions about advocacy for trade, and doing a better job of explaining the benefits. It also raises questions about how better to spread those benefits. Of course, that is an issue for domestic policies.

My focus today is the state of global trade. And there is no doubt that we are facing a crisis.

New tariffs announced so far this year cover hundreds of billions of dollars of imports. Further measures have been proposed. And at present there is no end in sight.

A continued escalation of tensions would pose real risks.

Our economists have been assessing a variety of possible scenarios to develop this picture, including the impact of a full, global trade war. The impact could be more limited if escalation is avoided, but a complete breakdown in international trade cooperation would see a sharp rise in tariffs, knocking up to 17% off

global trade growth, and 1.9% off global GDP growth. And these effects would cause significant disruptions for workers, firms and communities as they adjust to this new reality. Potentially millions of workers would need to find new jobs; firms would be looking for new products and markets; and communities for new sources of growth. The question is not whether the trade war scenario would have a negative impact, it is how horrible the effects are going to be.

Clearly we can’t afford to start down this road.  

There is a responsibility on the whole international community to help ease tensions, in the interests of all of our citizens. We need to see more dialogue — both bilaterally and through the WTO.

In fact, this situation is putting a new focus on the multilateral trading system as a place where solutions may be found.

At the root of the current tensions is the argument that the trading system is allowing distortive trade practices to go unchecked. Therefore, the argument goes, the system needs to change to be more responsive to such measures.

I don’t think that anyone believes this can be done through a technical discussion. The current crisis is political. It requires a political solution.

This is why a high-level conversation about ‘WTO reform’ or ‘modernisation’ is beginning to emerge. It is seen as a way to deal with some of the big trade problems that some members have identified. Leaders are engaged. I have discussed this with Prime Minister May — and others — in recent months.

The G20 Summit in November will be a key moment to advance this debate. I will be there — and I will be bringing a very clear message to the leaders about the need to preserve and strengthen the trading system in the interests of all.

Without action to ease tensions and recommit to cooperation in trade, we could see serious harm done to the multilateral trading system. And, again, the long term economic consequences of this could be severe.

It took many decades of painstaking work from governments around the world to build the trading system that we have today.

The system may not be perfect, but it is essential. And it has proved very effective.

The WTO covers around 98% of global trade today. It has overseen a historic opening of markets and integration of economies. The negotiations that led to the WTO resulted in global tariff reductions of 40%.

The system has provided stability and predictability in global trade — holding firm even during the financial crisis. It has supported peaceful economic relations between nations. And, as a result, it has helped to fuel unprecedented growth and development around the world, as well as a dramatic reduction in poverty.

People often cite the lack of progress in many areas of WTO negotiations. This is valid. We are working to change this, and we have recently made very significant progress with historic new deals like the WTO Trade Facilitation Agreement.

But if we focus only on that, then we are missing the fundamental point about the value of the system. It is the very foundation on which world trade is built today.

Yes, we must keep improving the system and advancing new deals. But let’s not forget its role as an essential pillar of global economic governance.

Without it we would surely face a future of uncertainty, lower growth and diminished opportunities everywhere.

We must preserve what we have, even as we work to improve it.

I count on your support to that end.

As I indicated at the beginning of my remarks, the United Kingdom has an important place in WTO history.

The UK is one of the founding members of the WTO and of its predecessor, the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade.

And the UK will remain a WTO member after its departure from the European Union.

Let me stress that whatever the future UK-EU relationship is, the rules and disciplines of the WTO will continue to underpin the UK’s interactions with all of its trading partners — near and far.

Closer trading relationships between countries, no matter their legal nature (whether a customs union, an FTA, or any other type of preferential arrangement) — they are all built on top of the foundation that the WTO provides.

So we will continue to play that fundamental role.

As far as the UK’s arrangements at the WTO are concerned, other WTO members are actively engaged with the UK and the EU regarding the WTO commitments that will apply to the UK, in its own right, once it leaves. At the same time the EU is also engaging with WTO members on changes to its own existing WTO commitments.

In both cases, the WTO Secretariat is doing all it can to facilitate the process and to help both sides with technical expertise or any other kind of support that is required.

Trade and the trading system matter for everyone.

We need them to play their part in fuelling economic growth and prosperity — just as they have done so effectively for many decades.

We need them to support the kind of vibrant, open societies that we value so dearly.

And we need them to promote international cooperation, stability and peace.

So let’s work together to shape the trading system that we want to see — one which can meet the challenges of today, and which continues to serve our economies and communities for generations to come.

In that spirit, and in this historic trading city of London, I ask you now to rise and drink a toast to the Lord Mayor and the Lady Mayoress.

Thank you.

Source: wto.org

 

106/ Australia accepted as new party to government procurement pact

On 17 October 2018, parties to the WTO plurilateral Government Procurement Agreement (GPA) unanimously approved a decision to welcome Australia as the 48th WTO member to be covered by the Agreement. Australia will officially become a GPA party 30 days after submitting its Instrument of Accession to the WTO’s Director-General.

Australia will accede to the Agreement based on the terms set out in its final market access offer, which all GPA parties approved. This outlines to what extent Australia commits to opening its government procurement market to the current GPA parties. Preliminary calculations suggest that Australia’s overall government procurement markets are worth AUD 110 billion (USD 78 billion), meaning that Australia’s accession will add significantly to the current USD 1.7 trillion worth of government procurement covered by the Agreement.

Australia will submit its Instrument of Accession within a period of one year following the Committee’s decision, after having ratified the decision domestically. Australia initiated negotiations to join the Agreement three years ago, in September 2015.

Echoing the GPA parties in congratulating Australia for “its patience and perseverance through this long road”, the Chairman of the GPA Committee, Carlos Vanderloo from Canada, said: “This is a major achievement for Australia, for the GPA Committee and for the WTO. It adds value to and strengthens the GPA, while also sending a strong signal to current accession candidates. We have shown that we can get the job done and that we are pragmatic and result-oriented.”

Australia’s Ambassador Frances Lisson said: “This is a positive outcome for Australia, for the GPA parties and for the multilateral trading system. We thank all GPA parties for their active and constructive engagement and support. Our final market access offer is commercially meaningful and ambitious. It provides a comprehensive coverage of entities at the central and sub-central levels of government, including all major government agencies, and represents one of the best levels of services coverage among GPA parties.”

WTO Director-General Roberto Azevêdo, commenting on the Committee’s decision, said that it “very clearly demonstrates Australia’s strong commitment to the multilateral system and to trade liberalization”. “The decision shows that the Committee is working hard to expand the benefits of the GPA, including enhanced transparency in government procurement, to broader membership. Australia’s accession should be an inspiration for all other members who wish to join the GPA,” he added.

The GPA aims to open up, in a reciprocal manner and to the extent agreed between WTO members, government procurement markets to foreign competition, and make government procurement more transparent. It provides legal guarantees of non-discrimination for the products, services or suppliers of GPA parties in procurement covered by the Agreement. The GPA is a plurilateral agreement — potentially open to all WTO members and binding only the parties to the Agreement. Currently, 47 WTO members (including the EU and its 28 member states) are bound by the Agreement.

Progress on the United Kingdom’s GPA accession

At the meeting, GPA parties reviewed the UK’s revised market access offer as part of its bid to join the GPA in its own right after its departure from the European Union. All GPA parties that spoke expressed a clear desire that the UK continue to participate in the Agreement in a seamless manner post-Brexit, on terms that are mutually acceptable.

The UK made clear that it intends to update its proposed GPA schedules of commitments within three months of their coming into effect, using the procedures set out in the Agreement. Many parties said they can already approve, in principle, the UK’s accession (in some cases subject to related conditions). Others called on the UK to provide further clarity on its eventual coverage and/or to address other concerns before the  accession can be concluded. The UK’s accession will be further considered at the Committee’s end-of-year formal meeting, scheduled for 27 November.

Under negotiation is a government procurement market worth at least GBP 67 billion (USD 88 billion), the UK said at the Committee’s meeting in June (based on 2013 figures).

The UK launched its GPA negotiations in June by submitting to parties an initial market access offer and replies to a checklist on its national government procurement legislation. As an EU member, the UK has been participating in the GPA for over 20 years.

Other accession bids

GPA parties reviewed the accession bids of China, the Kyrgyz Republic, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, the Russian Federation and Tajikistan.

China

China reported significant work underway at the national level, including on improving its latest market access offer in a comprehensive manner. Parties welcomed the continued engagement and urged Beijing to speed up efforts to submit a revised offer as soon as possible.

GPA accession application: December 2007

Latest revised market access offer: December 2014

Kyrgyz Republic

The Kyrgyz Republic informed parties of ongoing internal reforms. The Chairman urged Bishkek to maintain discussions to resolve members’ remaining concerns.

GPA accession application: May 1999, reactivated in 2016

Latest market access offer: June 2018

Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia

The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia expressed its commitment to advance negotiations following its initial market access offer submitted in February. Several members supported the first offer but some were concerned about certain aspects of the offer. The Chairman called for parties to engage with each other.

GPA accession application: March 2017

Initial market access offer: February 2018

Russia

Russia reported ongoing work on the sub-central entities to be covered by its upcoming revised offer and on the updating of its legislation related to government procurement. Parties highlighted Russia’s active engagement in submitting documents and in responding to comments and urged Moscow to significantly improve coverage of its proposed governmental entities in a revised offer to be circulated “as early as possible”.

GPA accession application: August 2016

Initial market access offer: June 2017

Tajikistan

Tajikistan updated the Committee on ongoing legislative reforms and parties urged Dushanbe to submit a final revised market access offer addressing pending issues as soon as possible.

GPA accession application: February 2015

Latest market access offer: February 2017

Other negotiations

Other countries with currently pending accession negotiations include Albania, Georgia, Jordan and Oman. In addition, Afghanistan, Kazakhstan, Mongolia, Saudi Arabia and Seychelles have GPA-related commitments in their respective Protocols of accession to the WTO, which they negotiated with WTO members before their WTO entry.

Outreach

The WTO Secretariat reported on various workshops it held across several continents on trade and government procurement, including for some WTO members having expressed potential interest in joining the GPA.

Implementation of the revised GPA

Parties welcomed an update by Switzerland, which stated that its Parliament is completing necessary internal steps prior to submission of its Instrument of Acceptance of the revised GPA.

Switzerland is the last party yet to implement the revised GPA, which was adopted in 2012 and entered into force in April 2014. The Chair called on Switzerland to finalize the procedures “as soon as can be managed”.

Work programmes

The Chair reported “good progress” on the work carried out by members on various agreed work programmes:

• small and medium-sized enterprises: members continue to work on a possible draft list of best practices to be circulated within the Committee;
• collecting statistics: work is continuing on improving members’ understanding of methodologies to collect data on procurement covered by the GPA;
• sustainability: members are reviewing a WTO Secretariat draft report based on an outline provided by the parties and summarizing past work of the GPA parties.

Next

The final 2018 meeting of the GPA Committee is scheduled for 27 November 2018.

Source: wto.org

 

Ngày 18/10

107/ WTO members fix dates for Astana Ministerial Conference

WTO members have agreed that the organization’s next Ministerial Conference will take place from 8 to 11 June 2020 in Astana, Kazakhstan. The dates were endorsed at an 18 October meeting of the WTO’s General Council.

The General Council agreed on 26 July to accept Kazakhstan’s offer to host the 12th Ministerial Conference in the Kazakh capital. Director-General Roberto Azevêdo met with President Nazarbayev of Kazakhstan in Astana on 27 September, where they reviewed preparations for the Ministerial Conference.

The Ministerial Conference is the WTO’s top decision-making body and the Marrakesh Agreement establishing the organization instructs members to hold one at least every two years. The event is attended by trade ministers and other senior officials from the organization’s 164 members.

The previous Ministerial Conference (MC11) was held in Buenos Aires in December 2017.

Source: wto.org

 

108/ From high-tech gadgets to the smart enterprise

Technological change is taking place at a dizzying rate, transforming our lives in all manner of ways that are not always obvious. How can we ensure efficient management of these automated systems so disruption is positive and does not become a bewildering maelstrom beyond our control?

We have all read stories of robots taking over our jobs – from Flippy, the hamburger-flipping robot (aka an “AI-driven kitchen assistant”) at a restaurant in California, to Pepper, a humanoid robot from SoftBank Robotics, that can recognize human emotions and has been employed in stores around the world. But smart manufacturing is actually much more pervasive and already making a huge difference to all our lives, more quietly and, as in Flippy’s case, more efficiently.

As more and more of us gain access to the Internet, smart manufacturing will become an indispensable element in our daily routines. A survey from the Pew Research Center indicates that there has been a noticeable rise recently in the percentage of people in emerging and developing countries who use the Internet. It goes on to say that while people in advanced economies still use the Internet more and own more high-tech gadgets, the rest of the emerging world is catching up – fast.

Patrick Lamboley is Chair of technical committee ISO/TC 184, Automation systems and integration, and Senior Director of Standardization at Schneider Electric. Schneider Electric is a European multinational corporation that specializes in energy management and automation solutions, spanning hardware, software and services. In the UK, for example, the company works with airports, providing them with state-of-the-art solutions to keep them competitive in a fast-moving business environment. Behind-the-scenes services include helping them implement the latest security measures using technology to keep baggage-handling systems working efficiently.

Here, Lamboley explains how standards can help address the biggest issues in smart manufacturing and why the relationship between human beings and machines has never been so important.

ISOfocus: What do you think are the greatest challenges for smart manufacturing?

Patrick Lamboley: I believe that managing digitization is the great challenge. As in the first industrial revolution, when national economies and the organization of the global economy changed, we are undergoing the same transformation or revolution. And this revolution is not a long-term vision; it’s a reality, taking place now. Today, the world’s biggest and most profitable companies no longer simply focus on what they produce; the focus is shifting to software companies, or the IT players dealing with data. This data is definitively an important point of attention of smart manufacturing and, of course, the big issue is how to ensure cyber security and data privacy for users and organizations alike with respect to their data, their knowledge.

Another big challenge is understanding and changing the relationship between these new technologies, such as artificial intelligence (through computers, apps, analytics, etc.), and the place of the human being in smart manufacturing, in order to achieve successful outcomes from this collaboration and define the role of humans in this new high-tech world.

How can ISO standards help overcome these challenges?

ISO committees have been strongly involved in automation and manufacturing for a very long time. An important element regarding ISO standards is that they don’t concentrate solely on technologies or one specific aspect, but at the level of the complete system, on the integration of subsystems and components. This is why our knowledge is so relevant to addressing the standardization of smart manufacturing.

One example of this desire to address the complete system is the creation of the Smart Manufacturing Coordinating Committee (SMCC), which comprises representatives of the relevant technical committees. As its name suggests, the SMCC is concerned with all the areas in ISO that fall within the scope of smart manufacturing, and establishes or reinforces relationships and concrete cooperation between them. And with the participation of joint technical committee ISO/IEC JTC 1 – the standards development environment where experts from ISO and the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) come together to develop worldwide information and communication technology (ICT) standards for business and consumer applications – the SMCC is also able to incorporate the IT world and associated topics.

In what ways can ISO’s recent efforts in automatization bring added value?

As I mentioned already, the SMCC creates good emulation between stakeholders and new ideas and values in the respective committees. What’s more, smart manufacturing was a major topic at the annual meeting of ISO/TC 184, called the Super Meeting, in Beijing in May 2018. A full day was devoted to smart manufacturing as a means of initiating exchanges between the experts involved in this field, which was also a great opportunity to get fresh perspectives and generate initiatives. The event drew participants from industry and R&D institutions, such as AVIC, SAC, WIZ, JLS Innovations, Beihang University, Siemens, Boeing and many more.

We named this day the “cavalcade day” and it consisted of two parts. The first part was dedicated to the presentation of local views and the implementation of smart manufacturing, along with the activities of ISO/TC 184 and its associated subcommittees. The second part, which took place during a “world café” session, was an interactive debate between experts on how the technical committee and its subcommittees respond to smart manufacturing and how we can make progress on what has now become one of the world’s hottest topics.

We concluded the day with two demonstrations that were directly linked to the implementation of ISO/TC 184 standards for smart manufacturing and gave a review of the feedback, ideas and ways to improve our activities in the different working groups.

What standards are making the most impact on smart manufacturing and why?

There are many standards within the scope of smart manufacturing that help with the definition of all associated components, such as the life cycle of technical installations, reference model, digital twin, data quality, and so on. ISO/TC 184 and its associated subcommittees are leading or are strongly involved in some of them. ISO/IEC Joint Working Group 21 was set up with the aim of harmonizing existing reference models and overseeing the development of an underlying architecture with regard to smart manufacturing models, with a special focus on aspects such as life cycles and the technical and/or organizational hierarchies relating to assets.

The goal is to define the common rules needed to build reference models for a smart manufacturing system. This begins with the merging, comparison and analysis of existing models, and with the active participation of countries that have defined their own reference models (e.g. China, France, Germany, Japan, Sweden, the UK and the United States, among others), to deliver a standardized metamodel that includes existing standards and/or specificities coming from the countries involved.

The second key topic for me is the “digital twin”. It started in ISO/TC 184’s subcommittee SC 4 (industrial data) with ISO 15926. The purpose of ISO 15926 is to provide a common language for computer systems, thereby integrating the information produced by them. Originally designed for the process industries working on large projects that involve many stakeholders, and plant operations and maintenance that last decades, the technology can also be used by anyone wanting to set up a proper vocabulary of reference data to provide a shared understanding of a specific domain. Only in this way can true integrations emerge, bringing added value to industries that are, to a large extent, knowledge-based.

Source: iso.org

 

109/ The new frontier for artificial intelligence

No longer just a fictional theme for far-fetched science fiction movies, artificial intelligence is now very much a day-to-day part of our reality. In factories, in intelligent transportation, even in the medical field, artificial intelligence (AI) is just about everywhere. But what exactly is artificial intelligence? As AI becomes more ubiquitous, why is there a need for International Standards? And what are some of the topics surrounding its standardization?

A recent report by the McKinsey Global Institute¹⁾ suggests that investment in artificial intelligence (AI) is growing fast. McKinsey estimates that digital leaders such as Google spent between “USD 20 billion to USD 30 billion on AI in 2016, with 90 % of this allocated to R&D and deployment, and 10 % to AI acquisitions”. According to the International Data Corporation²⁾  (IDC), by 2019, 40 % of digital transformation initiatives will deploy some sort of variation of AI and by 2021, 75 % of enterprise applications will use AI, with expenditure growing to an estimated USD 52.2 billion.

From perception to reality

But what exactly is AI? According to Wael William Diab, Chair of the new technical committee ISO/IEC JTC 1, Information technology, subcommittee SC 42, Artificial intelligence, the field of AI includes a collection of technologies. The newly formed committee has started with some foundational standards that include AI concepts and terminology (ISO/IEC 22989). Diab stresses that the interest in AI is quite broad, bringing together a very wide range of diverse stakeholders such as data scientists, digital practitioners, and regulatory bodies. He also points out that there’s something of a gap between what AI actually is today and what it is often perceived to be. “People tend to think of AI as autonomous robots or a computer capable of beating a chess master. To me, AI is more of a collection of technologies that are enabling, effectively, a form of intelligence in machines.”

He also explains that AI is often seen as a group of fully autonomous systems – robots that move – but, in reality, much of AI goes into semi-autonomous systems. In many AI systems, a good deal of data will have been prepared before being fed into an engine that has some form of machine learning, which will then, in turn, produce a series of insights. These technologies can include, but are by no means limited to, machine learning, big data and analytics.

Umbrella of technologies

Currently a Senior Director of Huawei Technologies, Diab is Chair of the ISO/IEC subcommittee for good reason. Armed with several degrees in electrical engineering, economics and business administration from both Stanford and Wharton, his professional life has focused closely on business and technology strategy. Moreover, he has also worked for multinational conglomerates Cisco and Broadcom as well as been a consultant specializing in Internet of Things (IoT) technologies, most recently as the Secretary of the Steering Committee of the Industrial Internet Consortium. He has also filed over 850 patents, of which close to 400 have been issued, with the rest under examination. That’s more patents than those filed by Tesla – and not one of his applications has been rejected.

Diab’s true specialism lies in the breadth of his expertise – his range stretches from the early incubation of ideas to strategically driving the industry forward. It’s also why he’s so keen on standardization, as he sees it as the perfect vehicle for the healthy expansion of the industry as a whole. He argues that we need standards for AI for several reasons. First, there’s the degree of sophistication of IT in today’s society. After all, an average smartphone now has more power than all of the Apollo missions combined. Second, IT is moving deeper and deeper into every sector. After a slow start in the 1970s and 80s, people no longer need IT systems merely for greater efficiency and it is now needed to reveal operational and strategic insights. Finally, there is the sheer pervasiveness of IT in our lives. Every sector relies on it, from finance to manufacturing to healthcare to transportation to robotics and so on.

Part of the solution

This is where International Standards come into play. Subcommittee SC 42, which is under joint technical committee JTC 1 of ISO and the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), is the only body looking at the entire AI ecosystem. Diab is clear that he and his committee are starting with the recognition that many aspects of AI technology standardization need to be considered to achieve wide adoption. “We know that users care deeply and want to understand how AI decisions are made, thus the inclusion of aspects like system transparency are key,” he says, “so comprehensive standardization is a necessary part of the technology adoption.”

The AI ecosystem has been divided into a number of key areas spanning technical, societal and ethical considerations. These include the following broad categories.

Foundational standards

With so many varying stakeholders, a basic starting point has been the committee’s work on “foundational standards”. This looks at aspects of AI that necessitate a common vocabulary, as well as agreed taxonomies and definitions. Eventually, these standards will mean that a practitioner can talk the same language as a regulator and both can talk the same language as a technical expert.

Computational methods and techniques

At the heart of AI is an assessment of the computational approaches and characteristics of artificial intelligence systems. This involves a study of different technologies (e.g. ML algorithms, reasoning, etc.) used by the AI systems, including their properties and characteristics as well as the study of existing specialized AI systems to understand and identify their underlying computational approaches, architectures, and characteristics. The study group will report on what is happening in the field and then suggest areas in which standardization is required.

Trustworthiness

One of the most challenging topics for the industry is that of “trustworthiness”, the third area of focus. This goes straight to the heart of many of the concerns around AI. The study group is considering everything from security and privacy to robustness of the system, to transparency and bias. Already with AI, there are systems that are either making decisions or informing individuals about decisions that need to be made, so a recognized and agreed form of transparency is vital to ascertain that there is no undesirable bias. It is highly likely that this study group will set out a whole series of recommendations for standardization projects. Such work will provide a necessary tool and proactively address concerns in this area. “By being proactive in recognizing that these issues exist and standards can help mitigate them, that’s a huge departure from how transformative technologies were done in the past, which were more of an afterthought,” Diab says firmly.

Use cases and applications

The fourth area of focus is to identify “application domains”, the contexts in which AI is being used, and collect “representative use cases”. Autonomous driving and transportation, for instance, is one such category. Another example is the use of AI in the manufacturing industry to increase efficiency. The group’s reports will lead to the commencement of a series of projects that could include everything from a comprehensive repository of use cases, to best practices for certain application domains.

Societal concerns

Another area of focus is what Diab terms “societal concerns”. Broad technologies like IoT and AI have the ability to influence how we exist for generations to come, so their adoption creates impacts that go much further than the technology itself. One of these is economic considerations, such as AI’s impact on the labour force (which naturally goes beyond the remit of the committee). But others certainly do fall into its purview: issues such as algorithmic bias, eavesdropping, and safety directives in industrial AI are all central to what the committee must look at. How, for instance, should an algorithm be safely trained – and then, when necessary, re-trained – to function properly? How do we prevent an AI system from correlating the “wrong” information, or basing decisions on inappropriately biased factors such as age, gender or ethnicity? How do we make sure that a robot working in tandem with a human operator doesn’t endanger its human colleague?

SC 42 is looking at these aspects of societal concern and ethical considerations throughout its work, and collaborating with the broader committees underneath its parent organizations, ISO and IEC, on items that may not be under the “IT preview” but impacted by it.

Big data

A few years ago, JTC 1 established a programme of work on “big data” through its working group WG 9. Currently, the big data programme has two foundational projects for overview and vocabulary and a big data reference architecture (BDRA), which have received tremendous interest from the industry. From a data science perspective, expert participation, use cases and applications, future anticipated work on analytics, and the role of systems integration, the big data work programme shares a lot of commonalities with the initial work programme for SC 42. From an industry practice point of view, it’s hard to imagine applications where one technology is present without the other. For this and many other reasons, the big data programme has been transferred to SC 42. The committee will focus on how to structure the work at its next meeting. It is also anticipated that new work products for big data will be developed.

Exponential growth

The field of AI is evolving very quickly and expanding so much that the application of the standards being developed by SC 42 will continue to grow along with the work programme of the committee. Diab foresees many more standards taking shape, especially in areas that have broad appeal, applicability and market adoption.

And it’s also because of these standards that Diab is certain AI adoption will not only be successful, but is one of those major technology inflection points that will change how we live, work and play.

Source: iso.org

 

Ngày 19/10

110/ New (e-)takeoff for aviation industry

New technologies, from robotics to machine learning, are ushering in a period of rapid change and development. While the aviation industry is working to reap the benefits of this industrial automation, standards, especially those of ISO/TC 184/SC 4, will play a key role in ensuring a smooth flight path – but only if they can keep up.

Ever since Icarus boldly strapped on his wooden-framed wings made of feathers and wax and took to the skies, human beings have been defying gravity, designing and creating all kinds of contraptions and devices to get themselves airborne. Hubris, along with solar power, did it in for Icarus, but these days, the likes of Elon Musk, founder and chief designer of SpaceX and creator of Tesla, and Jeff Bezos, founder of Amazon.com and Blue Origin, are blazing new trails in the skies, driven by their vision and a sense of adventure, and propelled by the new technologies of the Fourth Industrial Revolution.

These modern-day Icaruses can afford to think big, and their successes, trailblazing endeavours and projections are splashed across the media. Of course, the aerospace and aviation industry has been pushing boundaries for years. From the first commercial air flight in 1914, demand for air travel has grown exponentially. As a result, the industry has had to seek new ways to design safer, faster, lighter, more fuel-efficient aircraft. And in the ever more environmentally aware 21^st century, the industry also has to take action to reduce aircraft emissions and achieve a more sustainable carbon footprint – big challenges indeed in an era that has been described as “generation EasyJet”.

Fast and flexible

Finding solutions to these challenges calls for cost-­effective, fast and flexible new production processes. Technologies such as advanced robotics, artificial intelligence, machine learning, cloud computing and the Internet of Things are playing a huge role in such processes and are quietly transforming our lives, particularly in the aviation industry. Every time we step on a plane and buckle up, we are handing ourselves over to some degree of automation.

For instance (nervous flyers should look away now), we never think about the thousands of holes that are holding the different parts of the plane together and how those holes were drilled, a time-consuming task that also requires a lot of precision. Ben Morgan, Head of the Integrated Manufacturing Group at the Advanced Manufacturing Research Centre at Sheffield University, points out in an article on automated manufacturing in The Engineer, this is a task better suited to robots than people. “Automated systems can achieve greater precision, and do not get bored or tired; drills capable of handling aerospace materials and layers of different materials are bulky, heavy and difficult even for skilled staff to use,” he says. Good news for air travellers.

And when you consider that a Boeing 747, for example, consists of six million parts, which must all be assembled, it becomes clear that automated manufacturing has a key role to play in building new aircraft. However, therein lies the challenge for the aviation industry – not only in staying abreast of the rapid development of new technologies but also ensuring standardization in the field of automation systems and their integration for design, sourcing, manufacturing, production and delivery, support, maintenance and disposal of products and their associated services.

One person with a unique perspective on both these challenges is Kenny Swope, Senior Manager, Business Capability Integration, at Boeing, and Chair of technical committee ISO/TC 184, Automation systems and integration, subcommittee SC 4, Industrial data. For a company like Boeing, which is a manufacturer of highly complex systems at scale, Swope says standards are critical to its overall success in the industry and are woven through the company’s “product, the supply chain and the service offerings in a myriad of ways”.

Key role for standards

He cites three standards as playing a key role. According to Swope, one of the most successful standards in the adoption of a digital product design is ISO 10303, Industrial automation systems and integration – Product data representation and exchange, often referred to as STEP. ISO 10303 comes under ISO/TC 184/SC 4 on industrial data. STEP has evolved into the most commonly used standard for exchanging product design data between computer-aided design (CAD) systems, both inside companies and across the global supply chain.

He says: “As the heart of the product design and deliverable from engineering to manufacturing, the three-dimensional representation of the product design coupled with the engineering requirements and manufacturing information form the core of the digital twin.” This collection of data for a detailed virtual representation has clear benefits. At Boeing, Swope says, “the product design is distributed to both internal and external stakeholders at the component and assembly level and this standard is critical to that network”.

Disseminating complex data on product design for general instruction, training and documentation is another big challenge. Here, Swope highlights ISO 14306, Industrial automation systems and integration – JT file format specification for 3D visualization, which is also managed by ISO/TC 184/SC 4. He says the standard is invaluable in providing what he describes as a “lightweight version” of a complex data structure such as the visualization of the product for manufacturing, service and support, which “is useful in engineering documents, online service manuals and manufacturing stations”.

The third standard, ISO 32000, Document management – Portable document format, “is a strong partner to both ISO 10303 and ISO 14306”, says Swope. This standard, commonly known as the PDF standard, is, he adds, vital to the seamless operation of the digital future as it provides a universally accepted conveyance vehicle for the product design and its associated information.

Finally, ISO 8000, Data quality, and ISO 22745, Industrial automation systems and integration – Open technical dictionaries and their application to master data, are significant enablers to smart manufacturing. As ISO 9000 is to manufacturing quality, ISO 8000 is to data. Smart manufacturing requires data free of defect and openly shareable data definitions of commonly used parts. ISO 22745 provides a multi-industry solution to sharing definitions of these common parts for use across the supply chain.

Automation and efficiency

Annalise Suzuki, Director of Technology and Engagement, at Elysium Inc., a software company that describes itself as a multi-CAD data exchange optimization platform, also extols the benefits of standards and the critical role they play as the trend for industrial automation grows. She says: “Organizations pursuing automation for efficiency gains must find a balance between adopting new technology and leveraging stability from standards where they can.”

Like Swope, Suzuki believes that leveraging standards allows organizations to quickly agree on the means and methodology to collaborate, without overcomplicating processes. She says: “It allows doers to take action without the need to solve ‘how’ first.” While standards allow collaboration among people today, she says they will be “a key enabler to drive automation potential for machine-to-machine communication, which will be the basis for achieving the Fourth Industrial Revolution”.

Standards clearly go a long way to helping industry realize the full potential of automation, enabling people and technology to work hand in hand. But what about safety? Unlike our old friend Icarus, who turned a deaf ear to his father’s warning about flying too close to the sun, the aviation industry rightly puts safety concerns to the fore. But does smart manufacturing, and industrial automation in particular, carry the seeds of potential lapses in safety, especially when it comes to data security?

Bridging the safety gap

Christoph Preusse, an expert and designee from ISO/TC 199, Safety of machinery, and Chair of the Smart Manufacturing Coordinating Committee (SMCC), acknowledges the threat to safety from IT-system malfunctions. However, he points out that a lot of effort has been made by ISO/TC 184 (together with the International Electrotechnical Commission’s IEC/TC 65) as well as in ISO/TC 199 to improve security and the interaction between security and safety (for example, future technical report ISO/TR 22100-4). As a result, Preusse says, “industrial automation and its control systems are actually on the way to improving the safety of machinery”.

As mentioned earlier, one of the striking characteristics of the Fourth Industrial Revolution is the speed at which new technologies are being developed. Many young people growing up now, for example, have never used a land line. While industry adoption is something that each company has within its control, Swope says that gaps are often found that need to be addressed and resolved. “These resolutions simply take too long in today’s rapid-paced business environment. In addition, new technologies and methods of manufacturing are emerging that are seeing significant industry excitement. Additive manufacturing, blockchain, and advanced robotics are recent examples. While value generation is occurring right now as an emerging space, the real value will come when these and other technologies are standardized and replicated at a massive scale.”

Open for opportunities

The biggest challenge, therefore, in many respects, is how ISO and other standards organizations can keep up and ensure their standards remain relevant. As Swope puts it: “There is speed to adoption and speed of development.” He says consensus can be time-consuming and the more stakeholders have to agree, the more difficult consensus becomes and the longer it takes to achieve.

However, along with the biggest challenge, Swope also sees a great opportunity – the rate of standards development. He says: “I see opportunity for ISO and other standards bodies to digitally transform themselves and move to that agile future state. There are encouraging pilots and early work occurring in this area.” For Swope, ISO/TC 184/SC 4 is contributing to that future state “by adopting and promoting as many advancements as possible with these pilots, working with stakeholders in industry and across ISO”. Smart moves.

Source: iso.org

 

111/ Advanced Trade Policy Course gets under way in Geneva

Thirty participants from around the world are attending an Advanced Trade Policy Course (ATPC) from 8 October to 30 November 2018 at the WTO headquarters in Geneva. The course was opened by H.E. Mr Mikael Anzén, Sweden’s Permanent Representative to the WTO, and Ms Bridget Chilala, Director of the WTO’s Institute for Training and Technical Cooperation.

The course will focus on helping the participants develop and apply practical skills in areas such as trade negotiations, dispute settlement, trade monitoring, and the analysis, formulation and implementation of trade policy. Both legal and economic aspects of WTO rules and disciplines will be examined in a series of interactive sessions including case studies, simulations and exercises.

Roundtable discussions will provide a platform for sharing of experiences and best practices as well as debating current trade topics. Participants will be expected to prepare and deliver a presentation relating to a trade policy topic. More information on the course can be found here.

At the start of the course, participants were encouraged to be proactive and to engage as much as possible to maximize the benefits from exchanging ideas and opinions with each other and with the experts making presentations during the course.

The ATPC represents the highest level of training (level 3) in the WTO’s progressive learning programme and is targeted at participants who already possess a sound knowledge of the WTO and its agreements.

List of the participants

Ahmad Tariq MATEEN	AFGHANISTAN
Sonia BENZIADA	ALGERIA
Mohammad Marufur Rashid KHAN	BANGLADESH
John Nicholas RIVERO	BELIZE
Edina CAVCIC	BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA
Boitumelo SEBONEGO	BOTSWANA
Yuan YUAN	CHINA
Tamar NIKOLOZASHVILI	GEORGIA
Hannah Mensuah AFFUM	GHANA
Balbir SINGH	INDIA
Andrew Russell MIGHTY	JAMAICA
Mohammad Ahmad Yousef GHANEM	JORDAN
Yerkebulan ABDRASSIL	KAZAKHSTAN
Livingstone Mwangi WAHURO	KENYA
Anouphab SAYASENSOUK	LAO PEOPLE’S DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC
Relebohile Faith RAMAKHALE	LESOTHO
Naing NAING	MYANMAR
Vistorina NGHIFENWA	NAMIBIA
Buddhi Prasad UPADHYAYA	NEPAL
Zahra Ali Mohammed AL SIYABI	OMAN
Lynly DE LA CUESTA	PHILIPPINES
Marelva Samantha BOONE	SAINT KITTS AND NEVIS
Shu-Lin HUANG	CHINESE TAIPEI
Ester Lotty SOLOMON	TANZANIA
Ali Can KAHYA	TURKEY
Brenda KABASINGUZI	UGANDA
Tetiana NYKONCHUK	UKRAINE
Dero TAWI	VANUATU
Macpherson Mapenzi MUNSANJE	ZAMBIA
Farisai MUZIVI	ZIMBABWE

Source: wto.org

 

112/ Vietnam facilitates investment from EU, Belgium: Prime Minister

The Vietnamese Government is making concerted efforts to improve business climate for both domestic and foreign enterprises, including those from the Europe, Prime Minister Nguyen Xuan Phuc said on October 17.

Attending the Vietnam- EU-Belgium Business Forum jointly held by the Vietnam Chamber of Commerce and Industry (VCCI), Belgian Vietnamese Alliance, embassies and trade offices of Vietnam and Belgium, PM Phuc said that the Government pledges favourable conditions to connect enterprises from both sides for the benefits of the firms and the people.

Two-way trade has increased tenfolds in nearly a decade, he noted, adding that it is likely to rise to US$53 billion this year.

Laying stress on the Europe-Vietnam free trade agreement (EVFTA) which is expected to open the door for the enterprises to capitalise on their cooperation potential when it takes effect, PM Phuc hoped that the European business association, especially Belgian firms, will raise their voice to push the signing of the deal.

Vietnam will serve as a bridge for European enterprises to break into ASEAN market toward a free and fair trade, he said, underlining Vietnam’s advantages for Belgian investments like stable socio-political and macro-economic conditions, and well-developed port systems.

Together with the imminent signing of the EVFTA, Vietnam has participated in 15 new-generation free trade agreements, which means that if Belgian firms enter Vietnam, they will get into a global market, he underlined.

At the forum, PM Phuc and officials of both nations witnessed the signing of several cooperation documents between the VCCI and Belgian Vietnamese Alliance, Vietnam Post and Telecommunication Group and European mobile network business centre, and Vietnam Project company and Sarens Group.

Speaking at the event, Chairman of the Belgium – Vietnam Friendship Alliance Andries Gryffoy said Belgian firms are interested in seeking opportunities in health care, real estate, green energy, food, beverages, seaport infrastructure and other fields in Vietnam, adding that they are promising investors.

He said Belgium boasts a business-friendly government, dynamic research environment, and education system up to international standards and high labour productivity.

Lying in the heart of the EU with a population of 420 million and modern infrastructure, Belgium focuses on industries such as aerospace, chemicals, energy, waste and wastewater treatment, artificial intelligence and 4.0 technology, which are potential fields for partnership with Vietnamese firms, he said.

The same day, PM Phuc had working sessions with representatives from EU and Belgian leading firms operating in Vietnam, during which they informed the Vietnamese leader on outcomes and investment and business plans in the Southeast Asian nation in such fields as oil and gas, renewable energy, agriculture, fertiliser and insecticide production, seaport infrastructure, rubber, and tire production. They also made recommendations on how to accelerate cooperation between the business communities of Vietnam and the EU, as well as between those of Vietnam and Belgium in particular.

Earlier, on October 16, Prime Minister Nguyen Xuan Phuc received leaders of Solveigh and Nijhuis – the Dutch businesses with experience in anti-erosion, water exploitation and use and carrying out a climate change adaptation project in central Vietnam.

The PM hailed Solveigh and Nijhuis as well as other Dutch partners in conducting surveys, research and working solutions to minimise coastal erosion in Vietnam. He described their work as a specific action to implement cooperation programmes within the framework of the strategic partnership on adaptation to climate change and water management between Vietnam and the Netherlands.

Menno Holterman, Managing Director of Nijhuis, said the project’s partners inspected erosion in Hoi An and agreed to carry out another project to address challenges in the area. It aims to improve safety and livelihood for locals, and protect and restore Hoi An coast, while forming new eco-system tourist sites there. Investment for this will be arranged by European and Dutch organisations and businesses and Vietnam’s T&T group.

Representatives of the two Dutch groups expressed their wish to continue receiving attention and facilitation from the Prime Minister and relevant agencies of Vietnam during the project’s implementation.

Welcoming proposals of Dutch organisations and businesses, PM Phuc said the Vietnamese Government hopes for experience sharing and support on human resources and technology from the Dutch partners to solve urgent issues in Vietnam, especially coastal and riverbank erosion and subsidence, climate change response, and help local people’s sustainable socio-economic development.

The PM suggested Dutch and Vietnamese partners coordinate with the People’s Committee of Quang Nam province to accelerate the study and survey to have an optimal plan.

The two Dutch groups, T&T group and other partners were asked to work with Vietnam’s Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development and Quang Nam authorities to reach an implementation plan.

Source: NDO/VNA

 

113/ Eurocham: EVFTA a “win-win” for Europe and Vietnam

Nine out of ten European companies want the EU-Vietnam Free Trade Agreement (EVFTA) to be implemented in 2019 or as soon as possible thereafter, according to new research from the European Chamber of Commerce in Vietnam (EuroCham).

EuroCham released the data at an event in Brussels to launch its latest report – The EVFTA: Perspectives from Vietnam – on October 8, together with amfori and BusinessEurope. The launch event, with 70 participants, is part of a EuroCham mission to the European Parliament and European Commission to push for the quick ratification of the EVFTA.

EuroCham’s report includes the results of a new survey of the Chamber’s members, who were asked how the EVFTA would affect their business operations. Over 130 responded – more than 10 per cent of EuroCham’s membership – and the results were striking.

Just under 80 per cent believe that the EVFTA will have either a “Significant” or “Moderate” impact on their business in the medium term. Meanwhile, over 80 per cent believe that the FTA will make Vietnam more competitive, while 72 per cent said it will help Vietnam become a hub for European business in the ASEAN region.

On top of the positive economic benefits, EuroCham members believe the EVFTA will help improve a range of social and environmental issues in Vietnam, from “Knowledge Transfer and Local Workforce Advancement” to “Workers’ Rights”. For example, one-third (33 per cent) of EuroCham members believe the EVFTA will have a “Significant” impact on improving “Sustainable Development and Environmental Protection”.

The report also includes the reflections of business leaders, NGOs, economists, entrepreneurs and workers. In their own words, each contributor shares their personal perspective on Vietnam’s progress since the “doi moi’ reforms first opened Vietnam to foreign investment and on how the EVFTA will help Vietnam further integrate with the international community and global economy.

“This report provides clear evidence that the EVFTA is a ‘win-win’ for Europe and Vietnam,” said Mr. Nicolas Audier, Co-Chairman of EuroCham. “Our members paint a positive, optimistic picture of the agreement, with 85 per cent anticipating a significant or moderate impact on their business and investment plans in the long term.”

“Meanwhile, 80 per cent of EuroCham members believe the EVFTA will improve Vietnam’s competitiveness compared to other countries such as China, Japan and South Korea. And over 70 per cent see Vietnam becoming a hub for European business in the ASEAN region.”

“This week, EuroCham is leading a delegation of business leaders to Brussels to take this positive message to the heart of Europe. Our delegation will meet with the highest levels of decision making in the European Parliament and EU Commission, to highlight the impact the EVFTA will have not just on bilateral trade and investment but on the entire economic, social and environmental fabric of Vietnam.”

Source: VN Economic Times

 

Ngày 22/10

114/ razil initiates WTO dispute complaint against Chinese measures on sugar imports

Brazil has requested WTO dispute consultations with China to discuss certain measures imposed by China on imports of sugar. Brazil’s request was circulated to WTO members on 22 October.

In its request, Brazil identifies three measures adopted by China in relation to imports of sugar:

• an additional ad valorem duty of between 45% and 35% imposed as a safeguard measure on imports of sugar outside the existing tariff-rate quota (TRQ);
• China’s administration of its TRQ with respect to imports of sugar; and
• the Automatic Import Licensing System for sugar outside the TRQ, which, according to Brazil, allows granting a license to import sugar only if the request does not exceed the maximum amount pre-set by China’s Ministry of Commerce.

Brazil claims the measures are inconsistent with various provisions under the WTO’s General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) 1994, the Safeguards Agreement, the Agreement on Import Licensing Procedures and China’s Accession Protocol.

Further information is available in document WT/DS568/1

What is a request for consultations?

The request for consultations formally initiates a dispute in the WTO. Consultations give the parties an opportunity to discuss the matter and to find a satisfactory solution without proceeding further with litigation. After 60 days, if consultations have failed to resolve the dispute, the complainant may request adjudication by a panel.

• More on consultations
• Current status of disputes

Source: wto.org

 

115/ Ukraine initiates dispute complaints against Armenia, Kyrgyz Republic on steel pipe duties

Ukraine has requested WTO dispute consultations with Armenia and the Kyrgyz Republic to discuss anti-dumping duties imposed by the two countries on steel pipes from Ukraine. Ukraine’s request was circulated to WTO members on 22 October.

The two dumping measures were maintained pursuant to a 2016 sunset review conducted by the Eurasian Economic Commission (EEC), which prolonged the original measures. The EEC is the executive arm of the Eurasian Economic Union, of which Armenia and the Kyrgyz Republic are both members.

Ukraine charges the measures are inconsistent with various provisions under the WTO’s Anti-Dumping Agreement and Article VI of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT).

Further information is available in documents WT/DS569/1 and WT/DS570/1.

What is a request for consultations?

The request for consultations formally initiates a dispute in the WTO. Consultations give the parties an opportunity to discuss the matter and to find a satisfactory solution without proceeding further with litigation. After 60 days, if consultations have failed to resolve the dispute, the complainant may request adjudication by a panel.

• More on consultations
• Current status of disputes

Source: wto.org

 

116/ Advanced Course on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures starts in Geneva

Twenty-five participants from Latin America are taking part in the 14th edition of the WTO’s Advanced Course on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS). Organized by the Agriculture and Commodities Division (AGCD), with the collaboration of the Institute for Training and Technical Cooperation (ITTC), the course is taking place at WTO headquarters in Geneva from 22 October to 9 November 2018.

The aim of the course is to address, in a practical manner, implementation issues faced by WTO members related to food safety and animal and plant health measures. Participants will engage in hands-on training on SPS matters, ranging from addressing national implementation issues to the identification of SPS-related market access difficulties.

The course places emphasis on participants’ leadership and initiative in implementing SPS actions. With an informal motto of “you make the difference”, the training activity will require the participants to develop an action plan, with the help of experienced coaches, to address implementation and market access difficulties encountered in their countries.

An online follow-up will take place over nine months once the Advanced Course has been completed. Participants will present reports on the implementation of their actions plans at a session scheduled for July 2019 in Geneva.

Participants will have the opportunity to attend meetings of the SPS Committee and the thematic session on equivalence to better understand the day-to-day work of the Committee. Ad hoc sessions will be organised to allow participants to network and share experiences with WTO experts, capital- and Geneva-based delegates as well as representatives from other international organizations active in SPS-related matters, including the Codex Alimentarius Commission, the International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC) and the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE). The course will be conducted in Spanish.

List of the participants

Argentina	Ms. Jimena Georgina GIMÉNEZ
Argentina	Ms. Emilia Soledad IBARRA
Chile	Ms. Roxana VERA MUÑOZ
Chile	Mr. Fernando CATALÁN
Colombia	Ms. Margarita María GONZÁLEZ SERNA
Colombia	Ms. Blanca Cristina OLARTE PINILLA
Colombia	Ms. Elena MORENO BELTRÁN
Costa Rica	Ms. Kattia MURILLO MURILLO
Costa Rica	Ms. Karen Paola FERNÁNDEZ QUIRÓS
Costa Rica	Mr. Olivet CRUZ VÁSQUEZ
Cuba	Mr. Ángel Manuel CASAMAYOR LEÓN
Ecuador	Mr. Felipe Alejandro TORRES ANDRADE
Ecuador	Mr. Israel VACA JIMÉNEZ
Ecuador	Ms. Patricia LINCANGO ULCUANGO
Guatemala	Mr. Byron Efraín GIL MORALES
Guatemala	Mr. Julio CORDÓN y CORDÓN
Mexico	Ms. Leona VALVERDE
Mexico	Mr. Sergio Iván BALDERAS RODRÍGUEZ
Mexico	Ms. Zoila Erika CASTELLANOS BRAVO
Panama	Mr. Luis ALVARADO GÁLVEZ
Paraguay	Ms. Leonidas ENCISO
Paraguay	Mr. Julio Eduardo ROJAS RAMÍREZ
Paraguay	Mr. Idilio MÉNDEZ GRIMALDI
Peru	Mr. Efraín ARANGO CCENTE
Peru	Ms. Susan Karin DIOSES CORDOVA

Source: wto.org

 

117/ DG Azevêdo welcomes President Khaltmaa of Mongolia to the WTO

Director-General Roberto Azevêdo welcomed Mongolian President Battulga Khaltmaa to the WTO on 22 October. They discussed Mongolia’s support for the trading system, particularly in the context of the current trade tensions, and how the country can enhance its participation in global trade. President Khaltmaa was accompanied by Mongolia’s Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs, Ms Batmunkh Battsetseg, and other senior officials.

DG Azevêdo said:

“I am honoured to welcome President Khaltmaa to the WTO. Mongolia plays an active role in the activities of the organization and has long been a strong supporter of the multilateral trading system. As a landlocked country, it faces particular challenges in participating in global trade. Today’s meeting was a good opportunity to discuss how the WTO’s Trade Facilitation Agreement can help to address these challenges and to assist Mongolia in reaping the full benefits of trade.

“We will continue to support Mongolia to integrate further into the global economy, including by continuing to deliver capacity building support. I also encourage the Mongolian government to play an active role in ongoing discussions on strengthening the WTO, particularly in the context of the rising trade tensions which are on all of our minds today. I look forward to continuing to work with President Khaltmaa and the government of Mongolia in advancing the work of the WTO and in furthering the country’s growth and development efforts.”

Source: wto.org

 

118/ Viet Nam’s measures on cyber security products questioned at import licensing meeting

The United States and Japan asked Viet Nam to clarify its measures covering cyber security products at the 22 October meeting of the Committee on Import Licensing. WTO members also discussed previously raised issues concerning import restrictions on scrap materials, pulses and other goods.

The United States expressed concern over Viet Nam’s Decree No. 58 of 2016 involving the sale and provision of civil cryptographic products. The US said import licensing has been required for products where encryption is an important but not a core function. The US asked Viet Nam to clarify the rationale behind the measure and said it could stifle trade without producing clear benefits to Viet Nam.

Japan said it had a strong interest in the issue and requested Viet Nam to clarify the import licensing requirements and procedures for cryptographic products. Japan said it would closely monitor the situation. Viet Nam, in response, said it would relay these concerns to its capital-based authorities.

China’s import restrictions on recoverable materials

Five delegations (United States, European Union, Canada, Korea and Australia) reiterated their request for more information about China’s import restrictions covering scrap materials. The United States, which requested that the issue be included again in the meeting agenda, said recent changes in China’s policies have resulted in the disposal of recyclable materials into landfills instead of being further recycled in China. The US also said that Chinese manufacturers have been forced to use “virgin” materials and that there could be a heightened threat of increased marine litter.

The European Union, which had raised the issue under a separate item on the meeting agenda, similarly asked for a detailed description of procedures for waste products and envisaged changes to import policies. Canada said it encourages China to clarify the specific list of goods subject to import licensing requirements and the applicable procedures. Korea said there was a need to reduce the uncertainty related to this issue. Australia said that while it continues to appreciate China’s efforts to reduce pollution, it finds the measures to be more restrictive than necessary to achieve the desired objectives.

China, in response, said it had already notified information to the WTO Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade and that it plans to notify a catalogue of solid waste products that can be used as raw materials to the Committee on Import Licensing along with their respective import restrictions.

India’s measures on imported pulses

Four members (Australia, Canada, the EU and the US) reiterated concerns over India’s import restrictions on certain pulses such as lentils, mung beans and peas. Australia, which requested the item be placed again on the meeting agenda, noted that quantitative restrictions on certain pulses have been extended until 31 December. Australia said such restrictions are not consistent with India’s obligations to the WTO and that the measures have had a serious impact on the global market for pulses.

Canada, which identified itself as the largest supplier of pulses to India, said it was disappointed with the continued implementation of the import quotas. Canada noted that the elimination of quantitative restrictions is a fundamental principle in the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) and WTO rules. The EU likewise asked India to clarify the legal basis for introducing such quantitative restrictions. The EU said the sudden introduction of the measure has been harmful to both developing countries and developed countries alike due to price fluctuations. The US supported the other members’ statements and reiterated its request for India to provide more information and notify the measure to the WTO.

India referred members to its previous responses made in the Committee on Market Access and Committee on Agriculture. India also requested members to submit their questions in writing so these could be relayed to its authorities.

Other trade concerns

Members also discussed other previously raised issues such as Brazil’s import restrictions on nitrocellulose; Russia’s requirement for Good Manufacturing Practice certificates for pharmaceuticals; Thailand’s import procedures for feedwheat; Indonesia’s measures on imported tyres, dairy products, and cellular phones, handheld computers and tablets; and India’s  import restrictions on boric acid.

Efforts to improve transparency

The WTO Secretariat informed members of new resources for information on import licensing: a consolidated paper on written questions and replies submitted to the Committee since 1995 and a new website containing members’ import licensing profiles. Delegations already have access to the website and plans are being made for its public launch, the Secretariat said. The Committee Chair, Ms Lorena Rivera Orjuela (Colombia), sought members’ feedback on efforts to simplify the notification procedures concerning import licensing to encourage more transparency among members. Several members expressed their support in further discussions and initiatives on the issue.

The  Committee undertook the 12th biennial review of the operation and implementation of the Agreement on Import Licensing Procedures and the Chair intends to hold informal consultations with members on improving compliance with notification obligations and transparency in their import licensing regimes.

Source: wto.org

 

119/ DG Azevêdo meets Prime Minister Hun Sen of Cambodia at the WTO

Director-General Roberto Azevêdo welcomed Prime Minister Hun Sen of Cambodia to the WTO on 22 October. They discussed the potential risks that current trade tensions could pose for smaller economies and the importance therefore of strengthening the trading system and continuing to deliver capacity building support where it is most needed. DG Azevêdo congratulated the Prime Minister on Cambodia’s leadership in placing the issues of least-developed countries (LDCs) at the centre of WTO discussions.

DG Azevêdo said:

“It is my great pleasure to welcome Prime Minister Hun Sen of Cambodia to the WTO. During these challenging times for the multilateral trading system, we must redouble our efforts to support least-developed countries to benefit from trade. I am committed to working with Cambodia and other LDCs to stand up for their interests in the trade debate and to ensure that the trading system serves them. We must continue working together to this end. Providing capacity building support to help countries like Cambodia develop their trading capacity is one very important aspect of this. We will continue delivering that support with our Aid for Trade work, including through excellent initiatives like the Enhanced Integrated Framework.”

Cambodia held the position of coordinator of the LDC Group at the WTO in 2017, and led the Group at the 11th WTO Ministerial Conference in Buenos Aires. In recent years Cambodia has received support from the Enhanced Integrated Framework (EIF) to develop its National Trade Integration Strategy. The EIF provided investment of US$ 5.7 million to the Cambodia Export Diversification and Expansion Programme, supporting a range of economic sectors and delivering significant results. For example, this investment contributed to the tripling of Cambodian rice exports between 2011 and 2015.

The EIF is a multilateral partnership dedicated to assisting LDCs to use trade to support growth, sustainable development and poverty reduction. The EIF is headquartered at the WTO in Geneva, and the WTO is one of the Framework’s key partner agencies.

Source: wto.org

 

120/ WTO members engage in technical discussions on agricultural market access

At a meeting of the Agriculture Committee on 22 October, WTO members discussed agricultural market access and the proposed Special Safeguard Mechanism (SSM). In line with the approach proposed by the Chair of the Committee, Ambassador John Ronald Dipchandra Ford (Guyana), the discussions were geared towards technical and analytical exchanges. The Chair commended members on their active engagement in moving the process forward.

Presentations

Presentations by the WTO Secretariat, Paraguay, the United States and the Russian Federation prepared the ground for the discussions on agricultural market access, an important topic that has not been the subject of active engagement among members since the preparatory process for the Nairobi Ministerial Conference in 2015.

In response to the request of members, the Secretariat made a presentation on agricultural tariffs and the various data systems and online tools that members can consult to access the relevant information on tariffs and other market access issues. These data sources include the WTO’s World Tariff Profiles, the Tariff Download Facility (tdf.wto.org), Tariff Analysis Online (tao.wto.org) and the International Trade and Market Access Data interactive tool on the WTO website. The Secretariat also highlighted its ongoing efforts to further improve and streamline the various data systems that it maintains.

Stressing that “market access has a big contribution to make to the reform process as envisaged in Article 20 of the Agreement on Agriculture”, Paraguay presented its joint paper with Uruguay that was submitted in July (JOB/AG/139) entitled “Market access alternatives”. The paper points out some major issues in market access, including the tariff overhang (“water” between the bound tariff and the applied tariff), high tariffs and complex tariff structures.

Offering a recap of the previous negotiating approaches and tariff reduction formulae, Paraguay underlined some specific market access restrictions currently faced in agricultural trade – namely non-ad valorem (AV) tariffs, tariff peaks, tariff escalation (higher import duties on finished or semi-processed products than on raw materials), tariff rate quotas (TRQs), the special agricultural safeguard (SSG) and non-tariff measures. Paraguay also reminded members of the various challenges faced in the market access negotiations and posed specific questions on the desired level of ambition in market access and potential sequencing of the various issues forming part of the discussions.

The US presentation took a closer look at the six areas it identified in its July paper (JOB/AG/141), namely bound versus applied tariffs, complex tariffs, high tariffs, issues with TRQs, the special agricultural safeguard (SSG) and regional/preferential trade agreements. It presented data in respect of these six themes and highlighted the performance of certain members, including the biggest importers and exporters.

The United States stated that the implementation of tariff policies and their complexity vary across members and emphasized the need for technical engagement towards a greater understanding of such policies. It urged members to enhance transparency with regard to tariffs and other market access policy instruments through timely notifications and invited other members to undertake technical analysis of the relevant issues.

Russia highlighted its continued interest in the SSG issue with a new technical paper entitled “the usage of special agricultural safeguards” (JOB/AG/145). Following the agriculture tariffication process of the Uruguay Round negotiations, the SSG mechanism allows about 30 WTO members to temporarily increase import tariffs on specific agriculture products in cases of import surges or a decline in prices.

Russia noted that the usage rate of the SSG is very low: only eight out of 33 members entitled to apply the SSG used this instrument in the past five years. It begs the question as to whether the SSG is truly needed, Russia said. In response to specific questions on data and methodology, it emphasised that its paper is a result of preliminary research and work would be undertaken to further investigate the matter.

Members’ discussions

Members engaged in a discussion on a wide range of issues, including water in the tariffs, tariff reduction formulas, tariff simplifications, tariff peaks, TRQs, regional trade agreements (RTAs), erosion of preferences, tariff escalation as well as the SSG.

Discussions on various technical issues, which were taking place after a break of several years, were welcomed by many members, but there were clear differences between members on the broad issues of linkage and sequencing between market access and domestic support. Some members also referred to the linkage with market access in sectors outside of agriculture.

On the issue of tariff simplification, some members stressed the varying level of complexity that the various types of non-ad valorem tariffs entail. The point was also made that “water” in tariffs may be an important policy flexibility and reducing it would constitute a concession in the negotiations.

A number of developing members emphasized the importance of special and differential treatment (S&D) for developing countries while some importing members referred to non-trade concerns. Members who have joined the WTO since 1995 – through accession negotiations – emphasized the need to acknowledge the extensive commitments taken on during their membership negotiations.

Regarding the SSG, some members called for eliminating the SSG as an early confidence-building outcome since it was rarely invoked and seemingly easy to abolish. However, members with SSG rights said the elimination can only be considered in the wider context of the reform process.

Some members referred to broader food security and sustainability challenges and highlighted the need for a balance between domestic production and accessing international markets to fulfil domestic food needs. In addition, some members shared concerns about the “thin” global agriculture markets and the associated price volatility risks and emphasized the need to strengthen global trade through open markets and enhanced market access.

In spite of the complexity and divergences in the discussions, the Chair was “heartened” by the fact that all members stand ready to constructively engage in further discussions and to advance agricultural reform.

Special Safeguard Mechanism (SSM)

On behalf of the G33 (Coalition of developing countries pressing for flexibility for developing countries to undertake limited market opening in agriculture), Indonesia made a presentation in the dedicated session on the SSM. It recalled the repeated mandates from the Doha Ministerial Declaration (WT/MIN(01)/DEC/1), the Hong Kong Ministerial Declaration (WT/MIN(05)/DEC) and the Nairobi Ministerial Decision (WT/MIN(15)/43- WT/L/978) for an SSM for developing countries. The SSM, once agreed, would  allow developing countries to temporarily increase import tariffs in cases of import surges or a decline in prices.

Indonesia reiterated the socio-economic conditions in developing countries, especially in low-income and least developed countries (LDCs), where 60%-70% of employment depends on the agriculture sector and where the average landholding size is very small. Indonesia justified the need for an SSM to support food security and rural development by highlighting international price volatility and its potential impact on the livelihoods of many small and poor farmers. Indonesia also associated the importance of the SSM with the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (such as SDGs 1, 2 and 17.4).

A number of developing members supported the G33 demand for an SSM. One member shared its own experience of increased sugar imports, which put severe pressure on its domestic sugar sector and strongly supported the case for a safeguard mechanism for developing countries. Some G33 members expressed the view that an SSM was not intended to block normal international trade but to address the impact on small farmers’ livelihoods.

Other members stressed that they could envisage an outcome on an SSM only in the context of a broader outcome improving market access. These members questioned some of the underlying assumptions behind the G33 position and asked proponents a number of specific questions, including on the country exemptions, the need for an SSM despite “water” in tariffs, transmission of internal prices to domestic markets, the effect of an SSM in potentially aggravating price volatility and why the negotiating efforts should not be devoted to addressing agriculture distortions rather than seeking an SSM to remedy those distortions.

On the issue of “water” in tariffs, the G33 argued that the SSM would be a more targeted remedy compared to the general raising of tariffs on the relevant products. The G33 also expressed a willingness to further engage in technical discussions.

Next steps

Commending the good interactions and candid substantive exchanges among members, the Chair encouraged WTO members to engage in further technical discussions in the coming months. He cautioned against invoking difficult linkages at this stage. Based on members’ engagement and written contributions, he proposed to keep open the possibility to revert to the topics already addressed – i.e. domestic support, public stockholding for food security purposes, market access and the SSM – during the forthcoming Committee meetings in November and December.

The Chair underlined the concerns expressed regarding the current adverse global trade environment and said that this has a broader effect on the negotiations and is not just limited to agriculture. “Therefore, we should continue our efforts and engagement so that we can get ready to make decisions and compromises in a more enabling and conducive negotiating environment,” he said. He also urged members to adopt a sense of urgency, especially as they move into 2019, when there would normally be a Ministerial Conference, even if the dates for the next Ministerial Conference have been fixed for June 2020.

The next meetings of the Committee on Agriculture are scheduled for 15-16 November. They will include discussions on export competition and export restrictions.

Source: wto.org

 

121/ Steel at the centre of discussions in WTO safeguards meeting

Safeguard actions on steel were once again at the heart of most concerns raised by WTO members at a meeting of the WTO’s Safeguards Committee on 22 October 2018.

At the meeting, a number of members expressed concern over recent safeguard actions on steel products. Most of the members taking these actions referred to current global overcapacity in steel and certain measures imposed by other members.

Under the WTO Safeguards Agreement, a member may restrict imports of a product temporarily (take “safeguard” actions) through higher tariffs or other measures if its domestic industry is seriously injured, or threatened with serious injury, due to an unforeseen surge in imports. Unlike anti-dumping duties, safeguard measures cover imports from all countries although imports from developing countries with a small share of imports are exempted through special and differential treatment provisions.

Actions on products related to steel

Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) – three members voiced concern about the investigation notified by the EAEU on flat-rolled steel products. In response, Russia stressed that the investigation had just started on 7 August.

European Union – seven members voiced concern about the investigation notified by the EU on certain steel products, including on the provisional measure that took effect in mid-July 2018. Several members considered that the necessary preconditions for imposing a provisional measure had not been met, and that WTO rules did not allow for preventive measures. The EU responded that the investigation was carried out in a WTO-consistent manner and that the measure was neither a preventive measure nor retaliatory.

Turkey – six WTO members voiced concern about the investigation notified by Turkey on certain steel products, including on the provisional measure that took effect in mid-October. Turkey stressed that this was still only a provisional measure and that the investigation was continuing.

Canada – three WTO members voiced concern about the investigation notified by Canada on certain steel products, including on the provisional measure that took effect at the same time as the initiation on 11 October 2018. Canada stressed that the investigation was carried out in a WTO-consistent manner.

Other actions and issues discussed

In addition, six members expressed concerns with the US tariffs on imports of steel and aluminium products taken under Section 232 of its Trade Expansion Act of 1962. Those members consider these measures to be safeguards for which the United States has not offered trade compensation as required by the WTO Safeguards Agreement. Some of these members said that they had withdrawn equivalent trade concessions pursuant to the Safeguards Agreement.

The United States indicated that the measures are not safeguards and that the countermeasures are not authorized. Some of these members are pursuing WTO dispute settlement concerning the US measures and the US is pursuing dispute settlement on some of the measures that have been applied.

Next

In 2019, the Committee on Safeguards is scheduled to meet in late April and in October.

Source: wto.org

 

122/ Regional Trade Policy Course concludes in Thailand

Twenty-eight government officials from Asia-Pacific members of the WTO and observers took part in the WTO’s Regional Trade Policy Course (RTPC) in Bangkok, Thailand, from 22 October to 14 December 2018. The course was organized in partnership with Chulalongkorn University and the International Institute for Trade and Development (ITD).

The participants said that the RTPC deepened their understanding of trade policy, both at the regional and multilateral level. It also enhanced their capacity to make use of the rights deriving from the WTO agreements and to comply with WTO obligations, such as notifications requirements. The participants expressed their gratitude to Chulalongkorn University, the ITD and the government of Thailand for the support and hospitality provided.

The RTPC included an address by Deputy Director-General Frederick Yonov Agah on the importance of mainstreaming trade in national development plans and the role of trade in supporting the 2030 Agenda and the UN Sustainable Development Goals. His address was followed by a question and answer session which addressed themes ranging from the challenges faced by developing and developed economies in adapting to the changing global trade landscape to recent trends in the multilateral trading system.

The RTPC was closed by Professor Pomthong Malakul Na Ayudhaya, Vice President of Chulalongkorn University, Dr Kamalinne Pinutpivadol, Executive Director of ITD, and DDG Agah. Professor Pomthong Malakul and Dr Pinutpivadol thanked the WTO for its partnership with their respective institutions and the contribution it has made over the past four years towards improving Thailand’s capacity to engage in WTO-related issues. They reaffirmed their strong support for the WTO and its training and technical assistance programmes.

Regional Trade Policy Courses (RTPCs) are “generalist” Level 2 training activities on the WTO’s Progressive Learning Strategy (PLS). These two month-long training events are directed at government officials working on trade-related issues who have successfully completed a PLS-Level 1 course. The training curriculum covers the multilateral trade agreements and includes a trade negotiations workshop and a final exam.

A distinctive feature of RTPCs is their focus on regional trade policy issues and capacity building. RTPCs are organised and implemented in partnership with regional academic institutions and include regional academics and trade practitioners who co-lecture with WTO officials. A related objective of the co-lecturing approach is to foster networks among government officials, regional trade experts and regional trade-related institutions, with a view to enhancing dialogue on national and regional trade policy issues.

Source: wto.org

 

123/ AOAC and ISO announce cooperation agreement

Washington, DC, 22 October 2018: AOAC INTERNATIONAL (AOAC) and the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) announce that they have entered into a cooperation agreement for the joint development and approval of common standards and methods. The partnership significantly increases the global relevance and impact of AOAC/ISO standards and methods.

“The AOAC and ISO partnership broadens global acceptance of standards and methods, benefitting all stakeholders and consumers,” said Brad Goskowicz, CEO of Microbiologics, Inc. and President of AOAC INTERNATIONAL. “AOAC and ISO’s commitment and global leadership pave the way for methods to ultimately advance to the Codex method process for consideration as International Standards.”

ISO Secretary-General Sergio Mujica added, “ISO’s partnerships with other relevant organizations are extremely important, as we believe that the best way to meet market needs and provide global solutions is by bringing together the world’s best experts. This agreement will therefore benefit the industry through the joint development of standards that are globally accepted and recognized by Codex. We look forward to collaborating further with AOAC via this agreement to produce effective International Standards.”

Under the new agreement, signed on 18 October 2018, during the American National Standards Institute’s (ANSI – ISO’s member for the USA) World Standards Week in Washington, DC, AOAC and ISO can participate in each other’s work, whereby experts from each organization can serve on the other organization’s working groups. The partnership allows for joint development and approval of standards, which involves establishing working groups comprising AOAC and ISO experts to develop draft common standards. The standards would then be subject to parallel approval processes for AOAC and ISO. The resulting standards will be published by both organizations.

The AOAC/ISO partnership is entering its sixth year. The original cooperation agreement, signed on 18 June 2012, focused on milk and milk products and resulted in 12 joint AOAC/ISO methods adopted by the Codex Alimentarius Commission as International Standards (vitamin B₁₂, myo-inositol, chromium/molybdenum/selenium, nucleotides, vitamins A and E, fatty acid profile, iodine, pantothenic acid, vitamin C, biotin, chloride, vitamin). These methods help ensure that the nutrient content of infant formula conforms to its declarations worldwide.

“The outcome of the AOAC/ISO collaboration from 2012 was impressive with the joint development of multiple standards in the area of nutrients in infant formula and adult nutritionals,” said Erik Konings of Nestlé Research Center. “Harmonization of analytical standards by AOAC and ISO increases the global relevance of these methods. The AOAC/ISO methods adopted by Codex demonstrate compliance to Codex standards and will facilitate trade, which benefits all stakeholders, including consumers.”

The new five-year agreement extends the purview from milk and milk products to include projects in the scope of ISO technical committee ISO/TC 34, Food products. “With successes in detection of pesticide residues in soft drinks (India), sodium fluoroacetate in infant formula (New Zealand), and current work on BPA in beverages, veterinary drug residues, sugar analysis, allergens and more, AOAC continues to prove that it is a valuable partner and solutions provider in tackling industry and trade issues, food safety and regulatory compliance,” says AOAC Executive Director David B. Schmidt. “Leveraging the success of the original cooperation agreement with ISO, we look forward to working together to harmonize optimal global standards for a new range of food products.”

Future priorities for AOAC/ISO standards development are to be determined and may include more work on nutrient analysis, as well as expanding to contaminants, adulterants and pesticide residues.

As a leader in analytical excellence, AOAC INTERNATIONAL advances food safety, food integrity and public health by bringing together members, organizations and experts dedicated to developing and validating standards, methods, and technologies of global relevance.

Source: iso.org

 

124/ 12th ASEM Summit concludes

The 12th Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM) Summit concluded in Brussels, Belgium on October 19 with the release of a Presidential Statement affirming determination of ASEM members in strengthening partnership between the two continents in coping with global challenges and sketching out orientations to enhance intra-bloc cooperation in the future.

Prior to the closing, leaders of ASEM member countries had a discussion on regional and international issues, focusing on matters related to peace, security, anti-terrorism, non- proliferation of mass destruction weapons and maritime security.

They also discussed the complicated situation in the Middle East – Northern Africa, the Korean Peninsula, Iran, and the migration crisis. Many countries showed their concern about developments affecting security environment in Asia, including the East Sea and East China Sea.

Participants affirmed their commitment to maintaining peace, stability, maritime and overflight security, safety and freedom on the basis of full implementation of international law, as well as peacefully settling disputes in line with international law, especially the UN Charter and the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) 1982, refraining from using or threatening to use force, not conducting unilateral actions against international law, and implementing measures to build trust and ensure self-restraint.

Addressing the session, Vietnamese Prime Minister Nguyen Xuan Phuc stressed that peace, cooperation and development is the main trend of the era, but the international community is also witnessing strong changes and unprecedented challenges.

He proposed strengthening trade to maintain the recovery and ensure bright prospects of the global economy.

Vietnam supports efforts by the international community in line with the UN Charter and international law to seek peaceful and sustainable solutions to conflicts and disputes in the Middle East, Africa and Asia, he said.

The Vietnamese PM made clear that Vietnam and ASEAN members are working closely with the international community, including ASEM member countries, to maintain peace, stability, maritime and overflight security, safety and freedom, thus ensuring that freedom of trade is not hindered in the East Sea which is a big international sea route connecting trade between Asia and Europe as well as the whole world.

He underlined the need to persistently promote joint efforts, strengthen measures to build trust and preventive diplomacy, deal with disputed in a peaceful manner in conformity with international law including the UNCLOS, respect diplomatic and legal processes, and restrain from actions complicating the situation.

He also recognised initial progress in negotiation for a Code of Conduct in the East Sea (COC), highlighting Vietnam’s proposal that all parties should continue practical negotiation to soon reach the document.

The success of the 12th ASEM Summit created new motivation for the close and dynamic partnership between Asia and Europe, thus continuing to affirming the significant role of ASEM in the shaping architecture.

Source: VNA

 

125/ Vietnam, Denmark issue joint statement

On the occasion of the official visit to Denmark by Prime Minister Nguyen Xuan Phuc from October 19-20 at the invitation of Prime Minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen, the two sides issued a joint statement.

During the visit, PM Phuc held talks with his host and had a meeting with Queen Margrethe II. Together with other heads of state and government, he attended and addressed the first Green Growth and the Global Goals (P4G) Summit initiated by PM Lars Lokke Rasmussen.

The two PMs took note of the vigorous and comprehensive development in the bilateral relationship, and agreed to look for chances to further promote it in the time to come.

They expressed satisfaction at the rapid growth of the bilateral economic relations between the two countries, and reaffirmed their determination to further push up the promotion of bilateral trade and investment. The two sides agreed to jointly study the possibility of cooperation in the fields of Denmark’s current strengths which can meet Vietnam’s goals of modernization and becoming a high middle-income nation in 2035. They expressed their support for the early signing and ratification of the EU – Vietnam Free Trade Agreement and the Vietnam – EU investment protection agreement.

The two sides highly valued Denmark’s cooperation and development assistance contributed to the success in Vietnam’s development as well as growth in economic relation. They also committed to the more dynamic, intensive and extensive cooperation, especially in the fields of green growth, renewable energy, water, environment and food safety.

The two PMs noted the positive developments in the current energy partnership.

PM Phuc congratulated PM Lars Lokke Rasmussen and the Danish government on the successful holding of the P4G summit, and welcomed Denmark’s commitment in bringing into full play the strong potential of the P4G initiative.

The two sides expressed support for the partnership between companies and research institutes of the two countries, and agreed to facilitate the establishment and operation of enterprises of the two countries in the other market.

The two PMs welcomed the continuation of the bilateral cooperation in education and vocational training. They also took note of the increasing people-to-people exchanges in the cultural and socio-economic fields between the two countries.

Denmark reaffirmed the wish to support Vietnam’s agriculture, aquaculture and animal husbandry.

The two PMs expressed their support to the current common efforts aimed at preventing and controlling the challenges the poor-exercise lifestyle is posing to the population and healthcare system in the whole world.

They stressed the importance of bilateral cooperation at multilateral forums, especially the United Nations.

PM Lars Lokke Rasmussen highly valued Vietnam’s increasingly positive role in the international arena.

The two PMs agreed to cooperate towards strengthening the regional links between Asia and Europe.

They expressed their support to efforts aimed at pushing up peace, stability, cooperation and friendship in Southeast Asia. The two sides affirmed the importance of ensuring the freedom, rights and obligations enshrined in the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS 1982), especially the maritime and aviation freedom in the East Sea, and called on the sides concerned to solve the disputes by peaceful means in line with international law, including the UNCLOS 1982, to refrain from unilateral actions that can escalate tensions, and to fully and effectively implement the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the East Sea (DOC) and soon finalise a practical, effective and comprehensive Code of Conduct (COC).

Source: VNA

 

Ngày 23/10

126/ DDG Wolff: Government Procurement Agreement is a pillar of the global trading system

Speaking at a WTO-EBRD Regional Workshop on Government Procurement in Moldova on 23 October 2018, Deputy Director-General Alan Wolff said that the revised WTO Agreement on Government Procurement (GPA) is “an international gold standard of best practices in government procurement”, providing legally assured market access to procurement valued at up to $1.7 trillion annually. He welcomed the successful conclusion of negotiations for Australia’s GPA accession and looked forward to the future accessions of other WTO members.

Your Excellency Pavel Filip,

Prime-Minister of the Republic of Moldova; Mr Octavian Armașu,

Minister of Finance;

Ms Corina Cojocaru,

Economic Counsellor and Chargée d’affaires for the WTO,

Permanent Mission of the Republic of Moldova to Geneva,

Ms Angela Sax, Head of the EBRD Resident Office in the Republic of Moldova

Distinguished participants; ladies and gentlemen,

Good morning. As Deputy Director-General of the World Trade Organization, it is my pleasure to welcome you to this workshop. Government procurement is an area of vital strategic importance for the WTO and for the countries of Central and Eastern Europe and Central Asia (the CEECAC region). It:

• Accounts for a very significant proportion of GDP (13-15%, on average, or more, in countries in this region and around the world);
• Is vital to infrastructure formation and the delivery of essential public services, including health, education and national defence;
• Is increasingly important in negotiations regarding regional trade agreements;
• Offers important opportunities for foreign market penetration; the promotion of inbound foreign direct investment (by ensuring transparency and fair procedures for investors); and collaboration between domestic and foreign companies; and
• Is central to the struggle for good governance and against corruption.

Impressive leadership is being shown in the Republic of Moldova and in other countries in this region, in moving ahead with very significant reforms and market opening in the government procurement sector. For all these reasons, it is appropriate that this workshop has been convened jointly by EBRD, UNDP and the WTO and that the Republic of Moldova is hosting it.

Ladies and gentlemen, it’s an interesting time to be working at the centre of the international trading system. Many have observed that the system is currently in crisis. While I share a number of the concerns that are being voiced, I am confident that global trade and the WTO have an exciting and rewarding future before them. Trade today is too important, and our futures too interconnected, to let the system wither. The task for all of us is to ensure that a strong and vibrant WTO continues as an essential platform for negotiations, dispute settlement, transparency and dialogue on trade issues of importance to our members (and to countries desiring to accede to the WTO), who collectively account for almost all of world trade. It is a time for strengthening trade rules and their coverage. And, this will not be achieved without reform.

One thing is clear – whatever happens, the revised WTO Agreement on Government Procurement of 2012 – the “GPA” -is and will remain a pillar of the global trading system. The GPA:

• Is an international “gold standard” of best practices in government procurement, particularly since the 2012 overhaul of the Agreement to bring it up to date; and
• Provides legally assured market access to procurements valued at up to $1.7 trillion annually. Future accessions, including those of China and Russia are expected to add in the range of an additional USD 440-1,225 billion annually.

It is to expected that due to geopgraphic proximity and familiarity, much of government procurement tends to stay at home, with domestic suppliers. Important cross border procurement also occurs.  Under GPA disciplines, an average of 1.5-1.7% of procurements (by value) are awarded through cross-border bids by foreign suppliers. When awards to locally-established foreign companies are considered, the proportion of total value won by foreign companies rises to as much as 17%. Both modes of supply are legally supported and protected by the GPA.

The Agreement:

• Is an essential guidepost for national procurement reforms;
• Serves as the template for procurement chapters in regional trade agreements (RTAs) around the world; and
• Is a bulwark of the global struggle for good governance and against corruption. Good governance is promoted by:
• Ensuring minimum standards of transparency and fair procedures;
• Expanding the number and diversity of suppliers competing for key procurements (thereby strengthening competition and making supplier collusion more difficult);
• Encouraging and incentivizing the use of modern e-procurement and data management tools;
• Guaranteeing the role of strong, independent domestic review (supplier complaint or “bid challenge”) systems; and
• Involving a wider range of stakeholders (foreign governments and suppliers; civil society) in scrutinizing relevant activities.

Currently, the GPA consists of 19 parties comprising 47 WTO members. Since 2014, four additional WTO Members have acceded to the Agreement: our hosts, the Republic of Moldova, Montenegro, New Zealand and Ukraine. Only last week, during the GPA Committee meeting of 17th October, the negotiation of Australia’s GPA accession was successfully concluded and celebrated as a sign of the vitality of the Agreement. Australia will become a full-fledged GPA party when necessary domestic ratification procedures are completed.

Currently, a total of nine other WTO Members are seeking to participate in the Agreement as full Parties. These include China, the Russian Federation, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, the Kyrgyz Republic and Tajikistan. 32 Members, including, most recently, Afghanistan, Brazil and Belarus, have obtained observer status under the Agreement, in order to learn more about it.

The CEECAC region is the leading area for new recruits to the GPA family. Within the region:

• Four WTO Members (Armenia, Montenegro, the Republic of Moldova and Ukraine) have recently joined the Agreement; and
• A further eight Members from the CEECAC region (Afghanistan, Albania, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Georgia, Kazakhstan, the Kyrgyz Republic, the Russian Federation and Tajikistan) either have formally initiated accession proceedings or have taken commitments eventually to seek accession. In each case, GPA accession was or will be intertwined with important and far-reaching policy reforms.

Much of the focus this week will be on the benefits and challenges associated with becoming a GPA Party, and the accession process itself. For those of you who are already Parties, there will also be much to learn and to contribute. Indeed, I urge everyone present to consider that accession to the GPA is a beginning; not an endpoint. It requires continual attention to capacity building and implementation issues. Professionalization of the procurement workforce and securing the ongoing support of key stakeholders and related bodies, including senior political leaders; the supplier community; civil society; competition and anti-corruption agencies, are all crucial to success.

On behalf of my colleagues in the WTO Secretariat, we are ready and eager to support the countries of this region in their GPA accessions and implementation to the full extent that we can. We highly appreciate our partnership with EBRD in supporting the countries of this region. And, we salute the role that the Republic of Moldova is playing in hosting the workshop and sharing its relevant experiences – a very useful and appropriate role for the country as a dynamic WTO Member and recently acceded GPA Party.

I look forward to the proceedings.

Source: wto.org

 

127/ Subsidies Committee members express concerns on lack of notifications

Members of the WTO’s Committee on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures expressed concerns at their special meeting on 23 October about the failure of many members to notify the Committee of subsidy programmes.

Committee Chair, Luis Fernandez of Costa Rica, told the Committee that 78 WTO members (of 164) have not yet made their new and full subsidy notifications that were due in 2017, 63 members have not made the notifications due in 2015 and 56 members have still to deliver their notifications due in 2013.

“The chronic low compliance with the fundamental obligation to notify subsidies constitutes a serious problem in the proper functioning of the Agreement … I strongly urge all members that have not yet done so to submit their notifications as soon as possible,” the Chair said. New Zealand, Canada, the European Union, Norway, Switzerland, the United States, Australia, Chinese Taipei, Japan and Singapore all took the floor to join the Chair in expressing their disquiet about the slow pace of notification.

The Chair explained to the Committee that technical assistance from the WTO Secretariat is available for members experiencing difficulties in providing notifications regarding subsidies programmes or countervailing measures taken. The Chair also raised with the Committee that some members have not made notifications about legislation for the application of countervailing duty investigations, and that 41 members have not notified the Committee regarding countervailing duty actions taken in the first six months of 2018, although in both cases, in the absence of legislation and/or actions, simple nil notifications suffice.

On a brighter note, the Chair said that since the Committee’s spring special meeting, 23 new and full notifications for the 2017 notification cycle had been sent to the Committee. In the case of the Philippines, a new and full notification covering the 2017, 2015, 2013, 2011, 2009, 2007, 2003, 2001 and 1998 cycles was submitted. Madagascar and Saudi Arabia delivered notifications covering both the 2017 and 2015 cycles. Notifications for the 2013 cycle were submitted by Argentina, Iceland and Tunisia.

The Chair underscored for members that according to agreed procedures, members can submit written questions to any notifying member and that prompt responses to these questions were important to ensure full transparency during the process of reviewing submitted notifications.

“Failure to reply promptly to such questions undermines transparency and thus frustrates the purpose of the review,” he said.

At the following regular meeting of the Committee, a joint item proposed by the EU, Japan and the United States centered on the impact of subsidies on industrial overcapacity. The EU drew the Committee’s attention to a presentation on this topic held earlier this month during the WTO’s 2018 Public Forum. The United States said G-20 leaders had agreed there was a link between overcapacity and subsidies and that the recommendations put forward at the Public Forum event centred on the need for greater WTO transparency requirements on subsidies, stronger subsidy rules and stricter disciplines on public bodies and state-owned enterprises. Japan said government support created trade distortions in the iron and steel and shipbuilding sectors.

Canada, Mexico, Norway, Australia, New Zealand, Chinese Taipei and Switzerland supported the joint statement.

China considered that the issue of overcapacity is not in the terms of reference of the SCM Committee. It argued that slow recovery from the financial crisis and sluggish demand rather than subsidies were to blame for global overcapacity, noted that China had cut steel capacity by more than 100 million tons and considered that any response to the problem of overcapacity should be global in nature.

On the issue of fisheries subsidies, nine members requested that the Committee discuss a decision taken by ministers at the Ministerial Conference in December which recommitted WTO members to fulfil their existing transparency obligations in respect of fisheries subsidies, in the context of the negotiations to reach agreement by 2019 on disciplines on subsidies linked to the depletion of global fisheries stocks.

The United States said the negotiations were being undermined by the failure of members to notify their fisheries subsidies, noting that more than half of WTO members have not notified any fisheries subsidies to the Committee. The EU also noted the low level of compliance. New Zealand said 54% of the world’s fishing grounds would be unprofitable were it not for government support extended to fishing fleets.

Separately, the European Union raised objections to the application by the United States of countervailing duties on imports of ripe Spanish olives. Turkey reiterated its concerns regarding the decisions made by the US on public body, specificity, benefit calculation, cross-cumulation and Turkey’s developing country status in countervailing duty investigations.

Source: wto.org

 

128/ Vietnam, EU sign VPA-FLEGT to combat illegal logging

On October 19, Prime Minister Nguyen Xuan Phuc and Deputy Prime Minister Pham Binh Minh witnessed the signing of a Voluntary Partnership Agreement (VPA) on Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade (FLEGT) between Vietnam and the European Union (EU) in Brussels.

The agreement aims to tighten controls on forest governance, fight illegal logging and promote trade in verified legal timber products from Vietnam to the EU, and other markets.

Signatories included Vietnamese Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development Nguyen Xuan Cuong, Austrian Chancellor Sebastian Kurz, and EU High Representative and Vice-President Federica Mogherini.

In her remarks, Federica Mogherini highlighted the signing of the deal as the start of an important partnership through which Vietnam and the EU will work together to address illegal logging and its harmful effects.

The EU welcomes the progress Vietnam has made in preparing to implement the VPA and initial steps in strengthening controls of the timber it imports. However, more needs to be done. Controlling the legality of imports will be critical to full implementation of the VPA and ensuring that Vietnam’s exports of timber and timber products to the EU come from legal sources. The EU will maintain close contact with Vietnam and support their efforts in delivering results on the ground, she said.

Minister Nguyen Xuan Cuong said Vietnam has strong and developing wood processing industry with a significant role in the global market, noting that leaders, the business community and non-governmental organisations of Vietnam voice their support for the VPA and continue to become involved in policy reform processes in the forest sector.

Vietnam ensures that illegal logged timber is not allowed to enter the Vietnamese market, Cuong said, adding that the country has also set up a Timber Legality Assurance System (VNTLAS) which ensures that wood and timber products of Vietnam in the EU have legal origins.

VPA commitments have been included in the Vietnam Forestry Law which will become effective on January 1, 2019. The new law prohibits the import of illegal produced timber to Vietnam. Vietnam has prepared plans for the implementation of VPA with the involvement of many parties, he said.

An EU-Vietnam Joint Implementation Committee will oversee how the provisions of the Agreement are put into practice.

Source: VNA

 

Ngày 24/10

129/ DDG Wolff: “It is essential that the WTO adapts to future changes in world trade”

In a lecture delivered to the Academy of Economic Studies in Chișinău, Moldova, on 24 October 2018, Deputy Director-General Alan Wolff said that much in the world of trade will change going forward, largely due to the emergence of new technologies. He stressed the importance of maintaining and improving the multilateral trading system and said he was sure “that the WTO can and will be maintained and improved, despite the challenges that it will undoubtedly encounter”.

Doctor Grigore Belostecinic, President of the Academy of Economic Studies,
Staff and students of the Academy of Economic Studies,
Ladies and Gentlemen

Buna di-mi-nea-ta (good morning).  It is my pleasure to be here with you today.

I have the good fortune to be involved in the work of the World Trade Organization, the WTO, at a critical time in its relatively short life.  The system faces challenges some of which are very well known and some that are less public.  Populism is on the rise in many countries.  Trade is blamed for the consequences of other forces, such as technological change, and inadequate adjustment policies.  The U.S. and China are engaging in a trade war.  The U.S. President clearly states that he is dissatisfied with the WTO, the world’s trading rules as they now stand and as they are administered.  Maintaining economic integration in Europe, given Brexit, and until recently in North America, was and is challenging.  Bilateral rather than multilateral agreements are said by some to be easier to reach and even more desirable.  The legitimacy and effectiveness of the current multilateral trading system, its rules and institutions, are being questioned, not by all, but by voices significant enough that they must be heard and answered.

Before one becomes too pessimistic, I would like to stress that nearly all world trade, which for merchandise exceeds $11 trillion, continues to flow every bit as freely as it did since the WTO was established 23 years ago, building on the foundation of 1947 GATT.  This is due to the WTO rules holding for most trade.

Despite the recitation of  a litany of challenges, I am optimistic that there are good outcomes that will emerge from the current ferment.  I acknowledge, along with Chinese Premier Zhou En-Lai when asked about what effect the French Revolution had, he allegedly responded, “it is too early to say”.  We do not know how all this will turn out in the world of trade, but there is reason to believe that the system can be brought to a better place.

The starting point is that all WTO members profess that they agree on the importance of the multilateral trading system.  Sustainable trade relations require fundamental rules like any other system.  The alternative is chaos.  Even a Member which has recently been critical of the WTO has admitted that if the WTO did not exist, it would have to be created.

Today we live in a globalized world. Economic decisions that are taken in one part of the world can make a lasting impact on the other side of the world.  As students studying economics, you know how interlinked and interdependent economies are.  No country regardless of its economic size and economic capacity can afford to be isolated from the global economic system and rules, or it will simply stagnate.

The world is not always what we would hope it to be.  Relations among all countries are not always harmonious – not in geopolitical terms, and not in economic terms.   International relations (known in various universities as “political science”, and in my college, simply as “government”) is the study of how to manage the interface between and among sovereigns, generally countries, but in Europe, also the European Union in its interactions with others.

What is needed daily and over longer perods of time is a way to manage problems and to find solutions.  The broad term for this process is “governance” but this term suggests supra-national sovereignty, and as there is no global sovereign, sovereignty is lodged at a much more local level.  Therefore other means are needed for management of economic relations.  Optimally the framework for international cooperation is created through international agreements.

We are fortunate to have inherited a post World War II international economic order that has fostered economic growth, increased incomes in all countries and laid the basis for an era of general peace, and continues to do so.

The World Trade Organization was established 23 years ago replacing the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT).  The GATT was founded in 1948 together with the Bretton Woods institutions known as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, to provide an international economic order for reconstructing and developing the world economy. Out of the destruction of that great war, much of the world community came together to establish rules and disciplines that provide the world today with the current multilateral economic system.  The desire for peace and security drove the creation of today’s global economic system that continues to function today.

Since WTO was created, its membership has expanded to 164 members, and covers over 98% of global trade.  The Republic of Moldova applied to become a WTO member in 1993 shortly after its independence and after seven years and seven months of negotiations, Moldova became the 142nd member of the WTO in 2001.  The WTO accession and membership is a stepping stone to global integration.  It provides Moldovan business with an opportunity to gain access to the worlds markets and products, for the benefit of its people, as has been the case for many countries which have successfully completed the accession process.

Today conflict-affected countries for example Afghanistan and Liberia, the last two to join the WTO, and others such as Somalia, South Sudan and Sudan seek to join.  They do so because economic growth through domestic reform and integration into the world economy, is seen by each as a vitally important path to better lives for its peoples, providing greater stability, and a better chance at maintaining peace.

Trade negotiators, unless they are from a country seeking to enter the WTO or representing a new member, do not on a daily basis cite or perhaps even think of these fundamental values that form the foundation of the multilateral trading system, At senior political levels, the multiilateral trading system was said, when the subject came up, to be vitally important, but this basic truth did not necessarily show up in policy initiatives and positions taken in Geneva.  Often more mundane matters occupied the vast majority of attention of those who worked on trade – whether chickens should be dipped in a chlorine solution to kill off salmonella, or hormones should be fed to beef, or whether tariffs should be lowered on environmental goods or be at zero for an increasing number of information technology products.  For trade ministers, regional integration, such as was involved in the Trans Pacific Partnership or bilateral agreements such as the EU-Canada Free Trade Agreement, were at the top of the list of concerns.

This was true of business as well.  The world trading system seemed either good enough or was just too difficult to improve, so the WTO was for the most part taken for granted, and until recently largely ignored by most of the members and by stakeholders.  At least that is my impression of how matters stood.

Following the Second World War there were eight great “rounds” of trade negotiations.  The last round that was concluded successfully was launched in Punta del Este, Uruguay in September 1986 with the 20 agreements finally being signed at Marrakesh in April 1994.  When I was in government, I lived in Geneva for a while to represent the United States during the 7th round of negotiations, the Tokyo Round.  More recently an attempt was made at a ninth round, called the Doha Development Agenda, initiated in Qatar in 2001, in the shadow of the New York attack of 9-11.  It has not yielded a package of agreements.

When I taught a course a few years ago at the Monterey (California) Institute of International Relations, I conducted a simulation of multilateral trade negotiations,the DDA.  The students chose countries to represent.  The students from China enthusiastically chose to be the United States delegation, and did a great job.  I consulted with current senior trade negotiators so that the instructions that I issued from respective governments to their student delegations were an accurate reflection of countries’ positions.  The instructions were mutually exclusive – that is, there was no way that any agreement could emerge.  This reflected then current reality.  I then played the role of a hypothetically all-powerful WTO Director General and forced the student delegates to exceed their instructions, and we successfully concluded the Doha Development Round.

The lesson in this is that to reach international agreements, difficult compromises have to be made.  Countries’ interests differ.  Negotiations reach a positive result for all if there is willingness to do a bit more for the sake of maintaining and improving the multilateral trading system – to make a net contribution.

What I will suggest today is that we perform a thought experiment here and now, of how we can construct an improved international trading system.  I will provide the questions and you can reflect on the answers.  Time permitting we can discuss some of your possible outcomes, but you can take the issues back as an informal assignment to be worked on later, either in class or individually.  This is a pertinent simulation because WTO members are as we speak actually engaged in this same exercise to one extent or another, in informal groupings and in capitals.

Start with the following premise, which has guided world trade for over 70 years – multilateral rules are potentially more important to the world than all other trade agreements because in principle all countries should be able to trade equally.  This was the vision of Franklin Roosevelt and Winston Churchill meeting off the coast of Newfoundland in August of 1941, agreed to as to the shape that they wished to see the world take once the global war was over.

Every social or economic system, whether it is a social club, a church, a stock exchange, an NGO (non-governmental organization), a city, a country, or an international organization requires management.   In the case of these organizations and also a world trade organization, it needs to have three basic elements: a way to make rules, a way to administer them including knowing whether they are being complied with, and a means of settling disputes.

Governance falls logically into three functions – a legislative function to make rules, an executive function to organize the monitoring of their implementation and a quasi-judicial function to settle disputes.

Now you can decide how to create the ideal or at least a Moldovan Academy of Economic Studies new and improved WTO:  To do so, these questions are some that have to be answered:  what body or bodies should make the rules, how are they to be adopted, how is compliance to be monitored, and how are differences to be resolved?

We start with 164 diverse economies,  How should they agree to new rules?  Are they to be applicable to all members in varying degrees due to differences in capabilities and circumstances?  Do the Members decide on new rules by unanimity, some other form of consensus, or by voting?  The world keeps evolving. How do the rules stay current?  What is the balance to be struck between member’s autonomy and the interests of their trading partners?  What are the bounds for promoting an industry or agriculture, through protection or subsidy or other measures? What reactions are available if one country’s measures adversely affect the industry, service or agriculture of another?

How can the 164 members have equal knowledge of the conditions under which trade takes place?  How can transparency be assured?

What is the best internal structure of the organization?  How should the work be organized – to monitor, to initiate new ideas, to conduct analyses?  Can the members organize to be more effective?  What is the best use of a secretariat?

How are disputes to be settled?  How can the legitimacy of dispute settlement be assured, as legitimacy is essential if outcomes are to be accepted and acted upon?  Resolving trade disputes is one of the core activities of the WTO.  When a member government believes another member government is acting inconsistently with its obligations under a WTO agreement, the complainant government can ask for a dispute settlement.  Over 500 disputes have been brought to the WTO and over 350 rulings have been issued since the establishment of the WTO.  Dispute settlement is designed to preserve the global trading order which is essential to the health of the global economy.

You have an advantage in grappling with these questions in that if you watch the daily press about trade, you will see many articles in the coming months, starting this week with some news from Ottawa, about WTO members who are wrestling with aspects of these subjects and you can grade WTO members on the quality and timeliness of their efforts.

After your graduation, you will all take up your professions.  Some of you will shape domestic policies here at home, some of you will pursue careers abroad, many of you will work in the private sector, in business or in a civil society organization.  You will perform different jobs but whether it is in your community, your country, your region, or for the planet, you can make a positive contribution.  At this university, you will be given tools to deal with the challenges you will meet, and you will hone those tools through years of experience.  Wherever you serve, you may, and I hope will, have a chance to shape reality for the better.

Much in the world of trade will change going forward, largely due to the emergence of new technologies.  Trade will move in different channels and consist of different goods, services and products of the mind.  As Jack Ma, Executive Chairman of China’s Alibaba Group, said at the WTO Public Forum early this month: “We cannot stop technology.  The only thing you can do is to embrace it.”   In this context, it is essential that the WTO adapts to future changes in the world trade.

As a WTO member, Moldova has shown strong commitment to the multilateral trading system and adherence to WTO core principles.  It has joined the Government Procurement Agreement in 2016, which can improve public procurement practices.  In 2016, Moldova also ratified the Trade Facilitation Agreement and so far, has already implemented approximately half of the commitments.  It is hosting WTO events such as the regional workshop on Government Procurement this week.  These are important actions which further strengthen the multilateral trading system.

The future evolution of the multilateral trading system is in your generation’s hands.  It is the primary obligation of each generation to seek to leave the world in better condition than it was when it received it.  I can assure you that there will be much left for your generation to accomplish.

The future is not written yet. You and your generation have been given the privilege and responsibility of holding the pen.

I am sure that the WTO can and will be maintained and improved, despite the challenges that it will undoubtedly encounter.  Perhaps some of you will take on these challenges.

Thank you.

Source: wto.org

 

130/ DG Azevêdo meets Prime Minister Trudeau in Ottawa; welcomes strong support for WTO

Director-General Roberto Azevêdo met with Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau in Ottawa on 24 October to discuss the current state of global trade and the emerging discussions about reform of the WTO. DG Azevêdo welcomed the Prime Minister’s strong support for multilateralism and for the WTO and his commitment to work to strengthen and improve the trading system. The meeting took place ahead of a meeting of ministers to discuss WTO reform, which has been convened in Ottawa this week by the Canadian government.

The Director-General said:

“Canada has a very strong history of support for the multilateral trading system, and this is continuing today with Prime Minister Trudeau providing real leadership on this issue. This is very welcome, particularly in the current circumstances with trade tensions rising between major trading partners. I congratulate the Prime Minister on Canada’s initiative to convene a meeting of ministers in Ottawa this week to discuss how potential WTO reforms might help to address some of the current issues. I look forward to that discussion and to Canada’s continued engagement here.”

Source: wto.org

 

131/ Members query latest amendments to EU anti-dumping regulation

New European Union regulations governing anti-dumping investigations continued to draw questions and comments from WTO members at the 24 October meeting of the Committee on Anti-Dumping Practices. Members discussed changes to EU policy, which entered into force last June, and revisited concerns over an earlier revision in force since December.

Review of members’ legislation

The European Union introduced at the meeting Regulation (EU) 2018/825, which entered into force on 8 June 2018. The EU said the regulation puts in place new rules for EU authorities to calculate the “injury margin” or the rate of the anti-dumping duty necessary to compensate for the harm experienced by a local industry because of dumped imports.

The regulation provides for a minimum 6% “target profit” for EU industry in the calculation of the injury margin. It further adds an environmental and social dimension to the calculations, such that EU authorities may consider, when establishing the target profit, the cost an EU industry has had to bear to comply with environmental and labour protocols. The regulation also clarifies what export restrictions implemented in the goods’ origin can be taken into consideration when deciding if a duty lower than the calculated dumping margin should be applied. Furthermore, it contains a number of changes to align with rulings of the WTO Dispute Settlement Body. This is in addition to notice periods added into the process to inform affected traders of provisional measures in advance of their implementation to give time to flag and correct errors.

In the discussion, queries included how the EU would establish the 6% minimum profit margin, and which export restrictions would be considered under the new regulation. One member criticized the new methodology’s considerations of market distortions affecting raw materials, and of export restrictions as discriminatory. The EU indicated that the minimum profit margin was based on statistical studies and that application of other elements was based on evidence, and was non-discriminatory.

The Committee also returned to the discussion it had begun in April of the EU’s earlier amendments to its basic regulation on anti-dumping, adopted in December 2017. While some members expressed concerns over specific aspects of the changes, the EU considered that the Committee was not the appropriate forum for a deep legal discussion.

Review of members’ semi-annual reports of anti-dumping actions

The Committee reviewed the semi-annual reports of anti-dumping actions taken by members, and questions were asked regarding certain actions of Armenia, Brazil, China, Colombia, the EU, India, Indonesia, Israel, Mexico, Peru and the United States. The actions involved a range of products in a variety of sectors, including metals (steel, silico-manganese, fabricated metal products), food and chemicals.

A number of issues were raised in the discussion, including concerns over the operation of measures applied on behalf of customs unions, injury analysis and determinations, disclosure of essential facts, like product determinations, dumping calculation methodologies, domestic judicial review, treatment of confidential information, sunset reviews, reliance on facts available (where WTO litigation currently is ongoing) and findings of “particular market situations”. Some members raising concerns indicated that they were considering recourse to dispute settlement.

Preliminary and final anti-dumping actions: notifications

The Committee also reviewed members’ ad hoc notifications of preliminary and final anti-dumping actions taken. Queries were raised in respect of actions notified by Canada, Mexico, Brazil and Peru, which involved steel products, chemicals, food products and biodiesel.

Next meeting

The next Committee meeting will be scheduled in late April 2019.

Source: wto.org

 

Ngày 25/10

132/ Ottawa ministerial gathering: DG Azevêdo welcomes commitment to strengthen the WTO

Speaking at a gathering of ministers to discuss WTO reform, which was convened by the Canadian government in Ottawa on 25 October, Director-General Roberto Azevêdo welcomed the commitment of ministers to strengthen the trading system and pointed to the imperative for all members of addressing the significant challenges facing global trade.

The meeting was chaired by Canada’s Minister of International Trade Diversification, Jim Carr. DG Azevêdo joined the meeting at the invitation of the organizers.

The Director-General said:

“It is very positive to see the high levels of engagement in this debate about the WTO and its key role in global trade. The discussion focused on ideas and initiatives that aim to improve and strengthen the work of the WTO. This should be helpful in addressing the significant issues and challenges that we face today.

“I was pleased that there was a strong recognition from all those participating in this meeting that it was essential that all WTO members’ views be taken into account as this discussion moves forward. Whatever precise path the debate takes and whatever specific issues members want to take forward, we all have a responsibility to do everything we can to diffuse tensions, mitigate the risks and strengthen the system for the future. I welcome Canada’s initiative to hold this meeting and to shine a light on some of the key challenges before the trading system today.”

Source: wto.org

 

Ngày 25/10

133/ Vietnam urges continued reform of UN development system

Ambassador Dang Dinh Quy, head of the Vietnam Mission to the United Nations, called for the continued reform of the UN development system based on national priorities at a debate of the 73rd United Nations General Assembly’s Economic and Financial Committee Second Committee in New York on October 22.

On behalf of the ASEAN nations, Quy welcomed the progress in reforming the UN development system and spoke highly of the ASEAN-UN development partnership with positive outcomes, especially in fields under the ASEAN-UN Action Plan for the 2016-2020 period, and contributing to implementing the ASEAN Vision 2025 and the UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.

The cooperation mechanism between the ASEAN Secretariat and the UN Secretariat has been increasingly promoted, he said.

Quy shared the concern of several countries over the decline in resources and urged the UN and member states to continue supporting South-South and trilateral cooperation.

Participants shared the view that future reform efforts, including the reform of the UN Resident Coordinator system, development support framework, and national-level UN agencies, need to be made via close consultation with member states.

Source: VNA

 

Ngày 26/10

134/ Reference framework for the Internet of Things

The number of connected devices worldwide is growing exponentially and this “Internet of Things” affects every area of our lives from electricity to agriculture. A recently published International Standard will help ensure these systems are seamless, safer and far more resilient.

From autonomous vehicles to precision agriculture, smart manufacturing, e-health and smart cities, the Internet of Things (IoT) is already everywhere – and growing. It involves integrating “things” within IT systems, thus enabling electronic devices to interact with the physical world.

The applications are endless, but as the phenomenon explodes, so too does the need for trust, security and a base from which the technology can be developed further, with robust measures and systems in place.

ISO/IEC 30141, Internet of Things (IoT) – Reference architecture, provides an internationally standardized IoT Reference Architecture using a common vocabulary, reusable designs and industry best practice.

Dr François Coallier, Chair of the joint technical committee of ISO and the International Technical Commission (IEC) that developed the standard, said the IoT is growing fast due to rapid developments in ICT.

“So we saw a need for a reference architecture to maximize the benefits and reduce the risks”, he said.

ISO/IEC 30141 aims to do just that, providing a common framework for designers and developers of IoT applications and enabling systems that are “trustworthy”, meaning they are reliable, safe, secure, respect privacy and can withstand disruptions such as natural disasters and attacks.

“There are already many published standards for resilience, safety and security,” adds Coallier, “and this standard will provide the reference architecture to apply them to IoT systems.”

ISO/IEC 30141 was developed by joint technical committee ISO/IEC JTC 1, Information technology, subcommittee SC 41, Internet of Things and related technologies, the secretariat of which is held by KATS, ISO’s member for Korea. It is available from your national ISO member or through the ISO Store.

Source: wto.org

 

135/ WTO reform: EU proposes way forward on the functioning of the Appellate Body

Today, the EU together with other members of the World Trade Organisation (WTO) – Australia, Canada, China, Iceland, India, Korea, Mexico, New Zealand, Norway, Singapore and Switzerland – unveiled a proposal for concrete changes to overcome the current deadlock in the WTO Appellate Body.

The proposal will be presented at the meeting of the WTO General Council on 12 December.

Commissioner Malmström said: “The appellate body function of the WTO dispute settlement system is moving towards a cliff’s edge. Without this core function of the WTO, the world would lose a system that has ensured stability in global trade for decades. Now, together with a broad coalition of WTO members, we are presenting our most concrete proposals yet for WTO reform. I hope that this will contribute to breaking the current deadlock, and that all WTO members will take responsibility equally, engaging in good faith in the reform process.”

The WTO dispute settlement system with its Appellate Body has been key to the security and predictability of the multilateral trading system. Without a proper system of enforcement, the multilateral rules can no longer work effectively. If no solution is found to address the current deadlock on the appointments to the Appellate Body, the whole system is at risk.

The proposed amendments to the WTO Agreement submitted now to the organisation membership follow up on the EU’s ideas to modernise the WTO, published on 18 September, and are part of a broader effort that includes the recently submitted proposal on notification and transparency rules within the WTO that was co-sponsored among others by US and Japan.

They are the result of intense discussions over the past weeks with other WTO countries. The proposals address in a systematic and constructive manner all of the concerns expressed in recent months with respect to the Appellate Body. They show the EU’s willingness to engage in the process of reform of the WTO in all its functions.

The textual proposals submitted today seek to address all the concerns raised with regard to the WTO Appellate Body, by:

- Putting in place new rules for outgoing Appellate Body members which make clear in which cases they can stay on to complete the appeal proceedings they are working on;

- Ensuring that appeal proceedings are finished on time in line with the 90-day timeframe set out in the WTO rules, unless the parties in the dispute agree otherwise;

- Clarifying that the legal issues that are subject to appeal by the Appellate Body do not include the meaning of domestic legislation;

- InIndicating that the Appellate Body should only address issues necessary to resolve the dispute;

- Introducing annual meetings between WTO members and the Appellate Body to discuss in an open way systemic issues or trends in jurisprudence.

At the same time, the EU is also making proposals to reinforce the Appellate Body’s independence and impartiality and to improve its efficiency. These include having a single, longer term for Appellate Body members of 6 to 8 years, as well as increasing the number of members from 7 to 9 working full-time, to support the Appellate Body’s capacity to deliver.

The proposals also include rules to ensure that the selection process of Appellate Body members starts automatically when a post is vacant and that there is an orderly transition with outgoing members.

These proposals will be presented by the EU and co-sponsoring WTO countries to the entire membership at the meeting of the WTO General Council on 12 December. The EU hopes that all WTO members can engage swiftly on this basis and that we avert the looming crisis.

Source: Europa.eu

 

Ngày 29/10

136/ Panels established to examine Pakistani duties on film, Korean duties on steel

At a meeting of the WTO’s Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) on 29 October, WTO members agreed to a request from the United Arab Emirates for the establishment of a panel to examine anti-dumping duties imposed by Pakistan on biaxially oriented polypropylene from the UAE as well as a request from Japan for a panel to examine anti-dumping duties imposed on stainless steel bar from Japan. The DSB also considered requests from seven WTO members for panels to review additional duties imposed by the United States on steel and aluminium imports, four requests from the US for panels to examine countermeasures imposed by WTO members on US imports in response to the steel and aluminium duties, and a US request for a panel to examine Chinese measures for the protection of intellectual property rights.

DS538: Pakistan — Anti-Dumping Measures on Biaxially Oriented Polypropylene Film from the United Arab Emirates

The United Arab Emirates submitted its second request for a panel to examine Pakistan’s anti-dumping measures on imports of biaxially oriented polypropylene film from the UAE. The UAE’s first request was blocked by Pakistan at a DSB meeting on 28 May. The UAE said the measures were inconsistent with numerous provisions of the WTO’s Anti-Dumping Agreement (ADA) and that bilateral discussions had failed to resolve the dispute.

Pakistan said it regretted the UAE’s decision to submit a second request for a panel and said all possible alternatives to resolving the dispute should have continued. Pakistan is still prepared to discuss the matter with the UAE but will also defend the measures before the panel.

The DSB agreed to establish the panel. The United States, the European Union, China, Saudi Arabia, Japan, the Russian Federation and Afghanistan reserved their third-party rights to participate in the proceedings.

DS553: Korea — Sunset Review of Anti-Dumping Duties on Stainless Steel Bars

Japan submitted its second request for a panel challenging Korea’s sunset review of an anti-dumping duty order on stainless steel bars from Japan, a review which resulted in the continuation of the duties. Japan’s first request was blocked by Korea at a DSB meeting on 26 September. Japan reiterated that it considers Korea’s decision to maintain the duties to be in violation of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) 1994 and the ADA; as the inconsistency remains, Japan once again asks that a panel be established.

Korea said it regretted Japan’s decision to request a panel and noted its willingness to continue a constructive dialogue on the matter, but also said it would vigorously defend what was its WTO-consistent measure.

The DSB agreed to establish the panel. The United States, the European Union, China, India, Kazakhstan, Russia and Chinese Taipei reserved their third-party rights to participate in the proceedings.

DS475: Russian Federation — Measures on the Importation of Live Pigs, Pork and Other Pig Products from the European Union

The European Union requested the establishment of a compliance panel to examine whether measures taken by the Russian Federation to implement a WTO dispute ruling regarding Russia’s import bans on live pigs and pork products from Lithuania, Poland, Latvia and Estonia as well as the EU-wide import ban on live pigs and certain pork products brought the original measures at issue into conformity with Russia’s WTO obligations.

A WTO panel and the Appellate Body found the measures were inconsistent with various provisions of the WTO’s Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS Agreement) and the DSB later recommended Russia bring the measures into conformity with its obligations under the Agreement. The EU said it regretted Russia’s repeated failure to open its market to EU pig products despite the WTO ruling and despite the EU’s openness to resolving the matter through consultations.

Russia said it was disappointed with the EU’s decision to request a panel and noted that on 8 December 2017 it informed WTO members that it had implemented the ruling in full and within the required deadline. There is no legal basis for the compliance panel request, Russia argued; thus it was not in a position to accept the establishment of a panel.

The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to revert to the matter.

DS542: China — Certain Measures Concerning the Protection of Intellectual Property Rights

The United States submitted its first request for a panel to examine certain Chinese measures pertaining to the protection of intellectual property (IP) rights. The US said China agreed when it joined the WTO to provide certain protections for IP rights, among them to protect the exclusive rights of patent holders and to accord to nationals of other WTO members treatment no less favourable than it accords to its own nationals with regards to protection of IP rights.

However, China’s policies consistently seek to disadvantage foreign patent holders for the benefit of Chinese companies, the US said; these policies deny foreign patent holders, including US companies, basic patent rights to stop a Chinese entity from using the technology after a licensing contract ends and impose mandatory adverse contract terms that discriminate against, and are less favourable for, imported foreign technology, in violation of the WTO’s Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS). The US said it held consultations with China on the matter in July but the consultations did not resolve the dispute, prompting the US request for the panel.

China said it was disappointed with the US request and that it positively responded to the questions posed by the US in the consultation held on 18 July. The accusations made by the US in its consultation request are meritless and founded on the deliberate misrepresentations of Chinese laws and practices as well as allegations from unidentifiable sources, China said. As a result, China is not in a position to accept the establishment of a panel.

The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to revert to the matter.

DS544: United States — Certain Measures on Steel and Aluminium Products

DS548: United States — Certain Measures on Steel and Aluminium Products

DS550: United States — Certain Measures on Steel and Aluminium Products

DS551: United States — Certain Measures on Steel and Aluminium Products

DS552: United States — Certain Measures on Steel and Aluminium Products

DS554: United States — Certain Measures on Steel and Aluminium Products

DS564: United States — Certain Measures on Steel and Aluminium Products

China, the European Union, Canada, Mexico, Norway, Russia and Turkey all submitted first requests for panels to challenge the decision by the United States to impose additional customs duties of 10% on imports of aluminium products and 25% on imports of certain steel products.

While the United States claims the measures at issue were taken because of national security reasons, to the complainants it appears that the duties, in their content and substance, were taken as safeguard measures because the imports of steel products and aluminium products were deemed to be in such increased quantities and under such conditions as to cause or threaten injury to domestic producers of the products. As a result, the imposition of the additional duties was intended to protect the US steel and aluminium industries from the economic effects of imports. At the same time, the additional duties are not administered in a uniform manner since some WTO members are exempted from the duties. Moreover, quotas have been established for some WTO members.

The complainants said the measures are inconsistent with US obligations under the WTO’s Safeguards Agreement and the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) 1994.  Consultations between the seven complainants and the United States were held over the course of July up to early October but the talks failed to resolve the dispute, prompting the seven to request the establishment of panels.

China said its consultations with the US on the issue on 19 July were very limited and failed to resolve the dispute; the tariffs, taken under the guise of national security, are obviously and egregiously inconsistent with the relevant provisions of the Agreement on Safeguards and the GATT 1994. China is of the view that there is a joint understanding among different WTO members that the measures at issue are inconsistent with the core principles of the covered agreements. China also believes that WTO members should use or invoke the security exception provisions under the WTO agreements on a bona fide basis.

The United States said it was not surprised with China’s request and that China was following a pattern of using the WTO dispute settlement system as an instrument to promote its non-market economic policies, policies which have led to massive excess capacity in steel and aluminium and distortions of world markets that are damaging the interests of market-oriented economies, its businesses and its workers.

The US said it would not allow China’s “Party-State” to fatally undermine the US steel and aluminium industries, on which the US military and, by extension, global security, rely. The US has explained that the tariffs are necessary to address the threatened impairment these imports of steel and aluminium pose to US national security; what threatens the international trading system is not invocation of the national security exception but China attempting to use the WTO dispute settlement system to prevent any action by any member to address its unfair, trade-distorting policies. As a result, the US does not agree to the establishment of a panel.

The European Union said in its request for a panel that the US actions have prompted significant reactions over the past several months, both in the US and worldwide. It noted that the request by the seven complainants was unprecedented in that one member was being targeted with so many panel requests in one day, which was a sign of the degree of objection the US actions were eliciting from members.

The US arguments justifying its actions are simply wrong, the EU said: the US tariffs are in effect safeguard measures designed to protect domestic industries from imports; the national security justification under Article XXI of GATT can be reviewed in WTO adjudication; and the Article XXI exception does not apply in this case. It is a very dangerous proposition to suggest members can invoke national security in order to protect the prosperity of domestic industries, the EU said.

The United States responded that it was deeply disappointed with the EU’s request for a panel and that the EU’s action was misdirected; rather than supporting the international trading system by acting to resolve underlying concerns, the EU is undermining the system by asking the WTO to do what it was never intended to do – it is simply not the role of the WTO to review a sovereign nation’s judgment of its essential security interests. The EU has supported the US interpretation of Article XXI in the past, notably in 1982 when certain EU actions were examined before the then-GATT Council. The US supported the EU at that time. The US wishes to be clear – if the WTO were to undertake to review an invocation of Article XXI, this would undermine the legitimacy of the WTO’s dispute settlement system and even the viability of the WTO itself.

Infringing on a sovereign’s right to determine what is in its own essential security interest would run exactly contrary to the WTO reforms that are necessary in order for this organization to maintain any relevancy, the US declared, adding that it was not in a position to accept the EU request for a panel.

In their panel requests, Canada, Mexico, Norway, Russia and Turkey described the US actions as, for all intents and purposes, safeguard measures and questioned the national security exception cited by the US as a justification for its action.

Canada said it was inconceivable that exports of steel and aluminium from Canada could threaten US national security and that it was very concerned these measures could undermine the integrity of the global trading system. Mexico said using the national security exception as the US has done would frustrate the object and purpose of the WTO dispute settlement system while Norway said it was worried the US was adopting measures so evidently inconsistent with obligations of the rules-based trading system and based on a purported justification divorced from real-world security concerns.

Russia agreed that the unprecedented number of panel requests against the US tariffs indicated a shared understanding that the US measures were inconsistent with WTO rules while Turkey questioned why it was being singled out for tariffs on steel and aluminium double those imposed on other WTO members.

The United States rejected the additional four panel requests. The Section 232 tariffs were necessary for the protection of essential US security interests and thus justified under Article XXI.  The position of the United States for over 70 years has been that actions taken pursuant to Article XXI are not subject to review by the WTO. Because the US has invoked Article XXI, there is no basis for a WTO panel to review the claims of the complainants and no reason for this matter to proceed further.

The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to revert to the matter.

DS557: Canada — Additional Duties on Certain Products from the United States

DS558: China — Additional Duties on Certain Products from the United States

DS559: European Union — Additional Duties on Certain Products from the United States

DS560: Mexico — Additional Duties on Certain Products from the United States

The United States requested four dispute panels to challenge increased duties imposed by Canada, China, the European Union and Mexico on certain US imports. The increased duties apply only to products originating in the US and do not apply to like products originating from any other WTO member. As a result, the duties appear to be inconsistent with the most-favoured nation obligation under Article I of the GATT 1994, the US said. Moreover, the additional duties applied by Canada, the EU and China result in rates of duty greater than the rates of duty set out in their schedules of concessions and thus appear inconsistent with Article II of the GATT 1994.

The US said it held consultations with Canada, China, the EU and Mexico in September but that the talks failed to resolve the disputes, prompting it to request the establishment of panels. The US noted that members claim the US is breaching WTO rules by imposing tariffs on steel and aluminium imports but at the same time they are unilaterally retaliating against the US based on the pretence that the US actions are safeguards; this is the height of hypocrisy, the US said. The US has not invoked WTO safeguard provisions for its actions and because the US has not done so, other members cannot simply act as if these provisions have been invoked and use that sham pretence to apply safeguard rules that are simply inapplicable.

Canada, China, the European Union and Mexico countered that the tariffs are, for all intents and purposes, safeguard measures and the increased duties imposed by the four are completely justified measures in accordance with the WTO’s Safeguards Agreement. China noted the US refused to hold consultations on possible compensation for the steel and aluminium tariffs, leaving China no choice but to impose rebalancing measures. Mexico said its action was not in the purview of the WTO and that it was rightly taken in line with its NAFTA commitments. The four said they were not in a position to accept the US request for panels.

The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to revert to the matter.

DS234: United States – Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act of 2000

The European Union reiterated its request that the United States cease transferring anti-dumping and countervailing duties to the US domestic industry, arguing that every such disbursement was a clear act of non-compliance with the DSB’s recommendations and rulings on the matter. Brazil, Canada and Chile thanked the EU for keeping the item on the agenda and called on the US to fully comply. The United States referred to its previous statement and said it had taken all action necessary to comply with the DSB’s recommendations and rulings.

European Communities and Certain Member States – Measures Affecting Trade in Large Civil Aircraft: Implementations of the recommendations adopted by the DSB

The United States noted that the European Union has not provided a status report concerning the dispute DS316, “EU — Measures Affecting Trade in Large Civil Aircraft”, an issue raised by the US at past DSB meetings. The EU has argued that Article 21.6 of the WTO’s Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU) requires that the issue of implementation remain on the DSB agenda until the issue is resolved and that where a member disagrees with another member’s assertion that implementation of a ruling has been achieved, the issue remains unresolved for the purposes of Article 21.6.

The stated EU position contradicts its actions in this dispute, the US said, where the EU has admitted that there remains a disagreement on compliance. Under the EU’s own view, the EU should be providing a status report, yet it has failed to do so. The US urged the EU to provide the DSB for the first time any details on its alleged implementation efforts.

The European Union said there was a difference between the position it has taken in the DS232 “Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act” case and DS316. In the former, the case has been adjudicated and no proceedings are pending and the EU disagrees with the US assertion that it has complied; thus the issue remains unresolved for the purposes of Article 21.6. In the DS316 case, the EU notified its compliance measures, the US disagreed that compliance had been achieved and a compliance panel has been established to rule on the matter. The matter is subject to litigation and the EU is concerned with a reading of Article 21.6 which would require a member to notify the status of implementation while litigation is ongoing.

Statement by the United States concerning the Issuance of Advisory Opinions on Issues Not Necessary to Resolve a Dispute

The United States highlighted concerns it has with the WTO’s dispute settlement system, namely the practice by WTO panels and the Appellate Body of issuing “advisory opinions”, which it said were findings that are not necessary to resolve a dispute, including statements or interpretations that are not necessary or even on issues not present in a dispute. The issuance of these advisory opinions was yet another example of a failure by the Appellate Body to follow the rules set out by members, the US said.

The US highlighted five issues: 1) the relevant text of the WTO agreements and the DSU make clear that the purpose of the dispute settlement system is to help members resolve a dispute, not produce interpretations or make law in the abstract; 2) the current DSU rules were drawn from the dispute settlement procedures of the GATT, which did not provide for advisory opinions; 3) WTO members have not given panels or the Appellate Body authority to issue advisory opinions; 4) there have been troubling instances of advisory opinions issued by the Appellate Body, an approach which has been criticized by some members; and 5) there are serious consequences for the WTO dispute settlement system from the failure of panels and the Appellate Body to only make findings necessary to resolve disputes. The US said these advisory opinions add time to proceedings, add to the complexity of rulings, risk adding to or diminishing members’ rights under the covered WTO agreements and may not take into account all the facets of an issue. Ultimately the failure of WTO adjudicators to follow DSU rules risks further eroding support for the dispute settlement system and the WTO as a whole, the US declared.

Several members intervened on the matter. The EU said it did not necessarily agree with the US characterization of some Appellate Body findings as advisory opinions and that addressing the issues raised by the parties in a dispute does not mean that they cannot provide clarity regarding the existing WTO provisions, as permitted under Article 3.2 of the DSU.

Brazil said US concerns regarding the Appellate Body and dispute system did not justify “hostage taking” with regards to the filling of current vacancies on the Appellate Body and agreed that Article 3.2 provided some leeway to provide clarity regarding existing provisions of the WTO agreements. Japan noted that members have different views on what constitutes an advisory opinion and that constructive dialogue was needed among members on the issue.

China agreed that the Appellate Body should only address the issues appealed by the parties to the dispute and refrain from making findings on the issues that neither party appealed but said concerns about this should not be used to block the launch of the Appellate Body selection process.

New Zealand, Chile and India also commented and expressed different views on the matter.

Appellate Body appointments

Mexico, speaking on behalf of 68 WTO members, once again introduced a proposal calling for the establishment of a selection committee for the appointment of new Appellate Body members, the submission of candidates within 30 days and the issuance by the committee of recommendations within 60 days. The considerable number of members supporting the proposal reflects a common concern with the current situation in the Appellate Body that is seriously affecting its workings and the overall dispute settlement system against the best interest of its members, Mexico said.

The United States again said it was not in a position to agree to the proposal. The systemic concerns raised by the US in previous meetings regarding the Appellate Body have not been addressed, it said. For more than 15 years the US has been raising concerns with the Appellate Body’s disregard for rules set by members and its persistent overreach in areas such as anti-dumping and subsidy rules, standards and technical barriers to trade, and the use of safeguards; it also continues to have concerns that individuals who are not currently Appellate Body members continue to decide appeals. When the Appellate Body abuses the authority it was given, it undermines the legitimacy of the system and damages the interests of all WTO members who care about having agreements respected.

Twenty members took the floor, most of them reiterating their concerns with the continued impasse regarding the appointment of new Appellate Body members and urging all members to show flexibility in order to resolve the deadlock as soon as possible. Many repeated statements made at previous DSB meetings on the matter.

Brazil said there was nothing in the DSU requiring consensus from members in launching the selection process and thus no legal basis for the US to block the process; it asked whether it was legally justified for one member to cause such disruption for the entire membership and whether this member would be held accountable for its actions. The scope and breadth of consequences caused by the current impasse were having concrete effects on the trade and systemic interests of all members wishing to exercise their rights to resolve disputes, Brazil declared.

The United States countered that the DSU clearly required consensus to launch the selection process for new Appellate Body members.

Statement by Honduras – Fostering a discussion on the functioning of the Appellate Body

Members continued discussions on a proposal from Honduras presented at the DSB’s 26 September meeting setting out ideas for addressing US concerns regarding the Appellate Body’s practice of allowing AB members whose terms have expired to continue working on cases. Honduras said it was consulting with members on how to proceed with its initiative. Honduras added it was aware that other WTO members were putting forward proposals on this issue and said it welcomed all proposals and was ready to engage.

The United States said it looked forward to hearing other members’ views on the option set out in the Honduras paper and other possible approaches that members are considering but cautioned against continuing to allow the Appellate Body to permit continued service by members whose terms have expired. Other members expressed support for the initiative by Honduras and the need to resolve concerns regarding the practice of allowing Appellate Body members whose terms have expired to continue working on cases without the DSB’s approval.

Surveillance of implementation

The United States presented status reports with regard to DS184, “US — Anti-Dumping Measures on Certain Hot-Rolled Steel Products from Japan”,  DS160, “United States — Section 110(5) of US Copyright Act”, DS464, “United States — Anti-Dumping and Countervailing Measures on Large Residential Washers from Korea”, DS471, “United States — Certain Methodologies and their Application to Anti-Dumping Proceedings Involving China” and DS488, “US — Anti-Dumping Measures on Certain Oil Country Tubular Goods from Korea”.

The European Union presented status reports with regard to DS291, “EC — Measures Affecting the Approval and Marketing of Biotech Products”.

The European Union informed WTO members that a new EU Commission regulation was adopted on 18 October terminating anti-dumping proceedings against imports of biodiesel from Argentina and Indonesia, duties that were subject to dispute proceedings in DS473 and DS480,  ”EU — Anti-Dumping Measures on Biodiesel”. The regulation took effect on 19 October and from that date imports of biodiesel from Argentina and Indonesia are no longer subject to anti-dumping duties, the EU said. Indonesia thanked the EU for its status report and for the new regulation and said it would study the matter carefully.

Indonesia presented its status report in DS484, “Indonesia — Measures Concerning the Importation of Chicken Meat and Chicken Products”, expired on 22 July. Brazil said it continued to have concerns about Indonesia’s continued application of certain restrictive import licensing practices and its continued failure to recognize Brazilian veterinary health certification for exported chicken.

Next meeting

The next regular meeting of the DSB will take place on 21 November.

Source: wto.org

 

137/ DDG Wolff: WTO rules are not an obstacle to environmental goals but a means to achieve them

In a statement to the Emerging Markets Forum in Tokyo on 29 October, Deputy Director-General Alan Wolff said: “Trade is key in providing the best, most resource-efficient solutions to developmental and environmental needs.” To counter the threat of climate change, efforts should be focused on using trade to accelerate the diffusion of environmentally sound technological solutions to those places where they are most needed, promote a more efficient allocation of resources globally and facilitate the expansion of markets for sustainable products.

Specific question to Ambassador Wolff: With climate change threatening the world as we know it, how can the WTO reform its rules to include social and environmental concerns alongside economic efficiency concerns?

The WTO contributes in fundamentally positive ways to improve the global environment.  To address what reform might be needed, it is first necessary to grasp what the WTO rules and procedures actually do.

Climate change is altering where food and feed can be produced and where it needs to be consumed.  Avoiding hunger and starvation is a primary need of humanity.  The rules of the WTO provide a framework that facilitates the transfer of food from surplus areas to supply food deficit areas.  This is true whether the problem is sustained drought, excessive rain, other reasons for crop failure or to bring desperately needed supplies to disaster areas.  This aspect of globalization is essential for human well-being and must not be casually overlooked.

The most recent example of a net contribution of the WTO to sustainable development was an agreement to ban agricultural export subsidies.  Obviously, the primary benefit of this agreement reached in Nairobi in 2015 will be to farmers in countries too poor to afford to engage in an export subsidy competition.

The primary area of agreement in Buenos Aires at the Ministerial Meeting last December was a commitment of all Members to conclude an agreement by the next Ministerial Meeting to bring disciplines to fisheries subsidies.  Subsidized vessels deplete the oceans stocks of fish while destroying the livelihoods of coastal fisherman.  This is a key environmental objective of the WTO as well as a key sustainable development goal.

Policy space for inefficient production leads to environmental degradation.  Some of the worst environmental disasters of the last century occurred with insulation from the framework of the benefits of trade.  The disastrous plowing-up of the steppes and the loss and salinization of much of the Aral Sea occurred through illiberal policies divorced from integration into the world economy.

It is my privilege to chair the WTO’s Consultative Framework for Cotton Development.  It is one of the areas of least contentiousness in world trade.  Major cotton producing countries, including the United States, India, Pakistan, Brazil and Australia are engaged in a cooperative effort to aid the poorest countries, including Chad, Mali, Benin and Burkina Faso, to increase yields while reducing the use of fertilizer.

Just a few weeks ago, the WTO hosted a high-level WTO-UN Environment Leadership Dialogue on “Making Trade Work for Environment, Prosperity and Resilience”.  At that dialogue, the message from Erik Solheim, the Executive Director of UN Environment was very clear: Trade has driven down the prices of renewable energy technologies, it has lifted millions out of poverty and made possible resource efficiency gains, all of which has benefitted the environment.  He saw trade as part of the solution and urged that it be used to unlock triple win opportunities — by creating jobs, improving well-being and resource efficiency. The better we use our resources, the more people we lift out of poverty, the better it is for the environment.

“Trade or environment” is a false choice and it has never been the purpose or effect of the WTO’s rules. The principle of sustainable development is enshrined in the founding agreement of the World Trade Organization.  Page one, paragraph one. It reads:

“….expanding the production of and trade in goods and services, while allowing for the optimal use of the world’s resources in accordance with the objective of sustainable development, seeking to both protect and preserve the environment…”

This principle has been very powerful and effective. WTO rules are not an obstacle to environmental goals, they are a means to achieve them.

• With the threat of climate change, we should focus our efforts on using trade to:

1. accelerate the diffusion of environmentally-sound technological solutions to those places where they are most needed. At the same time, a more integrated global market can drive down the cost of such technologies, making it easier for countries to replace outdated, polluting technological solutions with environmentally sound ones.
2. If the top 18 developing countries with the most greenhouse gas emissions abolished these barriers, they would be able to import:
3. 63% more energy-efficient lighting,
4. 23% more wind power generation equipment,
5. 14% more solar power generation.
6. promote a more efficient allocation of resources globally. In doing so, the WTO also helps bridge differences in resource endowments across countries and to relieve resource scarcities in some regions. This role of trade is likely to become even more prominent in the coming decades, as the impacts of climate change are felt in varying magnitudes across different parts of the world.
7. facilitate the creation and expansion of markets for sustainable products, including in agriculture. Open, transparent and fair trade in sustainable agricultural products could contribute to broader poverty alleviation efforts in developing countries, if countries can overcome the many constraints that limit the capacity of smallholder farmers to participate in global markets.

Doing all of the above has more to do with mustering the required political will and national leadership than any possible reform of WTO rules.

WTO rules already provide ample space for environmental considerations to be reflected in governments’ policies. Every year WTO Members notify on average over 1000 new environmental measures, over 10,000 since 2009. Today, one in six notifications to the WTO are related to the environment; 20 years ago, it was 1 in 10. These trends show that WTO rules have not prevented governments from adopting environmental measures, with a rising number related to climate change mitigation or adaptation, nor has this resulted in many trade and environment disputes.  The notifications serve the purpose of allowing trading partners to comment on and spread the use of best practices.

More than 20 years of jurisprudence in the WTO show that trade rules do not prevent environmental actions. In the few cases in which environmental measures were considered in contravention to WTO rules, the environmental objective was never put in question. In all cases, one or more elements of the measure were arbitrary or unjustifiable discriminations that worked against the environmental objective, not in favour. In short, it was the protectionist element of the measures that was condemned.

Protectionism would have a negative effect on environmental objectives, for instance by making environmental technologies more expensive and less accessible. As Erik Solheim, Executive Director of UN Environment, recently stated [in an interview with Climate Home News], an increase in protectionism would be “very bad for the environment because you waste resources rather than using them effectively. It will make the spread of environmental technologies less fast. And, of course, it will keep more people in poverty for a longer period of time”.

The WTO has a committee dedicated to trade and environment where members debate, exchange experiences, learn from each other and discuss how to better achieve “win-win-win” policies.  For instance, in recent years, WTO members have regularly discussed issues such as energy efficiency policies, carbon footprints and labelling, trade-related elements in climate mitigation strategies and efforts to combat illegal logging. Our current negotiations on disciplining fisheries subsidies that lead to illegal, unregulated and unreported fishing came out of discussions in the Committee on Trade and Environment. It is also the forum for an exchange with multilateral environmental agreements, and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change frequently interacts in the Committee.

My final point is that trade is a critical tool in achieving the objectives of the Paris Agreement and of Agenda 2030 on Sustainable Development Goals. Trade is key in providing the best, most resource-efficient solutions to developmental and environmental needs. Trade leads to important efficiency gains globally, allowing for better use of natural resources. It has never been a choice between “trade or environment” but rather “trade for sustainable development”.

It is true that WTO reforms are needed.  There are major proponents of seeking ways to require that Transparency obligations are lived up to.  Without current accurate information, national policies adversely affect others, often developing countries least able to withstand competition from subsidies, excessively restrictive or discriminatory standards and other trade distorting measures.  But being in favor of greater scope for protectionist policies is a gross misuse of the term “reform”.

Source: wto.org

 

138/ Vietnam-Argentina seek to bolster economic, trade ties

The 6th meeting of the Vietnam-Argentina Inter-governmental Economic-Trade Committee took place in Buenos Aires from October 25-26, aiming to increase economic and trade cooperation between the two countries.

The meeting was co-chaired by Vietnam’s Deputy Minister of Industry and Trade Do Thang Hai and Argentina’s Secretary for International Economic Relations Horacio Reyser.

The Argentinian official stated that the close cooperation between the two sides is being realised with the implementation of a number of technical cooperation projects.

He added that the business delegation that accompanied Minister of Foreign Affairs and Worship Argentina Jorge Faurie’s visit to Vietnam aimed to explore opportunities in pharmaceuticals, biotech, medical equipment, poultry and beef, seafood and fruits.

Secretary Reyser also stated that Mercosur, to which Argentina is a member, is willing to begin pre-feasibility talks towards negotiations on a possible free trade agreement between Mercosur and Vietnam.

For his part, Deputy Minister Hai stated that the two sides have been actively working together to implement technical cooperation projects with positive results, bringing substantive benefits to both countries.

He noted that in order to boost trade and investment cooperation, Vietnam and Argentina needs to exchange information more frequently and increase business, trade promotion and investment delegations.

The Vietnamese official also called on the two sides to work more closely to diversify each country’s exports to the other.

During the meeting, the two countries’ trade promotion agencies signed a memorandum of understanding to facilitate trade and investment between Vietnam and Argentina.

Argentina is currently Vietnam’s second largest trade partner in Latin America, while Vietnam is the South American country’s fifth largest global trade partner. Last year, the two-way trade value reached US$3.03 billion, of which Vietnam’s exports to Argentina were US$482 million.

Source: NDO

 

Ngày 30/10

139/ WTO members discuss implementation of Information Technology Agreement

Participants in the WTO’s Information Technology Agreement (ITA) met on 30 October to discuss implementation issues related to the ITA and to report on work on non-tariff measures.

Implementation issues concerning India and China were flagged once more at the Committee meeting. WTO members raised concerns about the import duties that India has introduced on mobile phones and their parts, which members consider to be covered by the ITA.

They also expressed concern about India’s latest rectification notification, which sought to “unbind” the duties relating to these products. They felt that the Indian proposal would alter the scope of India’s concessions and thus could not be considered rectification of a purely formal character.

Members also sought clarifications from China on the new tariffs on certain semi-conductor products covered by the ITA.

Members urged India and China to bring their trade measures in line with the ITA and to grant duty-free market access for those products.

Under the work programme on non-tariff barriers, Switzerland updated the Committee on the work of the informal group of members, which is focusing on issues such as conformity assessment, transparency and e-labelling.

Reporting to the Committee on behalf of the ITA Expansion group, Canada said it was pleased to note that all 26 participants (representing 55 WTO members) in the ITA Expansion have now submitted their ITA Expansion commitments under the 1980 Decision for Modification and Rectification of Schedules of Tariff Concessions.

Background

The Information Technology Agreement (ITA) was concluded by 29 participants at the Singapore Ministerial Conference in December 1996. Since then, the number of participants has grown to 82, representing about 97 per cent of world trade in IT products. The participants are committed to completely eliminating tariffs on IT products covered by the Agreement.

The ITA Expansion was concluded at the Nairobi Ministerial Conference in December 2015, with 26 participants representing 55 WTO members. Trade under the ITA Expansion covers an additional 201 products valued at over $1.3 trillion per year.

The benefits of concessions under both the ITA and ITA Expansion are being extended to all 164 WTO members, meaning they all enjoy duty-free access to the markets of the members eliminating tariffs on these products.

Source: wto.org

140/ Writing the future on World Cities Day

Urbanization is alive and growing: our cities are tipped to house an additional 2.4 billion people over the next 30 years¹⁾. “Building Sustainable and Resilient Cities” is the theme of this year’s United Nations World Cities Day, and ISO standards are proving to be essential tools to do exactly that.

How do you enhance a city’s attractiveness, and preserve its environmental, social and cultural assets, when faced with a growing population?

Since becoming the first community in Europe to be certified to ISO International Standard ISO 37101, Sustainable development in communities – Management system for sustainable development – Requirements with guidance for use, Sappada in Italy now benefits from better managed local complexities, new initiatives for education and environmental protection, new ways of promoting their area and a system to measure and monitor sustainability performance – all the while increasing community engagement.

ISO 37101 is part of a suite of standards dedicated to future-proofing cities and making them sustainable and resilient, thus contributing to the goal of this year’s World Cities Day and United Nations Sustainable Development Goal 11 for sustainable cities and communities.

Developed by ISO’s committee of experts from more than 50 countries, ISO/TC 268, Sustainable cities and communities, it joins other standards dedicated to developing frameworks and measuring performance, such as the ISO 37150 series on smart community infrastructures and the recently updated ISO 37120, Sustainable cities and communities – Indicators for city services and quality of life.

Dr Bernard Gindroz, Chair of ISO/TC 268, said the cities of tomorrow face many challenges but also great opportunities, such as increasing citizen engagement and improving city living.

“The future of cities affects everyone as it touches everything from public transport, public facilities, water and energy supplies to social engagement, health and more,” he said.

“Building sustainable cities is no easy task, as cities are, by their nature, a highly complex interaction of systems. These standards help city leaders to define their own vision of how they want their city to be, how they will deal with the many challenges of a growing population and how they will get there with clear strategies, targets and roadmaps,” he adds.

Continuing the global conversation on sustainable cities, ISO joins fellow standards organizations – the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) and the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) – at the World Smart City Forum in Santa Fe, Argentina, on 29 November 2018.

The Forum will bring together leading international figures in the smart and sustainable cities space to discuss challenges and solutions in smart city development.

For details and registration, check the World Smart City Website.

Source: iso.org

 

141/ The huge new Pacific trade deal is about to kick off without the US

The CPTPP is ready for takeoff. The trade deal was recently ratified by Canada, and Australia says it will do the same soon. Japan, Mexico, New Zealand, and Singapore have already ratified it. With six countries on board, the pact will provisionally go into effect.

The CPTPP is the successor to the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), a similar deal that included the US. Donald Trump withdrew the US from the TPP soon after he was elected. During his presidential campaign, Trump referred to the TPP as the “greatest danger yet” to the US economy, and has declared a preference for bilateral trade agreements since coming into office. Former US president Barack Obama pushed for the deal because he said it would let the US, not China, “lead the way on global trade.”

CPTPP stands for the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership, but you can also just call it TPP without the US.

The other 11 countries in the deal, which also includes Brunei, Chile, Malaysia, Peru, and Vietnam, were undeterred by the US’s withdrawal from TPP. Even without the US, the new pact will be among the largest multilateral trade deals ever enacted (paywall). The CPTPP countries include 14% of world GDP. Beyond just lowering trade barriers between the countries, the deal also includes greater protection of intellectual property rights—a part of the deal the US fought for—and provisions to increase minimum labor standards for workers in participating countries.

If Australia ratifies the CPTPP this week, it means that the deal can fully go into effect during the 2018 calendar year. This is important because it means that the first round of tariff reductions can happen this year, and the second round at the beginning of 2019. (Tariff reductions can only happen once a year in each country.)

The non-profit Peterson Institute for Economics estimates that the total GDP of participating countries will increase by about 1.7%, with the largest gains for Vietnam and Peru. They also estimate that, overall, the US will be worse off due to the deal because US exports will now be less competitive in CPTPP nations.

Source: Quartz

 

Ngày 31/10

142/ Tracking it back: a new standard to support responsible use of wood just published

Deforestation and forest degradation are ravaging our planet, threatening biodiversity and contributing to climate change havoc and global warming. As consumer awareness grows, so too does the demand to know the origins of wood in the products they buy. A new ISO standard for tracing wood back to its sources will help to provide this information.

With many players in the wood supply chain, and many different types of wood, tracing its origins to legal sources is complex. A robust method of traceability, therefore, will help businesses favour timber that comes from legal sources, thus enabling the industry to grow. ISO 38200, Chain of custody of wood and wood-based products, specifies the requirements for a chain of custody of wood and wood-based products that allows users to trace the origins of wood and wood products every step along the supply chain.

This new International Standard lets users determine if the material is “verified”, for which evidence of compliance with the requirements of a due diligence system can be provided; “specified”, where it meets specific publicly available documented requirements set by organizations; “certified”, when it satisfies the requirements of a particular certification scheme; or “recycled”, if it has been recovered, or otherwise diverted, from the waste stream.

Dr Jorge E. R. Cajazeira, Chair of the ISO technical committee that developed the standard, said ISO 38200 provides a common framework, allowing players in the wood supply chain to “speak the same language”.

“It will also help purchasers track timber from different sources, thus helping to avoid timber from illegal sources from entering the supply chain.”

ISO 38200 was developed by ISO project committee ISO/PC 287, Chain of custody of wood and wood-based products, whose secretariat is held by DIN, ISO’s member for Germany, and ABNT, ISO’s member for Brazil. It can be purchased from your national ISO member or through the ISO Store.

Source: iso.org

143/ DG Azevêdo meets with participants in Advanced Course on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures

Director-General Roberto Azevêdo met with participants in the 14th Advanced Course on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS) taking place at WTO headquarters in Geneva from 22 October to 9 November 2018. In his remarks to the group, consisting of 25 specialists from 11 Latin American countries, DG Azevêdo underlined that SPS measures must always be based on scientific principles which contribute to protecting human, animal or plant life and health and are not used as disguised protectionism. This is what he said (in Spanish):

Hola a todos.

Buenos días.

Es un placer unirme a ustedes en esta la edición en español del Curso Avanzado sobre MSF.

Esta es una iniciativa muy importante.

El éxito que se ha cosechado a lo largo de los años se debe a:

• el compromiso de los participantes,
• los intensos esfuerzos del equipo MSF de la División de Agricultura y Productos Básicos,
• y el apoyo del Instituto de Formación y Cooperación Técnica.

Por ello, deseo dar las gracias a todos los que han participado en la organización de este curso.

Los rápidos cambios que se están produciendo actualmente, desde la aparición de nuevas tecnologías al aumento de los riesgos ambientales, nos obligan a replantearnos el concepto que tenemos del comercio.

Sin embargo, creo que los principios fundamentales consagrados en los Acuerdos de la OMC siguen siendo válidos: por ejemplo, la importancia de tener normas claras, la apertura, la cooperación y la no discriminación.

En la esfera sanitaria y fitosanitaria, esto significa que cuando los Miembros adoptan medidas para proteger la salud humana, o la vida animal y vegetal, deben asegurarse de que esas medidas se basan en principios científicos, que realmente contribuyan al logro de los objetivos de las políticas, y que no sean medios disfrazados de proteccionismo.

Todos los aquí presentes han pasado por un riguroso proceso de selección. La dificultad que entraña administrar las cuestiones sanitarias y fitosanitarias en sus países no es algo nuevo para ustedes.

Son perfectamente conscientes de la importancia de la reglamentación para garantizar la inocuidad de los alimentos y la sanidad animal y vegetal en sus países, de manera que estén en consonancia con los compromisos contraídos por sus países con los demás miembros de la OMC.

Por lo tanto, el objetivo de este curso no es formar a especialistas en cuestiones sanitarias y fitosanitarias, porque ustedes ya lo son.

El verdadero objetivo es ayudarles a aplicar esos conocimientos especializados.

Por ejemplo, ¿cómo explicarían a otras personas la importancia de las medidas sanitarias y fitosanitarias? ¿Cómo convencerían a un ministro, o a los ciudadanos de su país, de la importancia de cumplir el Acuerdo MSF?

Esas conversaciones requieren liderazgo, y un elemento importante de este curso es ayudarles a desarrollar esa habilidad.

Entiendo que ustedes han tenido discusiones interesantes, y que están trabajando en la elaboración de un plan de acción, que les permitirá:

• aprender a identificar los problemas y encontrar posibles soluciones,
• detallar las siguientes etapas,
• determinar las personas e instituciones que deben intervenir,
• convencer a otras personas de que les ayuden a implementar su plan de acción, y
• adquirir recursos para adaptar los planes según sea necesario.

Esta iniciativa está obteniendo buenos resultados.

Durante los últimos 14 años, los participantes han podido aplicar satisfactoriamente las lecciones aprendidas y han ayudado a lograr objetivos políticos fundamentales, en el cumplimiento de las obligaciones en sus países.

Vemos a participantes esforzarse por implementar sus planes de acción, identificar los problemas a los que se enfrentan sus países y elaborar estrategias para solucionarlos. Algunos siguen trabajando para elaborar MSF basadas en datos científicos o para ayudar a los exportadores a obtener acceso a los mercados para sus productos.

También hay participantes que han regresado a Ginebra para representar a sus países en las reuniones del Comité MSF o como delegados destinados en Ginebra.

Y hay participantes que han sido designados para integrar grupos especiales relacionados con casos sobre MSF o invitados como expertos en MSF de países en desarrollo o para ayudar en proyectos del Fondo para la Aplicación de Normas y el Fomento del Comercio.

Todo esto es muy positivo.

Así que estoy convencido de que esta experiencia está siendo constructiva y enriquecedora para todos ustedes, y confío en que la están aprovechando al máximo.

Sigan participando activamente, hagan preguntas, compartan sus experiencias. Este curso por sí solo no marcará la diferencia, todo dependerá de la implicación de ustedes.

¡Sigamos trabajando como hasta ahora!

Gracias por su atención. Les deseo que el curso continúe muy provechoso.

Source: wto.org

 

144/ CPTPP Ratification Process Advances, With Possibility of Taking Effect in Early 2019

Last week, Australia’s Senate passed legislation ratifying the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP), the sweeping trade accord signed by 11 Pacific Rim economies this past March in Chile. Australia is now the fourth of the 11 signatories to ratify the planned trade deal, following Mexico, Japan, and Singapore, boosting the chances of the CPTPP taking effect early next year.

Australia Prime Minister Scott Morrison told reporters in Canberra, that “it’s a big, important day for businesses all around the country, and it’s the product of a government that gets it.”

He added that the CPTPP, once in force, “could connect Australia to half a billion consumers around the world,” while noting that the accord will particularly benefit Australian farmers and services providers.

After US President Donald Trump withdrew his country from the original Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) Agreement in January 2017, the remaining signatories spent several months in negotiations to help the accord move forward, ultimately agreeing to suspend select provisions while leaving the bulk of the accord intact. (See Bridges Weekly, 16 November 2017)

Under the CPTPP’s terms, the accord requires ratification by at least half of its signatories, or six of the 11 countries involved. While four economies have already ratified the legislation, others may be close behind, with Canada, Vietnam, and New Zealand said to be well advanced in the ratification process.

CPTPP members speed up ratification

On the same day that Australia ratified, CPTPP legislation was approved in Canada’s House of Commons, and will soon be subject to Senate consideration.

“It’s time to diversify and Canada is moving swiftly to ratify the CPTPP. The agreement means free trade with 10 growing Asia-Pacific markets, including Japan and Australia,” said Jim Carr on Twitter. Carr is Canada’s Minister of International Trade Diversification, and issued the tweet ahead of a meeting with Canadian senators.

“It would be very helpful, senators, for Canada to be part of this initial group, and we know that the date is fast approaching,” he told Canadian lawmakers, according to comments reported by Bloomberg. He also urged them to do so by early next month. Similar entreaties have reportedly been made by farm groups and other CPTPP proponents in Canada, warning that falling behind could mean losing out on key market access benefits for products where the North American country is competitive.

Earlier this year, the Office of the Chief Economist at Global Affairs Canada issued a report suggesting that “the CPTPP would generate long-term economic gains for Canada totalling C$4.2 billion,” suggesting that this would be better than the gains previously anticipated under the original version of the deal. The report credited this to “improved market access for Canadian business to other CPTPP countries in the absence of US competition.”

New Zealand is expected to finalise domestic ratification of the accord after a final parliamentary debate in a matter of weeks. “Early ratification also means an immediate levelling of the playing field for many New Zealand exporters in some crucial markets,” said David Parker, New Zealand Minister for Trade and Export Growth, at the country’s parliament last week during a “second reading” of the CPTPP Amendment Bill.

Meanwhile, Vietnamese Prime Minister Nguyễn Xuân Phúc told the Nikkei Asian Review that the southeast Asian country also hopes to ratify in the near-term, potentially next month, as it will “draw out [Vietnam's] maximum possible latent economic and trade potential.”

As for other CPTPP signatories, some are also making strides in the ratification process. In Chile, the accord is also being considered by the domestic legislature, and Foreign Minister Roberto Ampuero said last month that he expects the South American nation to approve the deal shortly. Peruvian officials have made similar statements on their side. It is not yet clear what the timelines are for Brunei and Malaysia.

However, Malaysia, which has a new government in place, has previously expressed some wariness about the CPTPP and other accords inked under the previous government.

Recently, Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad said that Malaysia was “still looking at the pros and cons” of ratifying the CPTPP. “I am opposed to the trade pact because it was not a fair kind of fair trade agreement as it gave companies the power to sue governments for loss of future profits, and things like that,” the prime minister said last month, according to comments reported by local media.

Potential new members

With entry into force potentially imminent, many trade watchers are looking to see which other countries may later ask to accede to the CPTPP. For example, UK government officials have indicated interest in joining the CPTPP post-Brexit, a prospect that Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe welcomed publicly just weeks ago. (See Bridges Weekly, 11 October 2018)

Several other economies are also reportedly considering requesting accession to the CPTPP, such as Colombia, South Korea, Taiwan, and Thailand.

Nearly two years after withdrawing the US from the initial TPP agreement, conflicting reports have repeatedly emerged over whether US President Donald Trump would request to re-join the accord. Washington would need to renegotiate its re-entry and receive the approval of existing signatories to be back in, however.

Growing momentum on the regional integration front?

The past several months have seen concerted efforts on multiple fronts, including in the Asia-Pacific, to advance the negotiation, ratification, and implementation of new trade accords, particularly given some of the challenges that have emerged on the global trade landscape. Tensions between the US and China, which have not yet abated, have been named repeatedly as a cause for concern by other economies, which worry about supply chain disruptions and other consequences.

The CPTPP, as well as a separate Asia-Pacific accord still under negotiation known as the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), have long been considered as possible pathways towards a larger deal that could encompass much of the region. They differ somewhat in objectives and scope, however, along with size, given that the latter accord has 16 members, structured around the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and its six free trade agreement partners.

RCEP participants are hoping to clinch a “package” of deliverables before the end of the year, ostensibly in time for major regional summits planned for November.

Source: ICTSD

 

Ngày 01/11

145/ DDG Wolff: Good will and creativity can yield positive results in talks on strengthening the WTO

Speaking at Chatham House in London on 1 November, Deputy Director-General Alan Wolff highlighted the growing push for strengthening and modernizing the WTO, sparked by the current disruptions in the global trading system. “Good will and creativity can yield results,” but “extensive time is a luxury” that the process cannot afford, he warned. “The absence of change could easily result in a degeneration of the multilateral trading system.” The text of DDG Wolff’s remarks is below.

The primary causes of economic disruption

It is beyond argument that the widespread complacency over the existence of the liberal world trading system as we have known it has been disrupted.  The U.S. Administration might be all too willing to accept all the credit for doing so.  For it, all existing trading arrangements were stated to be badly flawed and perhaps unacceptable.  It is obvious that the change in announced U.S. trade policies is one cause of discontinuity and turmoil in the existing world economic order.   However, to attribute everything unsettling in the world of trade to Washington is to grossly oversimplify.  It is a mistake to view the current state of international trade through a single lens.  The current challenges to the world trading system have more than one source.

To focus solely on Washington’s pronouncements and measures would be to ignore, for example, the rise of a major new economic power.  A major new entry into the world economy particularly through trade is always disruptive.  This was true of the rise of the United States in the mid 19th century with serious consequences for British agriculture.  It was especially true of the rise of Japan with the differences between the organization of its economy and those of the West, at least initially, in the last third of the 20th century.  The impact on manufacturing in the U.S. and elsewhere, particularly in consumer electronics and automobiles, was pronounced.  Disruption during the last two decades of this century has also accompanied the rise of China, whose economy has characteristics that differ from those of its major trading partners.  Differences in economic organization exacerbate friction among countries.  Economists assign a major cause of dislocations of labor markets, particularly in the United States, to competition from China’s becoming the factory of the world.

At the same time, technological change has had a major impact on employment, particularly in manufacturing.  Add to the list of causes of current disruption, wage stagnation, rising income inequality, the effects of automation, issues arising from immigration, and consequent rise of populism and nativism, combined with the failure in most national governments to provide adequate adjustment policies – all contribute to stress on the multilateral economic order.

The disruption might have had far less impact if the trading system had kept pace with this list of challenges in the world economy.  However, there has been persistent underinvestment in the multilateral system from many quarters — from governments, from the private sector and from civil society.  The WTO needed reform before the confluence of major challenges struck.  It needed flexibility and a greater ability to improve its effectiveness.  To the extent that any institution fails to evolve, it would be likely to increasingly be less fit for purpose.  Adverse effects of this inability to adapt are not confined to the impact on the largest and most developed countries.

To maintain a system based on consensus, of necessity its Members must view it as having a balance of benefits and a sense of shared responsibility.  It must also be based on an understanding that where flexibility is required to accommodate the needs of its members, especially as they are sovereign countries and where national objectives must to some extent give way to international disciplines.  Enormous sensitivity to this balance is needed for an international organization like the WTO to succeed.

The WTO has in very many areas functioned very well in this respect.  Where it appears to have functioned less well, at least in the view of one major member, is in the area of dealing with what many call “protectionist” measures (antidumping, countervailing duties and safeguards).  It is imperative for any system comprised of sovereign entities to have safety valves, in this case, to allow trade remedies to function effectively to reduce pressure on the system.  Had there been a functioning political process as was intended in creating the WTO dispute settlement process, perhaps the current breakdown of the system might have been avoided.  The tools to mitigate the rate of change in competition from global competition, when harm occurred to domestic interests, were often not usable at all or taken away prematurely.  This alternative outcome, like all counterfactuals, is speculative.

Dispute settlement has no political accountability to the membership through the Dispute Settlement Body, nor any political (policy) corrective possible through rule-making by the Members.  In national governments, this function is supplied by the legislature and in some cases the ballot box.  As noted by many commentators, seeking to perfect a “quasi-judicial” function without the existence of checks and balances, a system comprised solely of juridical governance poses systemic risks, undermining the legitimacy of the dispute settlement function at least for important participants in the system.  The purity, independent of a political system, of a single aspect of the international trading system – dispute settlement – is not, as it turns out, equally appreciated by all,

The new trade-restrictive measures

The reporting in the press has given understandable prominence to the series of trade threats made and measures taken by the U.S. — consisting of increased tariffs on imports of steel, aluminum, and more generally on goods from China, as well as the Newtonian (for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction) retaliatory measures imposed by America’s principal trading partners, the EU, Canada, Mexico, and China.

There is a range of estimates of the current impact of these recent trade restrictive measures on world economic growth.  While trade patterns do not change overnight, and currency movements can offset some of the tariff increase, over time trade restrictions impair global economic growth.  The broader and more onerous the measures, the more negative the impact.  Ultimately, it is the effects on and of business and consumer confidence that will weigh most heavily on trade and investment. The impact of these broader effects is at present speculative but of likely greater magnitude.

There have been efforts to quantify the economic impact of the new trade restrictions.  Direct tariff effects in analyses carried out by multiple organizations have found results ranging from 0.1% to over 2.2% in losses to global GDP compared to a baseline growth.  This is not trivial.  It means that if global growth is 3.9%, these policies would have the near-term effect of reducing that level to a range of from 3.8% to 1.7%, all other factors being equal.  But, of course, other factors are never equal.   The picture is far more complicated.   The trade effects are generally swamped by macroeconomic forces — the strength of the U.S. dollar, U.S. and China’s saving and investment rates.  And as noted, the potential effect on the confidence of investors and consumers is a very large factor.

Neither is the picture perfectly clear in terms of the impact on particular sectors.  With higher tariffs on specific products, even if the effects on growth are small, a significant number of firms and workers will need to find new markets and jobs, incurring substantial transition costs in the short to medium-term. Nevertheless, some firms and workers will do well.

As for the countries involved, there may be little if any effect on a country’s overall imports and exports.  Analysis suggests as a general proposition that China’s direct exports to the U.S. will decline while China’s exports to other countries will rise, and that other countries exports to the U.S. will rise while US direct exports to China will fall and U.S. exports to other countries will rise.

The vast majority of economists would argue that the long run growth potential of all affected economies will be reduced — because more of their economic activity will not be based on comparative advantage, but on protection.  For the current US-China scenarios the estimated loss to global GDP is less than 0.2% in most models.  Again, not the end of the story, as models currently cannot account very well for potential interaction between real and financial sectors.   If tariff policies reinforce potential adverse effects from existing financial sector risks the effects could be bigger.

The above estimates are based on what is known at present of the tariffs.  We do not know what the future holds for these tariffs, in either direction (an increase or a decrease).  With respect to the measures related to steel and aluminum, it is clear that the countries with which the United States is negotiating trade agreements have an expectation that it is possible for them to obtain an exemption from these tariffs.  So, the end result, even for these products, is far from certain.

A wild card is the extent to which new measures will affect trade and investment in automobiles.  Then there is a question of the extent of knock-on effects from the first wave of restrictions and retaliatory restrictions, and perhaps emulation.

U.S. Trade policies are not uni-directional

Before writing a eulogy for the post-war liberal world economic order, there are other factors to be taken into account that are more positive.  Economic isolationism is not rampant.  NAFTA was renegotiated as USMCA, and while it contains elements of greater government intervention, particularly with respect to the automobile sector, economic integration of North America promises to continue.  Many of the new provisions in the USMCA agreement consist of modernizations of NAFTA and are consistent with the earlier work done on these subjects in the Trans Pacific Partnership.  The United States has also reached a revised trade agreement with Korea (KORUS).  In each case, USMCA and KORUS, the parties have expressed satisfaction with the result.  The United States has also agreed with Japan, the U.K. and the European Union to engage in negotiations of free trade agreements.  Moreover, the United States is highly active in the daily work of the various committees of the WTO and is sometimes second to none in its contributions to the work.  It is also active in the Joint Initiatives announced in Buenos Aires.

The reformation

There are numerous efforts underway on the part of a number of countries to work toward reforms in the world trading system at Buenos Aires last December, U.S. Trade Representative Lighthizer called for a number of specific WTO reforms, and at that time joined the trade ministers of the European Union and Japan in a declaration to work together on several reform issues.  President Macron picked up this theme in March at the OECD.  The EU recently tabled a paper containing many detailed suggestions for reform, Canada convened a two-day meeting of trade ministers last week in Ottawa to discuss WTO reform, and a paper on transparency obligations in the WTO is being tabled by the U.S., Japan and the EU next month in Geneva.  China has now said that it will entertain reform and the EU and China formed a bilateral forum to discuss WTO reform.  The trading system is far from moribund.  Changes are being considered in many quarters.

The primary areas of focus of Members’ discussions of reform are improved implementation of existing rules and structures, how to make the WTO more proactive, how to update the substantive rules of the WTO to address current problems and opportunities, and how to restore an appellate function to WTO dispute settlement before it disappears, which is in the offing.  To have an appellate function is extremely important.  The U.S. complaints are not an invention of the current U.S. Administration.  They have existed through several prior Administrations, regardless of the party in power, and are unlikely to be very different in any future Administration.  Absent an agreed solution, every dispute risks becoming an exchange of retaliation and counter-retaliation – movement further away from a rules-based system and a return to a state of nature.

In short, due in large part to disruptions, WTO reform is in the air.  This is in marked contrast to just a year ago when it was not a current topic.  While some reform elements could be organic, coming through joint initiatives of interested members to address new topics such as e- commerce, and perhaps investment, domestic regulation of services, questions of gender in trade, and participation in trade of micro, small and medium sized enterprises, the broader questions of reform were unlikely to be taken up but for the onset of disruptions by the United States.  The result cannot be foretold.  There is a chance that major improvements in the working of the organization will be made for the benefit of all its members.

Peering into the future

The international trading system performed remarkably well for over seven decades following the Second World War. The progress made through trade negotiations was cumulative.  Generations of trade negotiators did the best that they could, in their time — in the Kennedy, Tokyo and finally the Uruguay Rounds of multilateral trade negotiations, from the 1960s into the 1990s.  They made breakthroughs and substantial improvements in the world trading system.  They created new agreements and when they could, new institutions.  In fact, all countries now state that the WTO is indispensable.  This is a major point of agreement in what can be and often is a fractious world community.  By far most of world trade is in fact conducted within its terms, and all bilateral and regional agreements are based on its existence.  Whether or not the WTO could have been maintained longer as it was, largely unchanged from when it was created is unknowable but unlikely.

For over seventy years the United States was the prime mover for the creation of the liberal economic order that brought a high degree of economic growth, stability and peace to the world.  The U.K. and the EU were its allies and partners, but without the United States, starting after the Second World War, the current world order would not exist.  According to Robert Kagan, author of the important new book The Jungle Grows Back, this period was an aberration, far from what is usual in the interaction of nations, both in terms of the absence of global conflict among the major countries, and bitter economic rivalries.

That Washington is causing disruption is beyond question: disruption in willingness to depart from trade agreements (the Trans Pacific Partnership for one), disruption in terms of extensive use of increased tariffs, disruption in terms of modes of an expressed willingness to engage in trade wars, disruption in articulating national objectives, disruption in willingness to employ disparities in power to rebalance trade relationships, disruption in an expressed preference for bilateral arrangements as compared to multilateral arrangements and, not least, disruption in its method of dealing with the major rising economy of the last two decades — China.  The effects of the manifold disruptions caused by U.S. trade policy vary.  Most important for the future of the world trading system is the fact that the United States has stepped back from its seven-decade long role of being the prime mover and the guarantor of the world economic order.  Atlas has shrugged.

It is worth noting that on more than one occasion, past trade conflicts have provided an opportunity to re-examine the rules or change conduct for the better or both. This was true of U.S. leadership following the Second World War, it was true of U.S. unilateralism in the form of the 1971 import surcharge which preceded the creation of the floating exchange rate system and the first nontariff barriers agreements in the Tokyo Round, and it was true in U.S. unilateralism paving the way for the creation of the WTO itself.  More often than not, the means have been found to use economic conflict as a stimulus to improve the international economic system.  This is not to argue for disruptions of trade, for departures from accepted trade norms.  It is a plea to work with the situation as we find it and make progress toward constructive solutions. The path forward should be looked for with pragmatism and with a minimum of unproductive emotion.

As for the China-U.S. exchange, it is too early to judge where an equilibrium point will be reached in economic relations between the two countries. Will some issues be settled or does retaliation and counter-retaliation proceed to add layer upon layer of trade and investment restrictions?   Does either the U.S. or China know where the new equilibrium will be established or at what level?  I suspect that they do not.   We do not know what the End Game will be, but there is a possibility of a Middle Game.  (This was true even during the geopolitical Cold War between the West and the USSR).  If a settlement, formal or de facto is reached, it should include improved trading rules, so that the relationship is governed by agreed rules to a greater extent and occur less outside the system.  An interim result along those lines should be possible

Not the end of history

I believe that the WTO will endure and will be strengthened and improved.  This is because it is in the interests of its Members that this be so.  Good will and creativity can yield positives result.  To reach that point will require agility, creativity and pragmatism on the part of Members, and a willingness of each to make a net contribution for the sake of the system.  This would benefit all.   Events call for this.  A successful outcome demands it.

Change in the WTO tends to be glacial, and under current conditions some glaciers are retreating.   Extensive time is a luxury that the WTO reform process cannot afford.  Bilateral negotiations offer a way forward to create a template for what will become the multilaterally agreed rules.  The absence of change could easily result in a degeneration of the trading system.  Marching in place is not an option.  The multilateral trading system can be by-passed by an increasing use of measures outside the rules. The system can also be overtaken by the world economy evolving to the point where it makes the rules increasingly less relevant.  Both would do great damage to the world economy.

Disruption can easily be damaging; it can also be positive.  For the outcome to bring the WTO to a better place, a joint effort will be needed by its members.  A growing sense of urgency will be required, not least to create a dispute settlement system with more broadly acknowledged legitimacy before this one ceases to function.  Pragmatism and creativity resulted in the establishment of an agreed dispute settlement system in the first place, and there is no reason why it could not provide a basis for agreement once again.

Source: wto.org

 

146/ Members discuss precision biotechnology as a tool for agricultural innovation

WTO members discussed the role that precision biotechnology techniques can play in agricultural innovation, with a view to providing farmers around the world with access to tools that increase productivity while preserving environmental sustainability. At the meeting of the Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary (SPS) Measures held on 1-2 November, members also addressed new proposals for work under the Fifth Review of the Operation and Implementation of the SPS Agreement, which is set for completion in 2020, and debated five new specific trade concerns.

A group of members presented the Committee with the International Statement on Agricultural Applications of Precision Biotechnology (G/SPS/GEN/1658/Rev.3), with the aim of launching a forward-looking debate on how to support policies that enable agricultural innovation, including genome editing.

Proponents underlined that global environmental challenges, pest and disease pressures, food insecurity and changes in consumer preferences, among other factors, have made the use and fostering of tools such as precision biotechnology vital for increasing the production of safe food. In this light, in April 2018, the countries participating in the “Seminar on Genome Editing for Regulators”, organized by the Inter-American Institute for Cooperation on Agriculture, shared a draft statement on the applications of precision biotechnology. The primary objective of this initiative is to coordinate efforts to ensure that the regulatory approaches for these techniques are scientifically based and internationally harmonized.

The final text of the international statement is non-binding on supporting countries but provides guidelines for preventing regulatory asymmetries and, in turn, potential trade disruption.

Proponents indicated that the debate on precision biotechnology could build on the discussion of recurrent concerns at the Committee, including the rise in anti-microbial resistance (AMR), the spread of animal diseases, the increase in pest pressures as well as the nexus between animal health and welfare. The new biotechnology tools carry the potential to reduce significantly the costs and timelines to bring new products to market – thereby enabling public researchers and small technology companies to support local needs and challenges, particularly in developing countries.

Members supporting this initiative to date are Argentina, which raised the issue in the Committee, as well as Australia, Brazil, Canada, Colombia, the Dominican Republic, Guatemala, Honduras, Jordan, Paraguay, the United States, Uruguay and Viet Nam. Other members were invited to join.

Fifth Review

The SPS Committee chair, Ms Noncedo Vutula of South Africa, updated members on the work done under the Fifth Review of the Operation and Implementation of the SPS Agreement over the past few months. New and revised proposals were submitted and discussed. These included the promotion of science-based procedures for the implementation of the SPS Agreement, including procedures for situations where scientific evidence was insufficient, the role of the three standard setting bodies (Codex, IPPC and OIE) in addressing specific trade concerns (STCs) in the Committee, and third-party assurance schemes and the development of guidelines for the implementation of Article 13 of the SPS Agreement.

In addition, a joint proposal was introduced by the United States and Kenya, supported by Argentina, Brazil, Chinese Taipei, Paraguay and Uruguay, to use fall armyworm (an insect native to tropical and subtropical regions of the Americas, which in its larva stage causes significant damage to crops, if not well managed) as a case study to discuss the application of the principles of the SPS Agreement to enable greater access to tools and technologies. The chair suggested holding a thematic session in March 2019 to further discuss the issues raised in the proposal.

Members also reviewed previously submitted proposals which had been presented in the July 2018 Committee meeting as well as the comments received on these proposals.

Also in the context of the Fifth Review, the Committee held on 30 October the first part of a thematic session on equivalence, i.e. governments accepting other countries’ measures even if they are different from their own so long as an equivalent level of protection is provided. Discussions covered the challenges of having a common definition of equivalence, the lack of consistency in wording across organizations, the situations in which a systems approach should be used and the link between recognition of disease-free areas and equivalence determinations. The second session in March 2019 will focus on members’ experiences.

New specific trade concerns

Blue tongue – Russia’s import restrictions

The European Union raised concerns about the Russian Federation’s import restrictions on all susceptible live ruminants and their genetic materials following an outbreak of blue tongue (a non-contagious, viral disease spread by biting insects which affects species of ruminants, particularly sheep)  in limited areas of the European Union. The EU said that these measures are not in line with Chapter 8.3 of the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) Terrestrial Code, which recommends that the export of susceptible live animals and their genetic material from areas affected by the disease should be allowed under certain conditions, such as vaccination, laboratory testing or protection of animals in vector-protected establishments. These conditions are reflected in the relevant veterinary export certificates agreed by both parties but the Russian Federation is not respecting this agreement, the EU said.

The Russian delegate responded that the Ministry of Agriculture is currently reviewing the domestic legislation on this matter and called for constructive work among members to enhance activities aimed at preventing the spread of blue tongue in Europe.

EU policy on pesticides

Colombia and India raised concerns regarding the EU policy on maximum residue levels (MRLs) of certain pesticides (buprofezin, diflubenzuron, ethoxysulfurom, ioxynil, molinate, picoxystrobin and tepraloxydim). They underlined that the EU has based its measures on a hazard approach and a precautionary stance without considering the scientific evidence presented by the relevant organizations, which are not conclusive with regards to the genotoxic quality of these substances. Another 14 members – Argentina, Costa Rica, Brazil, Canada, Chile, United States, Panama, Paraguay, Ecuador, Nicaragua, Honduras, Peru, Guatemala and Turkey – supported this concern and complained that insufficient time has been provided to adjust to the new EU regulation.

The European Union replied that the proposed lowering of MRLs is necessary to protect consumers as available information indicates that, under certain circumstances, these pesticides can be of carcinogenic nature, for which a genotoxic mechanism cannot be excluded and therefore no threshold for acceptable exposures can be assumed. The EU reported that the draft legal acts lowering the MRLs generally apply six months after the date of entry into force, allowing member states, third countries and food business operators to put in place adequate arrangements to meet the new requirements.

ECJ decision on mutagenesis

The United States raised concerns regarding the EU Court of Justice (ECJ) Opinion 528/16 on organisms obtained by mutagenesis (the process of inducing mutations). These organisms would be subject to the burdensome risk assessment and review requirements, labelling and monitoring obligations as well as traceability laws that the EU applied to genetically modified organisms (GMOs). The US said that implementation of this ruling will place unjustified barriers to trade on products of genome editing as well as stifle the agricultural research and innovation necessary to prevent hunger and malnutrition in the coming decades while ensuring environmental sustainability of agricultural activities. Argentina and Paraguay joined in expressing this concern.

In its response, the European Union noted that the ECJ ruling had clarified that the GMO regulation applied to organisms obtained through new mutagenesis techniques. The EU further indicated its commitment to guaranteeing its proper implementation while remaining open to discussion on this issue on a bilateral basis.

Viet Nam’s Livestock Law

The United States raised concerns about the new Livestock Production Law which the Vietnamese National Assembly may debate and vote on as early as November 2018. In particular, the US highlighted a specific provision of the law related to an import ban on livestock products obtained by using chemicals prohibited for domestic production in Viet Nam. According to the US, this law would not allow the use of Codex MRLs for imported goods. Canada and Paraguay shared the same concerns.

Viet Nam stressed that it is still in the process of reviewing the draft regulation, notified to the WTO on 30 October 2018, as comments and feedback from other members are still being considered before the text undergoes the final ratification process.

Thailand’s import fees

The United States took issue with Thailand’s import fees related to approval procedures for uncooked meat, poultry and meat offal. The US noted that these fees, which have the same objective of preventing the spread of animal diseases as the corresponding domestic slaughtering fees for the same products, are significantly higher than the domestic fees and appear disproportionate to the cost of service rendered. The US also believed that these higher fees act as a disguised restriction on US exports.

In its reply, Thailand noted that these fees account for the domestic operational costs related to testing, which are necessary to guarantee the protection of domestic consumers. According to Thailand, the cumulative costs assumed by national producers at various stages in the process are higher than the total fees charged.

Other trade concerns

STCs previously brought up in the SPS Committee included five EU SPS-related policies: the categorization of compounds as endocrine disruptors, the maximum level of cadmium in foodstuffs, the veterinary medicinal products legislation review, the EU Commission decision 202/994/EC on animal products, and the new definition of the fungicide folpet.

The SPS Committee also heard previously raised concerns regarding Guatemala’s restrictions on egg products, China’s proposed amendments to the implementation of regulations on safety assessment of agricultural GMOs, the Russian Federation’s import restrictions on processed fishery products from Estonia and on certain animal products from Germany, Brazil’s measures on shrimp, and import restrictions by China and South Africa due to highly pathogenic avian influenza.

Other previous raised concerns heard by the Committee included general import restrictions due to Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE), New Zealand’s import health standard for vehicles, machinery and equipment, India’s fumigation requirements for grain and other products, Thailand’s import restriction on papaya seeds, US import restrictions on apples and pears and Indonesia’s alleged lack of transparency and undue delays in approval procedures for animal products.

Next meeting

The next meeting of the Committee is tentatively scheduled for the week of 18 March 2019.

Want to know more?

The SPS Information Management System (SPS IMS) includes all SPS-related measures notified by WTO members and the trade-related concerns discussed in SPS Committee meetings.

Source: wto.org

 

147/ WTO members shed light on challenges of increasing trade for small economies

Small economies outlined their efforts to boost their current levels of trade and increase competitiveness at a dedicated meeting of the Committee on Trade and Development on 1 November 2018. Implementing the WTO’s Trade Facilitation Agreement (TFA) was highlighted as one of the main ways of boosting the competitiveness of small economies and increasing their participation in world trade.

Mongolia and Mauritius underlined how the TFA, which is currently being implemented by WTO members, will help to reduce trade costs. The Agreement entered into force on 22 February 2017 after having been ratified by two-thirds of the WTO membership. In particular, Mauritius  stressed that major reforms to customs procedures have already greatly reduced processing time for the clearance of imported goods.

At the meeting, WTO members also highlighted external factors that they say are disproportionately affecting the ability of small economies to trade. These include the high costs of compliance with international and private standards, the increased intensity of natural disasters and stringent trade rules.

In a presentation, the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) noted that trade costs for small economies encompass much more than just tariffs. The high trade costs they encounter include transport, logistics, crossing borders, information sharing and the processing of transactions. To mitigate these trade costs, UNCTAD suggested focusing on transport connectivity analysis, digital connectivity and regional intercontinental shipping services among other areas.

The Enhanced Integrated Framework (EIF) – a multi-agency initiative working to increase the trading capacities of developing countries – stressed the importance of digital connectivity, especially to enhance the poorest countries’ access to global markets through reduced trade costs. It cited the importance of establishing new business models and app development to lower barriers to the entry of goods and services. It encouraged further analysis of e-trade, implementation of the TFA and the expanded WTO Information Technology Agreement and compliance with notification requirements for greater transparency.

Source: wto.org

 

148/ Singapore invites ASEAN neighbours to send experts to collectively tackle online threats

Singapore on Wednesday (Oct 31) suggested its Association of Southeast Asian (ASEAN) neighbours each send a cybercrime expert to be based in the country by 2019 in order to collectively tackle online threats that target the region.

The call was made by Singapore’s Senior Parliamentary Secretary for Home Affairs Amrin Amin at the 12th ASEAN Ministerial Meeting on Transnational Crime held in Nay Pyi Taw.

The team would work out of the Interpol building in Singapore, while tapping the global police network’s cybercrime fighting resources.

The initiative – referred to as the ASEAN Cyber Capability Desk – was launched in July by Interpol. Since its launch it has already detected a number of cyberthreats targeting ASEAN, Channel NewsAsia understands.

The desk will help ASEAN law enforcement agencies boost their ability to combat cybercrime through “a combination of intelligence development, investigative support and operational coordination”, according to Interpol.

Speaking to Channel NewsAsia at the sidelines of the meeting, Mr Amrin said countries cannot deal with transnational problems alone, and that transnational problems require transnational intervention.

The desk, he said, would be “immensely beneficial” for the region.

“In terms of networks formed, where we have fully staffed teams come together from different countries … this gives that network that ability to respond effectively as a unit,” he said.

“I think such networks are invaluable in investigation work, in piecing together evidence and various other follow-up measures to tackle this problem.”

“Countries can benefit from the training, the support through exchange of ideas,” he added.

Addressing the ministerial meeting, Mr Amrin said Singapore has rolled out new plans aimed at helping its ASEAN neighbours be more prepared for cybercrime threats.

“In July this year, Singapore hosted a series of cybercrime-related capability development events alongside the RSA Conference Asia Pacific and Japan,” said Mr Amrin.

The week-long event consisted of the ASEAN Plus Three Cybercrime Conference and the 5th ASEAN senior officials roundtable on cybercrime.

“These events saw fruitful discussions and renewed ASEAN’s commitment to cooperate to tackle cybercrime,” he said.

The two-day ministerial meeting – aimed at encouraging ASEAN to respond faster and more effectively to cross-border crimes – started Wednesday, and was attended by ministers and officials in charge of tackling crime.

Other topics of discussion at the meeting included counter-terrorism, drug trafficking and human trafficking.

Source: CNA/nc

149/ French PM’s Vietnam visit to boost strategic partnership

French Prime Minister Édouard Philippe’s official visit to Vietnam from November 2-4 is expected to help bolster the bilateral strategic partnership.

Vietnam and France set up diplomatic ties on April 12, 1973 and signed a joint declaration on the Strategic Partnership 40 years later (2013). Vietnam always attaches importance to its traditional friendship and cooperation with France and exerts its efforts to deepen the bilateral strategic partnership.

In the past years, both sides have maintained the exchange of high-level delegations and bilateral cooperation mechanisms such as a strategic dialogue on defence-security between the two countries’ Foreign and Defence Ministries, and an annual high-level dialogue on economic affairs.

In the field of defence-security, France was the first Western nation to appoint a defence attaché in Vietnam in 1991. The relationship in this field has developed well, reflected through regular delegation exchanges. In recent visits by the two Defence Ministers, both sides agreed on a bilateral strategic partnership in the defence field.

In terms of economic, trade and investment cooperation, France is Vietnam’s fifth biggest trade partner in Europe, following Germany, the UK, the Netherlands and Italy. In 2017, two-way trade hit 4.6 billion USD, up 11.6 percent from 2016. Of the total, 3.35 billion USD came from Vietnam’s exports which are mainly footwear, garment and textiles, ceramics, rattan goods, seafood, machinery and electronic parts. Vietnam imported 1.27 billion USD worth of aviation equipment, industrial machines, pharmaceutical and agricultural products, food, and cosmetics.

Bilateral trade in the first six months of this year came to 2.3 billion USD.

Last year, France ranked third among European nations and 16th out of 114 nations and territories investing in Vietnam, with 512 valid investments projects worth 2.8 billion USD. The country’s direct investments in Vietnam focus on information and communications, and manufacturing and processing, and are spread in 36 localities. To date, Vietnamese investors have run nine projects in France with a total registered capital of 3.04 million USD.

France is Vietnam’s leading ODA provider in Europe and Vietnam ranks second among the recipients of France’s ODA in Asia, with a total 18.4 billion USD committed from 1993. The Southeast Asian country is also among a few nations receiving assistance from all three financial aid channels of France: namely ODA, preferential loans of the French Development Agency (AFD) and those of the Priority Solidarity Fund (FSP). To date, France has provided Vietnam with 2.2 billion EUR (2.49 billion USD) in aid and preferential loans.

Cooperation in education and training between the two countries has formed and developed since 1980s. France always considers education and training a priority in its cooperation activities in Vietnam, with the focus on the teaching of French language and human resources training in the fields of economic management, banking, finance, law and new technology. Every year, France provides 80 scholarships for Vietnamese students in order to help Vietnam train high-quality human resources. Over the past decade, the number of Vietnamese students in France has risen by around 40 percent. France ranks third in receiving Vietnamese students, with over 7,000 students.

The two countries’ cultural exchange has been thriving as well. The French Government provides about 5 million EUR (5.6 million USD) for cultural cooperation activities with Vietnam each year. The European nation also ranks seventh among the countries and territories investing in Vietnam’s tourism, with 14 projects worth 188 million USD.

Meanwhile, bilateral collaboration in science and technology has been implemented through projects funded by the Priority Solidarity Fund. The two Governments signed an agreement on science and technology cooperation in March 2007, thus creating favourable conditions for experts, offices, and organisations to intensify cooperation.

In November 2009, both sides inked a cooperation agreement on using nuclear energy for peaceful purposes.

Moreover, cooperation between localities has become a typical feature in the Vietnam-France relations. At present, 38 French localities have set up partnership with 18 Vietnamese provinces and cities.

In the field of health, the two countries have 30 cooperation projects with the priority given to training.

Currently, there are around 300,000 Vietnamese people living in France.

The Vietnam visit by PM Édouard Philippe takes place at a time when the two countries are celebrating the 45th anniversary of diplomatic ties and 5th anniversary of Strategic Partnership.

It is expected to boost political and diplomatic ties, expand economic and trade cooperation, and step up collaboration in security defence, education, training, science technology, and energy between Vietnam and France.

Source: VNA

 

Ngày 02/11

150/ Aid for Trade Global Review 2019 to examine economic diversification and empowerment

The next Global Review of Aid for Trade will take place from 3 to 5 July 2019 at the WTO under the theme “Supporting Economic Diversification and Empowerment for Inclusive, Sustainable Development through Aid for Trade”. Proposals to organize sessions at the event may be submitted up to 31 March 2019.

Plenary sessions will address the main theme of the Review. Other sessions will provide further insights on this theme including from a regional, private sector or practice perspective. These sessions may also address trade and development themes more generally.  Proposals for sessions may be submitted by WTO members and the Aid for Trade community, including organizations engaged in Aid for Trade implementation or research.

WTO Director-General Roberto Azevêdo said: “Over the last 12 years, our Aid for Trade initiative has been a powerful instrument for building trade capacity and trade-related infrastructure in developing and least-developed countries. It aims to make trade more inclusive and ensure that its benefits are spread further and wider. Our focus in 2019 will be how trade can do even more to contribute to economic diversification and empowerment. I encourage WTO members and our key Aid for Trade partners to actively participate in this work. I look forward to welcoming them to the WTO for the flagship Global Review event in July.”

The WTO-led Aid for Trade initiative helps developing countries, and particularly least-developed countries, to trade by seeking to mobilize resources to address their trade-related constraints. Many developing countries face a range of supply-side and trade-related infrastructure obstacles which constrain their ability to engage in international trade.

Global Reviews are attended by ministers of trade and development, international financial institutions, private sector firms and associations, development research organizations, together with participants drawn from the broader trade and development community. Registration for participation in the 2019 edition will be opened in January 2019.

The event typically attracts over 1,500 registered participants. Past editions of the Global Review have examined digital connectivity, reducing trade costs and global value chains.

Proposals to organize sessions at the Global Review should be submitted using this form to aft.wto@wto.org no later than 31 March 2019.  Multiple proposals may be made but the number of sessions (plenary and other sessions) will not exceed 60.

Source: wto.org

 

151/ Bright prospects for Vietnam-Japan economic ties

Thriving economic cooperation has been a highlight of the Vietnam-Japan extensive strategic partnership, with bilateral trade value growing steadily towards a more balanced relationship in recent years.

Vietnam’s exports to Japan have seen encouraging growth. Last year, five Vietnamese export staples – namely garments, machinery, transport vehicles, seafood, and timber products – posted positive increases in revenues, with each bringing home at least 1 billion USD.

Meanwhile, most of Vietnam’s imports from Japan are used for production activities. Three imports from Japan with turnover surpassing 1 billion USD in 2017 were machinery and spare parts, computers and electronics, and steel and iron.

Japan is currently a big importer of seafood, garments, footwear products, and processed food, which are sectors that Vietnam holds strengths in. Additionally, Japanese machines and accessories have long established their reputation in Vietnam.

The country has helped Vietnam develop its supporting industry, with the Vietnam-Japan supporting industry exhibition being held regularly to promote economic and investment cooperation between the two countries and enhance the capacity of Vietnam’s supporting industry.

Cooperation between Vietnam’s Ministry of Industry and Trade and Japan’s Ministry of Economy, Trade, and Industry is also very active, with especially fruitful partnership between the Vietnam Trade Promotion Agency and the Japan External Trade Organisation (JETRO) as well as the ASEAN Promotion Centre on Trade, Investment, and Tourism.

The cooperation between the two sides has focused on fields with great potential and brought about speedy and effective results, especially in Vietnam’s key economic zones. One of the prime examples of Vietnam-Japan cooperation is Japan’s special support programme for Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, and Vietnam (CLMV) to help the four countries bolster the export of high-quality handicrafts.

Within the framework of the above-mentioned programme, Japanese experts share their experience with Vietnam on product design and marketing, and business administration. Recently, Japan has facilitated the import of more Vietnamese products, such as red-flesh dragon fruits, mangoes, heat-processed chicken, and milk. The two sides also cooperate in catching and exporting tuna to Japan.

The Vietnam-Japan Economic Partnership Agreement signed in 2008 has become a driving force for trade growth between the two countries.

The two governments’ supportive stance and the two business communities’ dynamism and effective cooperation are expected to create further opportunities for bilateral trade cooperation. However, Japan is a demanding market with strict requirements on product quality, applicable not only to imports from Vietnam but also to those from other countries.

In order to take full advantage of the cooperation opportunities between the two countries, Vietnamese enterprises are advised to ensure that their exports meet the quality standards of Japanese importers, while at the same time optimizing Japan’s cooperation and support programmes for the country’s economic and trade development.

Source: VNA

 

152/ PM has high hope for stronger Vietnam-Poland economic links

Prime Minister Nguyen Xuan Phuc received Polish Ambassador Wojciech Gerwel in Hanoi on October 31, noting that having served as a trade counsellor in Vietnam for many years, the diplomat will bring bilateral economic and trade ties to a new level.

Ambassador Gerwel expressed his honour to assume this position, saying that his experience in Vietnam will help promote the two countries’ relations.

Highlighting his special sentiment towards Vietnam, he said the Vietnamese community, including students, in Poland is a bridge helping to intensify bilateral connections.

With regard to priorities during his term, Gerwel said he will prioritise enhancing cooperation in politics, economy, education-training and culture with Vietnam. He expressed his wish for closer coordination between the Polish Embassy and ministries, sectors and localities of Vietnam.

Stressing economic ties, the diplomat said his country is strong in agriculture, food and pharmaceutical production, shipbuilding and mining, so it wants to step up partnerships in these spheres.

Poland has established a trade office in Vietnam and this is one of the first overseas representative offices of the Polish Investment and Trade Agency, showing the importance his country attaches to economic links with the Southeast Asian nation, he noted.

Ambassador Gerwel expressed his belief that the EU-Vietnam Free Trade Agreement (EVFTA) will take effect soon. He added LOT Polish Airlines, the national flag carrier of Poland, plans to open a direct air route to Vietnam, and this route will help shorten the two countries’ distance and facilitate tourism cooperation.

At the meeting, PM Phuc pledged the best possible conditions for the ambassador to promote collaboration with Vietnamese ministries, sectors and localities.

There remains much room for trade ties, he said, noting that bilateral trade is able to rise strongly from the current revenue of over US$1 billion.

He asked Poland to promote the signing and ratification of the EVFTA. The two sides should also work closely to disburse the preferential credit package of EUR250 million that Poland pledged for Vietnam.

The Government leader also applauded the planned opening of a direct air route, saying he believes that it will help bolster investment, tourism and cultural exchange between the two countries.

Source: NDO/VNA

 

Ngày 05/11

153/ DG Azevêdo joins President Xi at opening ceremony of China Import Expo in Shanghai

Director-General Roberto Azevêdo joined China’s President, Xi Jinping, and other world leaders at the opening ceremony for the China International Import Expo, which is being held in Shanghai from 5 to 10 November. The event is expected to welcome 150,000 visitors from around the world, including representatives from more than 3,000 businesses.

In his address at the opening ceremony, DG Azevêdo said that this first China International Import Expo sends a clear message about China’s key role in global trade and about the importance of imports.

DG Azevêdo underlined that around two-thirds of all exports around the world contain imported components. “And it is precisely this greater openness and economic integration which has helped to fuel growth, job creation, and development in the modern world.” The WTO provides the very foundations on which this greater economic openness and integration are built, he stressed. “We must work together now to strengthen those foundations.”

DG Azevêdo thanked President Xi for his vocal support of multilateral institutions and their importance in the global economy.

Following the opening ceremony, DG Azevêdo visited the WTO stand located in the event’s main exhibition hall. The WTO is participating in the Expo, along with the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, the United Nations Industrial Development Organization and the International Trade Centre, at the invitation of the Government of China.

DG Azevêdo also participated in the launch of the Chinese edition of the World Trade Report.

Source: wto.org

 

154/ IP seminar addresses how technological changes have transformed trade and knowledge flows

Government officials from 29 developing and least developed countries and 13 Geneva-based delegates from around the world took part in the Seminar on Intellectual Property and Knowledge Flows in a Digital Era, which took place at the WTO on 5-6 November 2018.

In his opening remarks to the seminar, Deputy Director-General Yi Xiaozhun highlighted that we are approaching the 25th anniversary of the conclusion of the WTO Agreement on Trade-related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS), signed in Marrakesh, Morocco, on 15 April 1994. He said:

“That Agreement was a landmark recognition of the importance of the knowledge component of trade. Yet in the years since conclusion, digital disruption has utterly transformed the interplay between trade and knowledge.  This radical transformation creates a compelling need to update our understanding of the context for TRIPS rules and the intellectual property system within the framework of trade and development policy.

“We need to fundamentally update both our theoretical understanding, and the empirical, factual base we work from. This is important, too, because in this period, development policy has laid increasing emphasis on the knowledge component of trade, and has raised practical questions of how developing economies can make best use of the opportunities provided by the knowledge economy: SDG 9, notably, identifies innovation as such as a goal for sustainable development.” His full speech is available here.

Organized by the WTO’s Intellectual Property, Government Procurement and Competition Division (IPD) in partnership with the Trade in Services Division and the Economic Research and Statistics Division (ERSD), the seminar aimed at reviewing the current legal and policy landscape for trade in knowledge and providing an integrated overview and broad-based range of cutting edge expertise from the world’s leading experts in this area.

Over 20 internationally renowned economist lawyers and policy makers examined, together with participants, how to map and assess the impact of knowledge flows across borders and contributed to charting the legal, economic and policy dimensions of such flows. Professor Keith Maskus of the University of Colorado, United States, delivered the keynote presentation.

Five main themes were covered by the seminar, including: mapping the interface between trade, intellectual property rules and knowledge flows; measuring trade in knowledge; the impact of knowledge flows on trade and development; policy, regulatory and legislative frameworks; and the way forward on trade rules and economic implications for cross-border knowledge flows. See the full programme here.

The 29 government officials, currently working on IP and trade-related issues and the digital economy, were from Argentina, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Bolivia, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, Chile, China, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Cuba, Egypt, Ghana, Kenya, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Madagascar, Mauritius, Mexico, Montenegro, Morocco, Nepal, Peru, Republic of Korea, Seychelles, Ukraine, Uzbekistan, Viet Nam and Zimbabwe.

The group also included 13 Geneva-based delegates representing nine WTO members: Argentina, Barbados, Brazil, Chile, Mexico, Peru, the Russian Federation, Singapore, the United Kingdom and the United States.

The seminar was backed up by extensive economic, legal and policy research materials on IP and knowledge flows in the digital area. The WTO Secretariat intends to provide an updated foundation for future technical assistance. Speakers and other international experts contributed to finalising th materials in the form of a set of capacity building tools for developing country officials, both as a tailored website and as a book.

In their feedback, participants said the seminar provided concrete data that can be used to further develop the understanding of the complex role of IP in the contemporary world and highlighted the value of presentations to better understand the link between IP and trade in services, particularly in terms of measuring knowledge flows.

Participants underlined that the seminar provided the opportunity for a fruitful exchange of ideas and best practices among countries as well as for understanding the intersection of IP, technology and trade, and various enforcement issues. These include internet service provider liability, voluntary initiatives addressing IP infringement in the online environment, federal criminal enforcement and international cooperation initiatives, and copyright protection and enforcement.

Source: wto.org

 

155/ DDG Yi: Seminar on IP and Knowledge Flows in a Digital Era

Speech

Ladies and gentlemen, dear participants,

I welcome you all to the WTO, and offer a special welcome to those who have travelled from far to participate in this seminar today.

We are delighted that you could join us for what will be, for us at the WTO, a truly unique technical assistance activity.  This seminar on Intellectual Property and Knowledge Flows in a Digital Era is a significant initiative for several reasons.

• Firstly, it aims to respond to the fundamental transformations that technological change has had on trade and on knowledge flows.
• Secondly, it recognizes that we cannot understand these developments without taking a cross-disciplinary approach. Thus I am pleased to say that this seminar involves collaboration between three WTO divisions I am responsible for – the Intellectual Property, Government Procurement and Competition Division (IPD) as organizer, in partnership with the Trade in Services Division and the Economic Research and Statistics Division.
• Thirdly, it is a unique activity as it brings in a large number of the world’s leading experts in this area, starting with our keynote speaker this morning, Professor Keith Maskus.
• Fourthly, this seminar is backed by extensive economic, legal and policy research materials on this subject. We have been drawing this material together to provide an updated foundation for future technical assistance. Your feedback this week will be important for us, as it will help us finalise these materials in the form of a set of capacity building materials for the benefit of developing country officials such as yourselves, both as a tailored website and as a book. Participants have already seen some of this material in draft form in the virtual classroom.

But why do we hold this event today?  We are approaching the 25th anniversary of the conclusion of the WTO TRIPS Agreement. That Agreement was a landmark recognition of the importance of the knowledge component of trade.  Yet in the years since conclusion, digital disruption has utterly transformed the interplay between trade and knowledge.  This radical transformation creates a compelling need to update our understanding of the context for TRIPS rules and the intellectual property system within the framework of trade and development policy.  We need to fundamentally update both our theoretical understanding, and the empirical, factual base we work from.

This is important, too, because in this period, development policy has laid increasing emphasis on the knowledge component of trade, and has raised practical questions of how developing economies can make best use of the opportunities provided by the knowledge economy: SDG 9, notably, identifies innovation as such as a goal for sustainable development.

The WTO’s technical assistance activities have sought to respond to evolving demand from developing country members for capacity building in these areas, but in a relatively ad hoc way, largely as an adjunct to existing programme structures, and these activities have demonstrated the unmet demand and practical need for more systematic capacity building on an updated base of information.

This demand follows the disruptive effect of technological change which has impacted significantly on the area of trade involving IP rights, and the exercise of policy options under the TRIPS Agreement, opening up new avenues for development as IP in itself becomes a tradable good and IP plays a pivotal role in dispersed international production chains and in facilitating knowledge transfer.  Policymakers therefore confront an entirely new set of challenges integrating TRIPS measures into trade policies that respond to a digitally transformed knowledge economy; these challenges extend to basic capacity to measure and to map the IP dimension of trade, and thus to develop an integrated understanding of how the IP system, and new forms of trading in knowledge, can function in the contemporary international economy to service diverse national development priorities.

This Seminar will systematically review the current legal and policy landscape for trade in knowledge and provide an integrated overview, deploying a selective, yet necessarily broad-based range of cutting edge expertise from internationally renowned economists, lawyers and policy makers. They will examine how to map knowledge flows across borders and the impact of these flows, and then will chart the legal, economic and policy dimensions of such flows.  The seminar will therefore serve to retool and rebase the WTO’s technical assistance in the TRIPS area in response to the fundamentally transformed technological and trade landscape.

I now introduce to you our keynote speaker, Professor Keith Maskus. Professor Maskus is an eminent Professor of Economics at the University of Colorado, Boulder, USA. He was Associate Dean for Social Sciences at the same university from 2007-2013. He has also previously been Chief Economist at the US Department of State and a Lead Economist in the Development Research Group at the World Bank. He is also a Research Fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, a Fellow at the Kiel Institute for World Economics, and an Adjunct Professor at the University of Adelaide. Professor Maskus, you now have the floor.

Source: wto.org

 

156/ Members hold second cluster of meetings in Sept-Dec fisheries subsidies work programme

At the 5-9 November cluster of fisheries subsidies meetings, WTO members in the Negotiating Group on Rules completed streamlining work on negotiating documents and discussed a second round of reports by four “incubator groups” on ideas regarding certain pending issues. Members also exchanged preliminary comments on how to deepen negotiating work in 2019.

Similar to the September cluster of meetings and in line with their work programme, WTO members also held text-based discussions, this time focusing on disciplining subsidies that affect stocks in an overfished condition. Regarding how to organize negotiating work in the new year, a number of members were of the view it was time to shift to full negotiating mode, including through  smaller group discussions to deepen engagement. The chair invited members for consultations the following week to hear detailed views on approaches conducive to making progress in the WTO’s fisheries subsidies work.

The next cluster of meetings will be on 3-7 December. Incubator groups will meet beforehand on 26-30 November.

Source: wto.org

 

157/ Improving farm safety: standards for agricultural machinery just updated

Ensuring the safety of tractors and other agricultural equipment means ensuring the control systems that are in place work as they are meant to. The internationally trusted set of standards for such systems has just been updated, making it even fitter for the farm.

Tractors and self-propelled ride-on machines used in agriculture and forestry have evolved over the years since Old MacDonald’s days and now feature as many electronic parts and systems as your modern car. A number of these are designed to reduce risks by preventing unintended movements and recognizing errors and other possible hazards, because ensuring the vehicles function correctly is as important as the functions themselves.

The series of standards ISO 25119, Tractors and machinery for agriculture and forestry – Safety-related parts of control systems, is widely used by the agricultural industry and its suppliers and has recently been updated. It sets out the general principles for the design and development of safety-related parts of control systems on tractors and self-propelled ride-on machines used in agriculture and forestry. It can even be applied to mobile equipment used in municipalities such as street-sweeping machines.

ISO 25119 helps designers and manufacturers ensure that safety-related parts perform as intended, and covers the system structure, fault detection mechanisms, reliability of components, operating stress, environmental conditions and more.

Dipl.-Ing Hans Jürgen Nissen, Chair of the ISO technical subcommittee that developed and revised the series, said the new edition includes a number of improvements based on feedback from end users.

“The key objectives of the revision were to harmonize ISO 25119 with, and ultimately replace, a European standard, under the Vienna Agreement, thus improving its relevance in the EU regulatory area,” he said.

“What’s more, changes were made to incorporate suggestions from end users, certification bodies and experts involved in standardization to make it more user-friendly, understandable and useful.”

The standards in the series are:

• ISO 25119-1, Tractors and machinery for agriculture and forestry – Safety-related parts of control systems – Part 1: General principles for design and development
• ISO 25119-2, Tractors and machinery for agriculture and forestry – Safety-related parts of control systems – Part 2: Concept phase
• ISO 25119-3, Tractors and machinery for agriculture and forestry – Safety-related parts of control systems – Part 3: Series development, hardware and software
• ISO 25119-4, Tractors and machinery for agriculture and forestry – Safety-related parts of control systems – Part 4: Production, operation, modification and supporting processes

The ISO 25119 series was developed by ISO technical committee ISO/TC 23, Tractors and machinery for agriculture and forestry, subcommittee SC 19, Agricultural electronics, the secretariat of which is held by DIN, ISO’s member for Germany. It is available from your national ISO member or through the ISO Store.

Source: iso.org

 

158/ NA deputies to continue discussing CPTPP ratification on Nov. 5

National Assembly deputies will discuss the ratification of the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) and related documents on November 5 morning as part of their ongoing sixth session.

The deputies debated in groups on the matter on November 2.

The same day, the deputies will listen to a report on the pilot implementation of Resolution No. 30/2016/QH14 on the issuance of e-visa for foreigners to enter Vietnam before discussing the extension of the measure.

In the afternoon, they will give ideas on a number of contents of the draft Law on Vietnam Coast Guard, which comprises of eight chapters and 48 articles.

They will focus on the use of weapons, supporting tools, explosives and professional technical vehicles and equipment; the scope of activities of Vietnam Coast Guard in Vietnamese waters; and the operational coordination of Vietnam Coast Guard.

Source: VNA

 

159/ 2019 Annual Meeting In Davos To Focus On Shaping New Architecture For Next Wave Of Globalization

The World Economic Forum announced today that its Annual Meeting 2019 in Davos-Klosters will focus on “Globalization 4.0: Shaping a Global Architecture in the Age of the Fourth Industrial Revolution”.

Globalization is being redefined simultaneously by four major transformations:

+ Global economic leadership is no longer dominated by multilateralism but characterized by “plurilateralism”

+ The balance of global power has shifted from unipolar to multipolar

+ Ecological challenges, including but not limited to, climate change, are threatening socio-economic development

+ The Fourth Industrial Revolution is introducing technologies at a speed and scale unparalleled in history

Whether Globalization 4.0 improves the state of the world for all will depend on governance at the corporate, government and international levels that adapts sufficiently to this new economic, political, environmental and social context.

“We are just at the beginning of Globalization 4.0, and are significantly underprepared for the magnitude of change we are facing. We are still approaching issues of globalization with an outdated mindset. Tinkering with our existing processes and institutions will not be enough. We need to redesign them so that we can capitalize on the abundance of new opportunities that await us, while also avoiding the kinds of disruptions that we are witnessing today,” said Klaus Schwab, Founder and Executive Chairman, World Economic Forum.

Under the rubric of Globalization 4.0, there will be a series of “Global Dialogues” in Davos to develop recommendations by the internationally relevant and knowledgeable individuals and institutions that are shaping the future, which include members of the World Economic Forum’s Board of Trustees.

The World Economic Forum’s Annual Meeting brings together governments, international organizations, business, civil society, media, foremost experts and the young generation from all over the world in more than 400 working sessions. It engages over 100 governments and 1,000 companies at the highest leadership levels.

Source: Eurasia Review

 

Ngày 06/11

160/ ISO standards help develop new toilet technology that will save millions of lives

New ISO International Standard for revolutionary sanitation systems launched at the Reinvented Toilet Expo, supported by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, held in Beijing today.

“International Standards are key to the progression of new sanitation technology and developing an industry that saves lives,” said ISO Secretary-General Sergio Mujica at the Reinvented Toilet Expo held today in Beijing, China. Mujica was speaking on a high-level panel as part of the opening plenary that featured Bill Gates, Co-Chair of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and Dr Jim Yong Kim, President of the World Bank, as well as other leading representatives from industry and government.

The panel, which is part of the three-day Reinvented Toilet Expo summit, discussed commitments to non-sewered sanitation and actions required to develop the industry, including standardization. Reinvented toilet technology is all about stand-alone sanitation systems that safely treat waste without the need to be connected to a traditional sewerage system. It is designed to revolutionize the lives of billions of people around the world who lack sufficient clean sanitation systems, saving lives and improving well-being.

Keynote speaker Bill Gates said: “This expo showcases, for the first time, radically new and pilot-tested approaches to sanitation that will provide effective alternatives for collecting, managing and treating human waste. The technologies you’ll see here are the most significant advances in sanitation in nearly two hundred years.”

This technology can be supported and further developed with the launch of the world’s first dedicated International Standard. ISO 30500, Non-sewered sanitation systems – Prefabricated integrated treatment units – General safety and performance requirements for design and testing, provides safety and performance requirements that will not only enable their effective manufacture, but the development of the sector as a whole.

Commenting on China’s “toilet revolution” and action plan for progressing safe sanitation, Gates added: “We look forward to China adopting a high-level standard (ISO 30500) for the non-sewered sanitation industry, which will further accelerate its leadership of a new commercial sanitation sector.”

Other highlights of the event include the “sanitation change-makers speaker series”, which features members from governments, industry and international organizations sharing their inspiring stories and achievements to improve sanitation services for the 4.5 billion people worldwide who live without them.

The Reinvented Toilet Expo is a three-day summit for governments, development banks and private-sector leaders wanting to accelerate the adoption of innovative sanitation technologies in developing regions around the world. These technologies are at the forefront of a growing movement to improve sanitation for the world’s poorest and contributes towards global water and sanitation targets outlined in the United Nations Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 6.

The Expo features companies from around the world displaying new sanitation solutions that eliminate harmful pathogens and convert waste into by-products without the need to be attached to mains sewers.

It also highlights the recent publication of ISO 30500 and the fact that many of the new technologies and products in this area are expected to meet the requirements of the standard to demonstrate that they are safe and perform effectively.

Find out how ISO standards contribute directly to all of the SDGs.

Source: iso.org

 

161/ Registration opens for screening of “US — Softwood Lumber Pricing Methodology” second hearing

At the request of the parties in the dispute “US — Anti-Dumping Measures Applying Differential Pricing Methodology to Softwood Lumber from Canada” (DS534), the panel has decided to open its second substantive meeting to public observation on 4 December 2018 (and on 5 December, if necessary). The live screening will take place at the WTO’s headquarters in Geneva.

The meeting with the parties is scheduled to start at 10.00 on 4 December 2018 and may continue until 17.00. It will resume on 5 December 2018, if necessary. The meeting may be closed at the times to be determined by the panel in order to discuss confidential information, if necessary.

The panel reserves the right to close the meeting to public observation at any time, on its own initiative or at the request of either party, if there is a risk of breach of confidentiality or of disruption of the meeting.

The meeting will be held in English only; interpretation will not be available at the public viewing.

To register, please complete the application form. Completed forms must be sent as an email attachment to openmeetingds534@wto.org. Applications will be accepted until 17.00, Geneva time, on 20 November 2018. Those who have successfully registered will be informed by a confirmation email by 23 November 2018.

Please note that the names of registered attendees may be communicated to the parties, the United States and Canada, at their request. Places in the viewing room will be allocated on a first-come first-served basis.

All registered individuals will need to present a valid identification document (passport, driver’s licence, etc.) on-site to gain access to the viewing room.

Please note that any form of recording or filming is strictly prohibited. Cell phones must be switched off during the meetings.

The WTO cannot offer any support, including financial, for accommodation, flight arrangements and visas.

Source: wto.org

 

162/ DG Azevêdo and Premier Li Keqiang discuss how to safeguard the WTO

Azevêdo visited Beijing, China, on 6 November to participate in the “1+6” roundtable meeting hosted by Chinese Premier Li Keqiang, together with five other heads of major international economic organizations and financial institutions (the IMF, World Bank, ILO, OECD and the Financial Stability Board). They discussed the current global economic landscape, the need to safeguard the multilateral trading system, and China’s economy in the context of the 40th anniversary of the country’s process of reform and opening-up.

The Director-General said:

“China’s transformation over the last 40 years has been truly remarkable. I am pleased that the WTO has been part of this historic journey, by facilitating the process of opening-up, reform and liberalisation. Looking ahead, we need trade and the trading system to continue playing their full role in fuelling growth – just as they have over the last 40 years. However this could be undermined by the current tensions in global trade. Continued escalation is a real possibility, so this is an extremely serious situation. It threatens stability, jobs and growth. We have to act now, both to ease tensions and strengthen the trading system.

“The situation is unprecedented, both in terms of risks and opportunities. The stakes are higher than ever. Doing nothing is not an option. We need significant political engagement and political will to ensure that the trading system is equipped to meet the challenges of today and tomorrow. I hope that we will see this at the G20 summit in Buenos Aires at the end of the month. I will be there – and I will be bringing a very clear message about the need to preserve and strengthen the trading system in the interests of all. I count on China’s continued leadership and engagement to that end.”

Source: wto.org

 

163/ Aid for Trade monitoring exercise to review economic diversification and empowerment

The Aid for Trade monitoring and evaluation exercise was launched at a meeting of the WTO Committee on Trade and Development on 6 November 2018. WTO members and Aid for Trade partners may submit self-assessment questionnaires up to 31 December 2018 to assist preparations for the 2019 Aid for Trade Global Review.

The monitoring and evaluation (M&E) exercise aims to collect essential information on national Aid for Trade priorities and on the role of the Aid for Trade initiative in supporting economic diversification and empowerment of micro, small and medium-sized enterprises, youth and women across the world. This exercise feeds into the 2019 Aid for Trade Global Review, which will take place at the WTO from 3 to 5 July 2019 under the theme “Supporting Economic Diversification and Empowerment for Inclusive, Sustainable Development through Aid for Trade”.

The self-assessment questionnaires underpinning the M&E exercise can be submitted by WTO members and Aid for Trade partners, including bilateral and multilateral agencies and regional economic communities. Background information on the monitoring exercise is available here.

Information for the questionnaires is to be collected from national authorities and private sector associations and should be submitted via an electronic form no later than 31 December 2018. More information is available at http://www.wto.org/aftmonitoring.

At the Committee meeting, WTO members shared national experiences to deepen each other’s understanding of how trade can support industrialization, economic diversification, youth and women’s economic empowerment.

In the margins of the meeting, two workshops discussed key aspects of the Aid for Trade Work Programme 2018-2019, which aims to help developing countries – particularly least-developed countries (LDCs) – build the supply-side capacity and trade-related infrastructure they need to better implement and benefit from WTO agreements and to expand their trade.

The first workshop, entitled “Industrialization, Economic Diversification and Structural Transformation,” highlighted global trends in economic diversification and industrialization. The WTO Secretariat provided an overview of trends in economic diversification in terms of merchandise goods over the period 1994-2014.  The United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO), the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) focused on policy issues while Guatemala, the African Group, the WTO group of LDCs and Ethiopia provided national and regional perspectives.

The second workshop, entitled “Economic Diversification and Empowerment with a focus on Youth and Women,” presented various empowerment programmes, initiatives and policies implemented at the international and regional levels by the International Labour Organization (ILO), UNCTAD, the Asian Development Bank (ADB) and the United Nations Food Agricultural Organization (FAO). WTO members including the Philippines and Jamaica presented how they are mainstreaming women’s economic empowerment into trade and economic policy.

Source: wto.org

 

164/ Aid for Trade monitoring exercise to review economic diversification and empowerment

The Aid for Trade monitoring and evaluation exercise was launched at a meeting of the WTO Committee on Trade and Development on 6 November 2018. WTO members and Aid for Trade partners may submit self-assessment questionnaires up to 31 December 2018 to assist preparations for the 2019 Aid for Trade Global Review.

The monitoring and evaluation (M&E) exercise aims to collect essential information on national Aid for Trade priorities and on the role of the Aid for Trade initiative in supporting economic diversification and empowerment of micro, small and medium-sized enterprises, youth and women across the world. This exercise feeds into the 2019 Aid for Trade Global Review, which will take place at the WTO from 3 to 5 July 2019 under the theme “Supporting Economic Diversification and Empowerment for Inclusive, Sustainable Development through Aid for Trade”.

The self-assessment questionnaires underpinning the M&E exercise can be submitted by WTO members and Aid for Trade partners, including bilateral and multilateral agencies and regional economic communities. Background information on the monitoring exercise is available here.

Information for the questionnaires is to be collected from national authorities and private sector associations and should be submitted via an electronic form no later than 31 December 2018. More information is available at http://www.wto.org/aftmonitoring.

At the Committee meeting, WTO members shared national experiences to deepen each other’s understanding of how trade can support industrialization, economic diversification, youth and women’s economic empowerment.

In the margins of the meeting, two workshops discussed key aspects of the Aid for Trade Work Programme 2018-2019, which aims to help developing countries – particularly least-developed countries (LDCs) – build the supply-side capacity and trade-related infrastructure they need to better implement and benefit from WTO agreements and to expand their trade.

The first workshop, entitled “Industrialization, Economic Diversification and Structural Transformation,” highlighted global trends in economic diversification and industrialization. The WTO Secretariat provided an overview of trends in economic diversification in terms of merchandise goods over the period 1994-2014.  The United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO), the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) focused on policy issues while Guatemala, the African Group, the WTO group of LDCs and Ethiopia provided national and regional perspectives.

The second workshop, entitled “Economic Diversification and Empowerment with a focus on Youth and Women,” presented various empowerment programmes, initiatives and policies implemented at the international and regional levels by the International Labour Organization (ILO), UNCTAD, the Asian Development Bank (ADB) and the United Nations Food Agricultural Organization (FAO). WTO members including the Philippines and Jamaica presented how they are mainstreaming women’s economic empowerment into trade and economic policy.

Source: wto.org

 

Ngày 07/11

165/ Second Vietnam trade promotion office in China opens

A Vietnam trade promotion office, the second of its kind in China, was inaugurated in Hangzhou city in the eastern province of Zhejiang on November 5.

Vietnamese Prime Minister Nguyen Xuan Phuc, Minister-Chairman of the Government Office Mai Tien Dung, Minister of Industry and Trade Tran Tuan Anh, Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development Nguyen Xuan Cuong, Vietnamese Ambassador to China Dang Minh Khoi and newly-accredited Chinese Ambassador to Vietnam Xiong Bo attended the inauguration ceremony, among others.

Speaking at the ceremony, Vietnamese Minister of Industry and Trade Tran Tuan Anh said that by holding strengths in foreign trade, e-commerce, manufacturing, and seaport services, Zhejiang and the eastern region of China in general will continue to take the lead in the country’s reform process, thereby fueling economic and trade ties between China and countries across the region and even the world.

Vice Governor of Zhejiang province Zhu Congjiu said that via the newly-opened office, provincial leaders expect that Vietnamese and Chinese companies can gain a deeper insight into opportunities for the import-export of goods in demand, especially Vietnam’s agro-forestry-fishery products which are popular in China.

Dao Viet Anh, Trade Counsellor at the Vietnamese Embassy in China, said the event is meant to realise the agreement signed by the two governments in 2013, as well as the joint statement inked during Chinese Party General Secretary and President Xi Jinping’s visit to Vietnam from November 10-13 last year.

Trade Counsellor at the Vietnamese Embassy in China Viet Anh said trade between Vietnam and Zhejiang hit US$ 7.92 billion in 2017 and Vietnam is now the largest trade partner of the province.

The first Vietnam trade promotion office in China was established in Chongqing city in 2015.

Source: VNA/NDO

Ngày 07/12

Vietnamese farm produce holds huge potential in EU market

Vietnam holds great advantages to export agricultural products to European Union (EU) countries, whose soil is not suitable for the cultivation of tropical farm produce, experts said.

In particular, when the EU-Vietnam Free Trade Agreement takes effect, Vietnamese products will gain a competitive edge in the market as tariff lines will fall to 0-5 percent over the next seven to 10 years.

At the Vietnam-EU Trade Forum held by the Ministry of Industry and Trade’s Department of European-American Market in Hanoi on December 6, Deputy Minister Cao Quoc Hung stressed that the EU is a prosperous economic bloc, with a gross domestic product (GDP) accounting for 23 percent of the world’s economy, and an income per capita mounting to 40,890 USD.

With 28 member states, the EU’s total population reaches some 516 million people with high demand for imports, including farm produce. Meanwhile, more than 10 key Vietnamese agricultural products have been present in over 160 countries and territories worldwide, many of which have gained more than 1 billion USD in export revenue like coffee, rice, cashew, vegetables, and fruits, he added.

However, Deputy Head of the Agro Processing Market Development Authority (AgroTrade) Tran Van Cong said that besides robust achievements, shipments of farm produce still face a number of hurdles, like processing ability and undeveloped branding.

Therefore, export turnover is still a far cry from expectation, while earnings have been shared through dozens of intermediary stages.

Trade experts have said that the loose connections between farmers and businesses is the first barrier to agricultural exports to the EU. Some 70 percent of agricultural materials have been purchased directly from farmers, who are not fully provided with appropriate cultivating techniques.

In addition, out-of-date post-harvesting technology is another factor that hinders exports, resulting in a loss of up to 30 percent in farm production.

As the EU sets strict criteria in food safety, antibiotic residues, and product origin, Alexandre Bouchot, Agricultural Counselor of the French Embassy to Vietnam, suggested decentralising management of food policies as well as promoting investment in the sector.

Research and development activities should be paid due attention and the agricultural sector needs to be reformed to develop in a sustainable manner.

France is willing to share its experience with Vietnam in this field, he added.

Source: VNA

 

173/ Vietnam, Belarus agree to enhance trade ties

Belarus not only wants to export its products to Vietnam, but also transfer technologies and establish joint production plants in Vietnam with local firms, a bilateral business forum heard in Ho Chi Minh City December 6.

Speaking at the first ever meeting of the Vietnam-Belarus Business Council and the Vietnam-Belarus Business Forum, Belarus’ Deputy Minister of Agriculture and Food Igor Brylo said Vietnam is a traditional trade partner for his country in Asia.

The 2016 free trade agreement between the Eurasian Economic Union and Vietnam has boosted investment and trade between the two countries significantly, he said.

Vo Tan Thanh, Director of the Vietnam Chamber of Commerce and Industry’s HCM City office, said last year bilateral trade rose 7 percent to 101 million USD.

The two countries are making efforts to increase it to 500 million USD as agreed by their governments, he said.

In 2016 Belarusian-Vietnamese joint venture “MAZ Asia”, Belarus’s first investment in this country, was licensed in the northern province of Hung Yen.

It has finished construction of a plant and expects to produce 1,500 Maz trucks a year in the first phase, Thanh said.

“Belarus firms also plan to invest in some other projects in manufacturing and dairy and set up a bus assembly plant in Vietnam,” he said.

As the country’s economic hub, HCM City is a promising location for Belarusian businesses, he said.

Denis Nikolaev, trade counsellor at the Belarusian embassy, said his country has set up joint production plants in Vietnam, transferred technology and trained human resources.

“Belarus is willing to shift from pure sales of goods to Vietnam to technology transfer and setting up joint production plants,” Brylo said.

Besides, Vietnam could act as a gateway for Belarus to ASEAN markets while his country could be one of the gateways for Vietnamese goods such as seafood, tea, coffee, and others to penetrate the Eurasian Economic Union, he said.

Andrei Shakhanovich, deputy chairman of the Belarusian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, said 60 leading businesses, which are showcasing their products at the 2018 Vietnam Expo in HCM City and participating the forum, hope to find new partners in HCM City.

“We promise to make more efforts to promote cooperation between businesses of the two countries.”

Nguyen Quang Hung, chairman of the Vietnam-Belarus Council, expressed the hope that many Vietnamese and Belarusian firms would explore trade, investment, science and technology, and tourism opportunities.

The council would be a good channel for dialogue between businesses and government agencies of the two sides, he said.

At the same time the council would help find solutions to difficulties faced by enterprises doing business in the other country, he said.

The event was organised by the VCCI and the Belarusian Chamber of Commerce and Industry.

Source: VNS/VNA

 

Ngày 08/11

166/ DG Azevêdo and Prime Minister Abe discuss easing global tensions and strengthening WTO

Director-General Roberto Azevêdo met with Japan’s Prime Minister Shinzō Abe in Tokyo today (8 November 2018) to discuss the current situation in global trade, efforts to ease the growing tensions between major trading partners and the emerging debate on strengthening the WTO. The Director-General welcomed Japan’s continuing leadership on these points.

During his visit the Director-General also met with Japan’s Minister for Foreign Affairs, Mr Taro Kono, and the Minister for Economy, Trade and Industry Mr Hiroshige Seko. In addition, he took part in a roundtable discussion with Keidanren (the Japan Business Federation), spoke at a panel discussion organized by the Japan Institute of International Affairs  on ‘WTO reform and the path forward’ and delivered a keynote speech at the International Symposium for the 60th Anniversary of the Establishment of the Japan External Trade Organization, JETRO.

In his remarks to the JETRO event the Director-General said:

“Japan is currently the world’s 4th largest exporter of goods and the 4th largest importer. One out of every 10 Japanese jobs is linked to exports. You are also working to further increase your integration with other markets. Prime Minister Abe signed a free trade deal with the EU in July. The CPTPP is set to enter into force at the end of the year. And of course Japan is a very prominent member of the WTO. In fact, Japan’s representative to the WTO, Ambassador Junichi Ihara, is currently the chair of the General Council. This is one of the most important roles in the organisation. All of this shows how much you value trade and the trading system – including the WTO.

“In these times of rising tensions, and questions about the WTO’s future, I think it’s vital that we remember the system’s fundamental importance. In my view we must work together to ensure that we can meet the trade challenges of today, and be ready to face the challenges of tomorrow. I am confident that we can do this – and ensure that the global trading system goes from strength to strength. I know that we can rely on Japan’s leadership and support in that endeavour. In the end, this is how we will continue to support growth, development and prosperity for the years to come.”

Source: wto.org

 

167/ JETRO 60th anniversary symposium

Remarks by DG Azevêdo

Mr. Chairman,
Excellencies,
Ladies and gentlemen,

Good afternoon.

I am very pleased to be back in Japan, and to have this opportunity to congratulate JETRO on its 60th anniversary.

As WTO Director-General I have always valued your engagement on trade issues and your strong support for the trading system.

Moreover, I think it’s clear that JETRO has made a huge contribution over the years in supporting Japan’s integration with the global economy and driving the country to be the leader in trade that it is today.

• Japan is currently the world’s 4th largest exporter of goods and the 4th largest importer. One out of every 10 Japanese jobs is linked to exports.
• You are also working to further increase your integration with other markets. Prime Minister Abe signed a free trade deal with the EU in July. The CPTPP is set to enter into force at the end of the year.
• And of course Japan is a very prominent member of the WTO. In fact, Japan’s representative to the WTO, Ambassador Junichi Ihara, is currently the chair of the General Council. This is one of the most important roles in the organisation.

All of this shows how much you value trade and the trading system – including the WTO. And I want to underline this point.

In these times of rising tensions, and questions about the WTO’s future, I think it’s vital that we remember the system’s fundamental importance.

The WTO provides the framework of rules and practices that underpin 98% of global trade today.

It provides the foundations on which decades of economic openness and integration have been built.

As such it has supported a major expansion of world trade. Since the WTO’s launch, trade volumes have increased two-and-a-half times, with average applied tariffs being cut in half.

The WTO also acts as an essential pillar of global governance. The system provides stability and predictability in trade – holding firm even during the financial crisis. And, as a result, it has helped to fuel unprecedented growth, development and job creation around the world as well as a dramatic reduction in poverty.

Of course the trading system is not perfect – no one would claim that. But it is essential. It is effective. And it represents the best efforts of governments around the world, working together for 70 years, to find ways to cooperate on trade issues.

It took a lot of people and a lot of time to push the boulder this far up the hill. Even keeping it in place requires constant effort. And if we let it slip it would likely take a long time to get back to where we are today.

When we talk about the problems we are seeing in global trade, we should always remember that fact.

You are all well aware of the tensions that have been rising, in recent months, between a number of major trading partners.

The situation is of real concern.

New tariffs announced so far this year cover hundreds of billions of dollars in trade. Further measures have been proposed. And, at present, continued escalation is a real possibility.

This could have dramatic consequences for trade and GDP growth. And it could have very serious systemic consequences as well.

I am talking to all sides to try to resolve this situation. Instead of escalating tensions, we need to find ways to resolve them constructively.

In this context I want to mention one specific systemic issue which is particularly pressing – and that is the problems in the WTO’s Dispute Settlement System. As you know, we currently have an impasse regarding appointments to the Appellate Body, which could eventually threaten the functioning of the whole dispute settlement system as we know it today.

Again, I am talking to all sides to identify possible ways forward.

These challenges require an urgent response from members. There is a responsibility on the whole international community here.

And while we work to respond to these immediate threats, we also need to develop a deeper understanding of the longer-term economic shifts.

Technological change is revolutionising the global economy.

We recently published a major WTO report looking at precisely this issue – setting out how innovations like Blockchain, AI and 3D printing could change the way we trade. We see a future with lower trade costs, more opportunities for developing economies and smaller companies, and an even greater emphasis on services. There isn’t time to go into more detail now – so I urge you to take a look at this report for yourselves.

But it’s clear that we are, in many ways, in a state of flux. The situation raises a series of questions about how governance structures should respond.

Our focus today is the future. So, faced with these issues, what is the future of the WTO? What role do we want the organization to play?

These questions of course can only be answered by WTO members. But let me share a few thoughts.

• Firstly, I think we need to ensure that the trading system is strong enough to continue providing the stable underpinnings for global trade cooperation.
• And secondly, I think we need to ensure that the system is flexible enough to help countries to meet the challenges and seize the opportunities before us today.

Let me take each point in turn.

Ensuring the system remains strong requires work and it requires constant engagement.

The current trade tensions are leading directly to a high-level conversation about ‘WTO reform’ or ‘modernisation’.

At the root of the current grievances is the argument that the trading system is allowing distortive trade practices to go unchecked. Therefore, the argument goes, the system needs to change.

There are a range of ideas and initiatives being proposed.

Japan is a very active participant.

It is part of a trilateral initiative with the US and the EU which is discussing transparency and a range of other issues.

And the government has been involved in some key moments in the debate. For example, Japan took part in a ministerial meeting convened by the Canadian government in Ottawa two weeks ago to discuss these issues.

And, of course, Japan is also part of the discussions that are happening in the G20. WTO reform was at the top of the agenda at the G20 trade ministers meeting in Mar del Plata in September. And the upcoming G20 Summit will be a key moment to advance this debate. I will be there – and I will be bringing a very clear message to the leaders about the need to preserve and strengthen the trading system in the interests of all.

This debate will continue into 2019, when Japan will hold the G20 presidency. I look forward to your continued leadership there.

While there are members who do not share the view that a reform is needed, it’s clear that this debate is gathering significant momentum. So if this conversation is to advance, it is essential that all members’ views are considered.

I should stress that in some ways this conversation about strengthening the WTO isn’t new.

I have been working with members over recent years to achieve exactly this and we have made real progress.

In recent years we have struck major deals like the Trade Facilitation Agreement, the abolition of agricultural export subsidies and the expansion of the Information Technology Agreement. Together, these deals represent the biggest trade reforms in the WTO’s history.

This brings me to my second point, which is that the system must be flexible enough for progress to be possible.

These deals also provided some valuable lessons about how to make progress. So what did we do that suddenly made it possible? Ultimately it is all about flexibility – and we have shown how this can be applied in a number of different ways.

• For example, we can have flexibility in substance. We saw this with the multilateral Trade Facilitation Agreement, where each developing country may ask for technical assistance and may itself decide how fast it can implement each specific commitment.
• And we can have flexibility in geometry. This is the case of the Information Technology Agreement, where only a group of members participate. In this case the zero tariffs of the participants apply for all members. Of course, Japan is a leading proponent of this agreement.

In a system with members of different sizes, different priorities and different stages of development, the only way to advance is by being flexible.

People see the economy evolving. They see important issues being stalled. They want to make progress. So they must be ready to explore creative, flexible approaches to achieve that.

Another notable development over recent months is that groups of members have begun conversations in a number of issues of emerging economic importance.

These include electronic commerce, investment facilitation, SMEs and the economic empowerment of women. We have also seen a group of members coming together to issue a joint statement on domestic regulation in services. It won’t surprise you to hear that Japan is part of all of these initiatives.

Time will tell exactly how this work develops. While some members do not support these initiatives, it is clear that they are fast evolving.

Of course, interest here does not mean abandoning issues that are very dear to many members and that also need to see progress. This includes issues such as agriculture, food security and development.

It also includes fisheries subsidies, where members are working towards a deal by the end of 2019. I commend Japan’s engagement here, once again.

We need to keep working hard on all of these fronts if we want to see progress – and we need to use all of the different options and avenues that are available to us.

Ultimately the future of the WTO is in the hands of its members.

In the WTO we have 164 different perspectives. Exactly how our story evolves, we will have to wait and see.

In my view we must work together to ensure that we can meet the trade challenges of today, and be ready to face the challenges of tomorrow.

I am confident that we can do this – and ensure that the global trading system goes from strength to strength. I know that we can rely on Japan’s leadership and support in that endeavour.

In the end, this is how we will continue to support growth, development and prosperity for the years to come.

Thank you.

Source: wto.org

 

168/ Members discuss role of IP in promoting new business, health impacts through competition

WTO members discussed how intellectual property (IP) can catalyse growth in infant businesses and how its link with competition law and policy can foster public health objectives at a meeting of the Council for Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) on 8-9 November. Members also agreed to grant the Cooperation Council for the Arab States of the Gulf (GCC) permanent observer status in the TRIPS Council.

IP and innovation: the societal value of IP in the new economy – IP and new business

Part of a series of TRIPS Council discussions on IP and innovation launched in 2012, this item was put on the agenda at the request of Australia, the European Union, Japan, Switzerland, Chinese Taipei and the United States, and was co-sponsored by Brazil. Their communication (see IP/C/W/648 and IP/C/W/648/Add.1) introduced the topic.

The proponents stressed that a balanced regime to protect IP rights (IPRs) can play a central role from the onset of a young enterprise and facilitate new ideas coming to life and turning into a commercial success. As an incentive mechanism for innovation, the IPR system has proved to be essential in supporting the entry of entrepreneurial companies into the market and has created a critical and profound nexus with business development and economic growth that results in improving lives and society as a whole, these members said. Some also reported on the importance of IP-intensive industries for their economy.

The proponents highlighted the need to create the necessary conditions for small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs), including start-ups, to thrive by protecting trade secrets, patents, trademarks, designs and other IPRs. SMEs can use the yields of IP as an essential asset-building instrument; however, small companies may know about the potential value of IP rights but shy away from the administrative work and financial costs associated with seeking IP protection, or falsely assume they can secure IP rights at a later stage. This is where governmental institutions, academia and the private sector can provide new firms with assistance as temporary partners, training coaches and intermediaries.

The proponents also cited greater legal certainty, both domestically and internationally, as a crucial element in encouraging innovation and investment, particularly where the knowledge-based part of the economy is made up of business that mostly rely on intangible valuable assets. Therefore, innovative and creative start-ups need to be aware of the advantage of using IP and the dangers of neglecting these assets, the proponents said.

Whilerecognizing the role innovation plays in cultivating new businesses, some members stressed that IPRs are neither necessary nor a sufficient condition for innovation; on the contrary, unlimited power to IP rightsholders can adversely affect innovation, they said. These members asked for a discussion on IP and innovation that places emphasis on the existing barriers to the use of the IP system by innovative companies. For instance, these companies may have limited financial resources to pay for legal advice or consider patent search as an excessively costly investment. In addition, enforcement measures and the need for surveillance of possible infringement of their IP assets require resources.

These members called for a broad discussion that does not overlook these obstacles, while noting that infrastructure, collaboration and research are the fundamental ingredients for innovation to thrive. This includes not only appropriate and effective IP protection but also other mechanisms, such as capital and human resources, adequate funding, tax incentives and free trade agreements that enhance integration in global value chains.

IP and the public interest: promoting public health through competition law and policy

As a follow-up to the discussion of the same topic at the Council’s meeting last June, South Africa asked that this item be added to the agenda. It was co-sponsored by Brazil and India. The co-sponsors also submitted a communication on this topic (see IP/C/W/649,IP/C/W/649/Add.1 and IP/C/W/649/Add.2). They said that IP protection per se cannot be presumed to confer market power or to allow for anti-competitive behaviour. For this reason, and as a general rule, IPR holders are not prevented from exercising their exclusive rights but at the same time they are not automatically exempted from competition rules because they own IPRs.

The co-sponsors noted that different approaches are taken by various jurisdictions regarding the interface of competition policy and IP rights. Many WTO members already use competition law to address various anti-competitive practices that affect access to medicines and medical technologies. Several practices have been identified as detrimental. These include: abuses of IPRs due to a refusal to deal with, or imposition of, overly restrictive conditions on medical technology licensing; preventing generic competition through anti-competitive patent settlement agreements; mergers between pharmaceutical companies that lead to the undesirable concentration of both research and development, and IPRs; cartel agreements between pharmaceutical companies, including manufacturers of generics; anti-competitive behaviour in the medical retail and other related sectors; and bid-rigging in public procurement.

Proponents recalled that for a long time, IP and anti-trust law were considered incompatible but are now seen as complementary, despite the existing tension. Therefore, they should be considered simultaneously when trying to achieve common goals, particularly in the context of the new economy in which innovation knowledge and IPRs are a central part of the competition dynamics. This was confirmed by the inclusion of competition-related provisions in the TRIPS Agreement.

The proponents reiterated that the TRIPS Council is therefore the appropriate forum to discuss intellectual property and competition issue in an open and inclusive manner. The co-sponsors were joined by the World Health Organization (WHO), which sees competition law as an important tool in promoting innovation and access to new health technologies.

However, some other members argued that the TRIPS Council is not the ideal venue to have this discussion, given the fact that relatively few delegates can be expected to have deep expertise in both IP and competition policy. Since work by non-experts could easily lead to a misapplication of competition law in the context of IPRs, the focus of the discussions should be on how to facilitate the task of anti-trust enforcers that strive to eliminate unnecessary uncertainties faced by innovators and creators when utilizing their IPRs, they said. Other international fora, such as the International Competition Network (ICE), are a better venue for this discussion. While the TRIPS Agreement is obviously compatible with the application of competition policy measures, it clearly does not allow for “absolute policy space” and the relevant provisions should not be interpreted too broadly, these members cautioned.

Non-violation and situation complaints

This item – mandated by successive WTO Ministerial Conferences – concerns the longstanding issue of whether members should have the right to bring cases if they consider that another member’s action or a specific situation has deprived them of an expected benefit under the TRIPS Agreement, even if no TRIPS obligation has been violated.

Several delegations showed readiness to engage in a discussion of the scope and modalities for non-violation and situation complaints should they be initiated under the TRIPS Agreement, building on the substantive discussions at the Council’s June meeting. Some delegations maintained their view that the current moratorium should expire and that such complaints be allowed but indicated that they were ready to discuss the matter. Some other members reiterated their position that non-violation and situation complaints should not apply to TRIPS at all.

With the 12th Ministerial Conference 19 months away, the chair called for intensified work regarding a possible way forward that would permit the Council to examine scope and modalities in order to prepare recommendations for adoption by ministers.

GCC, granted permanent observer status

Following last year’s significant development, when the Council agreed to grant permanent observer status to the African Regional Intellectual Property Organization (ARIPO) and the African Intellectual Property Organization (OAPI), members agreed to grant the same status to the Cooperation Council of the Arab States of the Gulf (GCC). The Council also agreed to renew an invitation to the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) to attend the Council’s next meeting as ad hoc observer.

Currently, there are 13 pending requests for observer status in the TRIPS Council by intergovernmental organizations (IGOs). The list of observers can be found here.

Incentives to transfer technology to least developed country members

The Council initiated the sixteenth annual review of the incentives that developed country members are required to provide to their enterprises for the purposes of promoting and encouraging the transfer of technology to least developed countries. Developed countries (United States, Switzerland, Australia, Japan, Canada, Norway, New Zealand as well as the European Union and some of its member states) gave an overview of the information contained in their new detailed reports submitted to the Council (IP/C/W/646 and addenda) and called for a robust discussion. Least developed countries provided some initial feedback.

The WTO Secretariat is planning to hold a workshop back-to-back with the Council’s next meeting in February to facilitate the exchange of views between cooperation partners and to deepen the dialogue on incentives for transfer of technology to respond to the needs identified by least developed countries.

Source: wto.org

 

169/ Hyundai Motor gears up for change

Shifting from a traditional automotive manufacturing process to advanced automated and digitalized intelligence manufacturing will lay the ground for how automotive companies compete in the future. We ask Hyundai how it all connects.

In the last century, the car culture has conquered the entire world, shaping not only the global economy but how millions of people live. Yet, for all its staying power, the automotive industry is facing transformative change on multiple fronts with autonomous vehicles, hyper-connected smart cars and electric mobility, to name a few. But even the best transitional strategies can fail if the businesses themselves don’t follow, and the companies that stand the distance will be those that digitalize not just their products and services but how their businesses operate.

To capture the trend, automotive manufacturers cannot simply turn to their traditional toolbox. They need to take key strategic decisions about how they build cars in the future. A case in point is the Hyundai Motor Company, which, with a global value of USD 13.2 billion, consistently ranks among the world’s top-valued brands. Under its brand direction “Modern Premium”, Hyundai Motor is working incredibly hard to realize its vision for future mobility. And this includes plans to implement smart manufacturing solutions in order to improve production processes.

Currently, a standard car manufacturing plant uses multiple systems, including information technology, intelligent motors, sensors, computerized controls and production management software, that coexist as separate islands of efficiency. The overarching concept of smart manufacturing in the auto industry is to interconnect each individual stage of production to achieve plant-wide efficiency. ISOfocus caught up with Dr-Ing. InSung Chang, Executive Director, Manufacturing Engineering Research & Development Center, at Hyundai Motor Company, to find out how smart technology is driving the auto industry.

ISOfocus: Why is smart manufacturing a key focus for the auto manufacturers sector in general, and at Hyundai Motor, in particular?

Dr-Ing. InSung Chang: Historically, automotive manufacturers – or OEMs, as they are known to industry – have been defined by automated assembly and inspection to increase productivity and quality. This enabled large volumes of standardized vehicles to be manufactured. Now, however, the make-to-custom car model is on the rise, bringing obvious challenges with regard to how we control quality, cost and deadlines. As mass production turns into mass customization, or “personalized” production, the complexity in production plants has significantly increased. Unless we manage to solve this complexity, we won’t be able to provide high-quality products at acceptable prices, and we cannot expect sustainable growth either.

hat’s why the Hyundai Motor Company is putting the focus on smart manufacturing systems. Built on the concepts of smart products and smart factories, these form a production environment in which production and logistics systems organize themselves without human intervention. This is known as a “smart ecosystem” and has been a source of great satisfaction to Hyundai Motor and our customers.

Could you tell us a little more about Hyundai’s “smart manufacturing solutions”. How is Hyundai’s “smart tag” being used in the production process?

Hyundai Motor defines the smart factory as an environment in which automation becomes more human-centric and massive quantities of information on the physical layer collect into the cyber layer in a digital form. This digitalized information is linked to other related information and will finally be fed back to the automation level. To embed the elements of automation, digitalization, connection and intelligence in the smart factory, we make the best of Hyundai’s manufacturing technologies and cutting-edge ICT, such as smart sensors, the Internet of Things, big data, artificial intelligence, and others.

A year ago, Hyundai introduced its “smart tag” technology, a wireless production control system to be implemented in all our factories. Developed by Hyundai’s production technology development centre, the smart tag boasts a real-time locating system – including high-capacity memory, wireless chip and location tracking sensor units – that provides positioning information to secure information connectivity. This real-time data collection is expected to enable immediate response to even a small error. Smart tag is a core technology of connectivity, which is fundamental to the smart factory concept.

What about standards? We obviously need them to really have the connectivity goals of a digitally connected enterprise or a smart manufacturing ecosystem. How can standards keep up with the pace of innovation?

The core of smart manufacturing consists of connectivity and convergence. Standards are needed to achieve both efficient data connectivity and effective information flow by making it easy to connect devices and services from various suppliers at low cost.

What’s more, solutions and standards must always be taken into consideration together. In an era of convergence, both solutions and standards must be flexible. We hope that ISO standards will serve as a platform for building this smart manufacturing ecosystem. It is up to each company to adopt the standards and, ultimately, to adapt them accordingly in order to compete.

With increased complexity in activities and communications, how are ISO standards making smart manufacturing “smarter”?

There are a lot of human errors involved in analysing complex data. In this era of complexity, it is therefore important to standardize data types and data connections so that complex situations can be automatically judged and executed, utilizing information and communication technology.

In my view, complexity can be handled in the smartest way when automatically gathered and standardized information is linked with other related information. Therefore, I believe that ISO standards are essential for the creation of a smart manufacturing ecosystem, because they are developed in a way that promotes the participation of various companies and organizations involved in smart manufacturing.

In an era of rapid convergence, what advice would you give other companies looking to embrace “smart manufacturing” solutions and standards?

We should approach smart manufacturing from the perspective of customers and corporate sustainable growth rather than by focusing on the smart manufacturing technology itself. Otherwise, it will only cause additional cost to the enterprise.

I believe each company should develop tailor-made solutions that are affordable and suit its needs. Standards allow a more dynamic and competitive marketplace, without hampering the opportunity to differentiate. They reduce the risk of error between enterprises developing solutions and those implementing them, accelerating adoption of new manufactured products and manufacturing methods. This will ensure that both solution-providing companies and auto makers embracing smart manufacturing systems enjoy long-term competitiveness in the global automotive industry.

Source: iso.org

 

170/  Measuring up to the Fourth Industrial Revolution in the latest ISOfocus

The Fourth Industrial Revolution has been getting a lot of press. What does it really mean, and how will it affect us?

The Fourth Industrial Revolution is expected to create up to USD 3.7 trillion in value by 2025, according to the 2018 World Economic Forum/McKinsey & Company white paper. Contrary to some negative perceptions, countries and companies have an opportunity to counter and potentially reverse the slowdown in productivity by diffusing and adopting technology at scale.

The November/December 2018 issue of ISOfocus examines how government, businesses and societies will navigate the increasing integration of technologies into business and production processes. Among the experts interviewed are faculty, companies, small business leaders and standards professionals from around the world, in fields ranging from robots to industrial data to artificial intelligence.

“As in the first industrial revolution, when national economies and the organization of the global economy changed, we are undergoing the same transformation or revolution,” says Patrick Lamboley, Chair of technical committee ISO/TC 184, Automation systems and integration, and Senior Director of Standardization at Schneider Electric, when referring to the Fourth Industrial Revolution. “And this revolution is not a long-term vision; it’s a reality, taking place now.”

The latest ISOfocus issue showcases some of the new opportunities for ISO standards by highlighting the industry sectors most likely to benefit. It gives examples of how some companies are already leveraging this growing market, taking advantage of the emergence of digital systems, networked communications, and large-scale data analysis. This edition of ISOfocus also considers the opportunities offered by standards not only as a way of providing a platform for performance, but, equally important, as a way of getting different systems to effectively communicate to drive efficiencies.

So how can we prepare? Organizations should look to ISO standards now, to fully embrace this revolution in the making – and it may arrive quicker than we think. As Christoph Winterhalter, CEO of DIN, the ISO member for Germany, writes in his introductory remark: “The consolidation of new concepts by means of standardization at an early stage of development is absolutely essential if they are to be rapidly implemented in industrial practice.” After all, the Fourth Industrial Revolution is bound to bring significant changes to the way we live, interact and do business… if it hasn’t done so already.

Read the latest ISOfocus to learn more.

Source: iso.org

 

171/ Vietnamese exporters fret over weaker yuan

While the weakening yuan has allowed Vietnamese importers to benefit from cheaper material costs, exporters are feeling the pinch.

The yuan declined to 6.9075 per U.S. dollar on Nov. 6, according to Xinhua News Agency. The move has dragged the yuan down by almost 9 percent from the beginning of this year, the steepest drop in the last 10 years.

A yuan was selling for VND3,327 on Monday, down from VND3,595 in February 5, according to Vietnam Customs. This means that the dong has gained 7.4 percent over the yuan in the last nine months.

Experts say that this is an opportunity for Vietnamese businesses to import cheaper materials.

Economist Bui Trinh told the Thanh Nien newspaper that the falling yuan will allow local businesses to gain from importing materials and machines, 90 percent of which are obtained from China.

A Vietnamese plastic importer said as his firm pays with the weaker yuan, it has become more competitive in the market. Up to 70 percent of this company’s materials are imported from China.

An importer of Chinese fruits said buying fruits from China is cheaper and prices in Vietnam remain the same. “So I’m making more profit.”

But the falling yuan has created more difficulties for Vietnamese exporters.

Bui Thanh Van, director of trade firm Van Phat Ltd., which exports produce to China, said that the falling yuan has lowered the amount of orders they used to get.

Some Vietnamese produce are being priced higher than other countries in ASEAN, such as Thailand and Malaysia, and countries which are lowering their currency values to increase exports to China, he said.

“The weakening of the yuan has made it a challenge to export to China.”

Truong Dinh Hoe, general secretary of the Vietnam Association of Seafood Exporters and Producers, said that as China has been one of Vietnam’s top export markets in the last two years, the weaker yuan would make it difficult for seafood exporters.

China was among the top four largest importers of Vietnamese seafood in the first eight months this year, along with Japan, South Korea and the U.S., according to the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development. These four markets accounted for over 54.1 percent of Vietnam’s total seafood exports in the same period, it said.

The falling yuan will likely increase prices and lower orders from China, affecting the local seafood market, Hoe said.

Experts are also worried that the weaker yuan will lead to an increasing number of Chinese goods entering Vietnam with more competitive prices, making the nation’s trade deficit even higher.

From January to September this year, Vietnam had a trade deficit of $18.45 billion with China, its largest trade partner among over 200 countries and territories, according to Vietnam Customs.

Trade turnover between Vietnam and China reached $93.69 billion last year, up 23.2 percent from 2016, accounting for 22 percent of Vietnam’s total trade turnover, Vietnam Customs reported. The figure is estimated to reach 100 billion this year.

Source: VnExpress

 

Ngày 09/11

173/ DDG Wolff highlights benefits of WTO accession for investment and economic growth

Speaking at the Belarusian State University in Minsk on 9 November Deputy Director-General Alan Wolff said efforts by Belarus and other candidates to accede to the WTO will have a positive impact on the business environment and promote good governance by creating predictable and transparent rules for trade. “Membership in the Organization sends a clear signal to investors about a country’s commitment to an open economy, which encourages the inflow of foreign investment and technological know-how,” he declared.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

As Robert F Kennedy, brother of U.S. President John F. Kennedy and a U.S. Senator, said at the University of Cape Town in 1966 –

Like it or not we live in interesting times. They are times of danger and uncertainty; but they are also more open to the creative energy of men than any other time in history. And everyone here will ultimately be judged –will ultimately judge himself — on the effort [each] has contributed to building a new world society and the extent to which his ideals and goals have shaped that effort.⁽¹⁾

Half a century later this is as true as ever. It is certainly relevant when we look at the current state of the global trading system and of relations among major trading countries.

Particularly for those of you studying International Relations, you can recognize the potential beginning of a trade war: when Country A raises tariffs on imports from Country B and Country B responds by raising tariffs on imports from Country A.   An incipient trade war is no longer hypothetical. It is the new reality which is unfolding as we speak.  Yesterday in Geneva, at the WTO, the U.S. filed notice that it would ask that dispute settlement panels be formed against China with respect to intellectual property issues, and against four WTO members for imposing retaliatory tariffs against U.S. exports in relation to U.S. trade restrictions imposed on steel and aluminium. For their part, 13 WTO members filed notices that they would ask for dispute settlement panels against the United States for imposing steel and aluminium tariffs.

As the United States and China, and others, exchange threats and increased tariffs, the world is watching anxiously to see what the effect will on the global economy.

Whether or not a trade war is already under way, what is clear is that the uncertainty around the tariffs is forcing some businesses to shift production among countries and cut back on hiring. For example, foreign carmakers that employ thousands of workers in the United States are gauging whether tariffs, the main weapon in this war, may compel them to transfer jobs back to the United States or to other countries.

In one instance BMW, one of the largest exporter of cars from the United States, has reportedly already planned to move some of the production of its popular X3 sports utility vehicle — once made exclusively in South Carolina — to a factory in Shenyang, China.  And it is not just BMW, it is its suppliers that produce for BMW that may be affected.  It is a matter of time before other companies, not only carmakers, will have to make similar decisions, sometimes to move production into the United States to meet new content requirements, sometimes out of the U.S. to supply markets for reasons of economic efficiency or because of increased foreign barriers.

Fears of a global trade war already affect negatively the value of companies that rely on international trade.  It can also affect stock markets broadly.  This can be the case in any region, whether the U.S. or abroad.   Overall, the Shanghai market is down 24% from the beginning of the year.⁽²⁾ No doubt this is due to a number of factors, but a continuing trade war is likely a prominent one.

This brings us back to the economic fundamentals. Increased tariffs cause the costs of international trade to increase.  This will affect prices for consumers and the cost of doing business in every market that is affected.  At the same time, increased tariffs can depress the rate of growth more widely.  If the use of tariff increases does not spread further, the effects on global GDP growth are in a range of just under a loss of 0.5 % to a loss of 2.2 %.  This is substantial, although more limited than one would expect, because sourcing patterns shift, exchange rates adjust, and macroeconomic factors swamp trade effects.  But if investor and consumer confidence fall generally, then the effects will be more dramatic, and all negative.

The economic outlook gets cloudier if retaliation and counter-retaliation become the rule rather than the exception. The effects will not be limited to one country and one industry. In a globalised world, there can be material spill-over impacts in almost every economic sector.

The world has experienced seventy years consisting of a trend toward increased trade and greater economic growth — lifting literally 100s of millions out of poverty⁽³⁾, not to mention the absence of global war.  But at least one author, Robert Kagan, in his book The Jungle Grows Back, warns that this period defined by a liberal international order is not normal, but an aberration in human history.  His view is that it will take strong action to maintain what we have, not to mention improving on it.

The WTO, with its 164 Member countries and covering 98% of world trade, is designed to provide within its framework of rules greater certainty for those engaged in international commerce. This is a vitally important global public good fostering international cooperation on trade issues. The benefits of public goods, however, tend to be invisible and under-recognized. This has led governments and businesses to underinvest in the multilateral trading system, to become complacent with what they have.  While advocacy for trade is now essential. all need to do a better job of supporting trade multilateralism not just with words but with deeds.

International trade is an essential foundation of international peace and prosperity.⁽⁴⁾ It is useless to argue about the merits of globalization; the economic interdependence of national economies is now a fact. Global economic stability has relied on a multilateral trading system with its recognized and predictable framework for commercial exchanges. Without it, the world would be poorer and conflict and uncertainty could become the norm.  The purpose of the establishment of the GATT founded in 1948 was to provide an international economic order to rebuild the world economy after World War II and help countries aid development.  It was the desire of the founders to underwrite peace and security through the creation of the multilateral trading system.

The WTO encompassed and succeeded the GATT in 1995. The negotiations that led to the creation of the WTO resulted not only in bringing into international rules new areas such as services and intellectual property, but in the establishment of an organization that could oversee implementation of the commitments made, including global tariff reductions of 40%.  The multilateral trading system which relies on the WTO is not a cure-all, as Nelson Mandela said on the 50th anniversary of the founding of the GATT.  It can make a major positive contribution but other factors are at work.

Income inequality has grown.  Technological change and automation cause disruptions in the workforce.  While economic progress has always provided more jobs than have been lost, this is never seen in advance. This was true when telephone operators at switchboards were replaced by electro-mechanical switches generations ago, and it is true when you think of the jobs that smart phones have replaced.

Trade is often blamed for the consequences of other forces and policies, not only technological change but inadequate national domestic adjustment policies.  We live in a swiftly changing world, and as many of you belong to the so-called Generation Z⁽⁵⁾, growing up with computers in the palm of your hands, you know it better than anyone else.

Technology transforms the way we think, the way we interact and certainly it affects patterns and channels of trade. Trade is faster, easier and truly global today. For instance, Amazon shipped more than 5 billion items worldwide via free one- or two-day shipping in 2017. It also offers one-hour delivery service for customers in the United States.  Alibaba is transforming the market in China.

Just a decade ago ordering food online or booking AirBnB using your phone and a credit card was science fiction. It is still hard to believe, though, that it takes 2.5 seconds to process payment transactions with a banking card.  It is estimated that E-commerce in merchandise will experience double-digit growth by 2020, when sales are expected to exceed USD 4 trillion. The upcoming wave of technological advances, in artificial intelligence (AI), robotics, machine learning tools, and 3-D printing will continue changing the mechanics of trade. Some skills, products and transaction means will become obsolete and be replaced by new ones. And the truth is that we need up-to-date international rules to keep up with changes in the way that trade takes place.

The good news is that all WTO members profess that there is a demand for the multilateral trading system. However, the WTO must adjust to the realities of the 21st century. A conversation between WTO Members about WTO reform is gathering significant momentum.  Just a couple of weeks ago, in Ottawa, a group of Trade Ministers from countries representing roughly 40 percent of world GDP agreed that addressing modern economic and trade issues, and tackling pending and unfinished business is key to ensuring the relevance of the WTO.

Expanding the scope of the issues covered by the WTO – for example, with respect to E-commerce — is only a part of the ongoing conversations between WTO Members. The more challenging task may well be to address how to improve the current system without prejudice to the core values of the Organization.

• First, the nature of our times dictates that global governance should be far more prompt and responsive in its decision-making process. The WTO is not an organization with majority rule; it requires consensus among its membership which can be difficult to reach. So, how to get 164 members to agree?

In the Uruguay Round, as the WTO was yet to be created, there was a one-time leverage: any holdouts were risking their membership in the new organization. As the Doha negotiations illustrated, reaching consensus without such a lever is very hard. Launched in November 2001, the Doha talks were intended to conclude by 2005; to date there is no unanimity as to what kind of future the Agenda’s issues have. So, a key question that we need to answer is: how can we ensure that rule-making in the 21st century is not lagging behind the rapid changes in the world of trade?

• Second, how can we ensure that the WTO principles are respected? Today the dispute settlement system is a central pillar of the WTO, which aims to preserve the rights and obligations of WTO members, and ensure that the rules are enforceable. What will happen to the WTO’s dispute settlement system, including the crush of new cases which are now being filed? What should be done to maintain the core strength of the multilateral trading system in the future?

Tackling these and many other questions will require flexible and open approaches from the WTO members.  Good outcomes that can emerge from the current ferment with good will, pragmatism and creativity.

WTO Members are finding ways to work together even in these testing times. The new Joint Initiatives in trade are a case in point. These are ongoing discussions on new issues such as E-commerce; micro, small and medium enterprises; domestic regulation of services,  investment facilitation and gender and trade. Discussions on established trade topics are also continuing in existing WTO bodies.

One of the brightest areas of the multilateral trading system, and one in which I am involved, is the accession of new Members to the WTO.    Right now, there are 22 countries pursuing accession to the WTO, including Belarus.  These countries look forward obtaining the benefits of deeper integration into the world trading system, gaining domestic economic growth through increased trade opportunities.  For some countries that are conflict-affected – such as Sudan, Somalia, South Sudan, Syria and East Timor, increased economic well-being through joining the WTO holds the promise of stability and peace.  This was also true for the last two countries to accede – Afghanistan and Liberia.  Serbia, The Bahamas and Uzbekistan have also reactivated their accession processes.

Belarus is accelerating its accession process.  This is why I am here. There is intensive work within your government and with other governments to move forward on this country joining the WTO.

Governments pursue WTO Membership for a variety of reasons.  Membership in the Organization sends a clear signal to investors about a country’s commitment to an open economy, which encourages the inflow of foreign investment and technological know-how.  By committing to a maximum level of tariff protection and eliminating quotas on imports, as required by the WTO, countries create a predictable and transparent framework which improves the business environment and promotes good governance.  Similarly, the establishment of simplified rules on licensing, registration, and customs clearance can have a very positive effect on business.

President Lukashenka has been quoted recently saying that he wants Belarus to be “open to the world, pursue an open policy, and be predictable”. Well, this is what the WTO is all about.

Becoming a WTO Member is not an easy process.  For most, a benefit is engaging in extensive domestic reforms in order to qualify for membership.  It also requires active negotiations between WTO Members and the acceding government.  The negotiation process is what determines the specific terms of entry of a country to the WTO.   In fact, since Belarus filed its initial letter of application, some 36 economies – big and small – have gone through this often challenging process, and have emerged as active Members of the Organization.

So, what are the timelines that Belarus should be looking at?

• The WTO’s 12th Ministerial Conference in June 2020 in Astana, the capital of Kazakhstan, provides a natural target for concluding the accession negotiations of Belarus. This will be the first WTO Ministerial Conference hosted by a recently-acceded WTO Member, as Kazakhstan came into the WTO in 2015. In addition, the host is also a regional partner from the Eurasian Economic Union. Belarus may benefit from goodwill from all sides in support of the conclusion of its accession.
• For this target to be met, Belarus has approximately 12 to 13 months – until the beginning of 2020 – (i) to close all substantive issues raised in its accession Working Party; and (ii) to conclude the remaining bilateral negotiations on market access issues with interested WTO Members.

Belarus has been very active in its preparations to become a WTO member and the path forward has been identified:

• Belarus has a platform from which to negotiate its accession.  As a member of the Eurasian Economic Union Belarus has the WTO accession packages of the Russian Federation and Kazakhstan – which are already WTO Members – as clear examples for engaging in negotiations for its terms of entry to the WTO. This is particularly relevant to commitments in the areas falling under the competence of the Eurasian Economic Union.
• By virtue of its membership in the Union, Belarus is already in fact applying a wide range of WTO disciplines. In many ways, the choice to join the WTO has already been made with Belarus’ decision to join the EAEU Agreement.  Four out of five members of the Eurasian Economic Union are already Members of the WTO (the Russian Federation, Kazakhstan, Armenia, and the Kyrgyz Republic). It makes little sense for Belarus to remain on the outside while discussions that affect its economy are taking place in the WTO.

Having said that, keep in mind, that there will be a moment in time when Belarus can have the advantage of your support and commitment to contribute to its membership in the WTO. For that you don’t have to be a negotiator.  Regardless of what role you may have at that moment — in public service or in the private sector — your contribution will count.

In future years, it will be your generation which will shape this world.  The true value of education the knowledge and skills acquired, can empower you to help create the world you want to live in.

The future is in your hands!

Source: wto.org

 

174/ Vietnam urges China to import more agriculture produce

China should import more Vietnamese products, especially agriculture produce, so as to balance bilateral trade, PM Nguyen Xuan Phuc said Sunday.

“As Vietnam is seeing a great trade deficit with China, you [Chinese businesses] should import more products from Vietnam, starting with agricultural products, to balance bilateral trade,” the prime minister said at a meeting with Chinese businesses in Shanghai before the November 5-10 China International Import Expo (CIIE).

“This is in line with the policy of China’s top leaders, who have repeatedly told us that they are keen to move towards a trade balance between China and Vietnam,” he noted.

China is currently the largest market for agricultural products in Vietnam with the export turnover of agriculture, forestry and fishery products this year estimated at over $35 billion, up nearly 9 percent over the same period last year, Voice of Vietnam quoted Phuc as saying.

However, most Vietnamese produce are mostly consumed in China’s southern Yunnan Province and the Guangxi region bordering Vietnam, not in the rest of the country, he said.

As the second largest agricultural produce exporter in ASEAN with over 20 agriculture products that have an annual export value of over $1 billion worth, Vietnam offers many products favored by Chinese consumers, the PM said.

Many Vietnamese agriculture produce are among the world’s best, like rice, pepper, cashew, pangasius fish and shrimp, he noted, adding that its fruits, like dragonfruit, mango, longan and watermelon, have passed import standards set by Australia, the EU, Japan, South Korea and the U.S.

These products have great potential to boost bilateral trade cooperation, the PM stressed.

Representatives of Chinese corporations at the meeting said they value the investment potential in Vietnam and are interested in bringing Vietnamese agriculture produce to China and and the world.

Pu Jian, executive director of the CITIC International Asset Management company, said that he could bring Vietnamese products more deeply into the Chinese market as his company specializes in importing rice, fruits and other produce.

His corporation also owns 60 percent of McDonald shares with over 3,500 stores in China, and this could be a potential channel to consume Vietnamese produce, he added.

Johnson Choi, executive director of China’s conglomerate Sunwah Group and general director of Sunwah Vietnam, said that his company would like to distribute Vietnamese coffee in the Chinese market and invest in Vietnam’s “green” agriculture.

In a meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping the same day on the sidelines of the CIIE, China’s major event seeking more import opportunities, PM Phuc stressed that Vietnam always attaches great importance to the development of friendly, stable and healthy relations with China.

China should adopt policies and practical measures to reduce the current large trade deficit with Vietnam, he added.

Xi said that his country doesn’t want to pursue a trade surplus with Vietnam, and will increase imports from Vietnam towards more balanced and sustainable bilateral trade.

Vietnam-China trade reached $93.69 billion last year, up 30.2 percent from 2016. Vietnam earned $35.46 billion from exports to China, up 61.5 percent, while spending $58.22 billion on imports from the country, up 16.4 percent.

In the first nine months this year, bilateral trade between the two countries reached $76.06 billion, up 18.7 percent over the same period last year.

China continues to be Vietnam’s largest trading partner and the one with which it has the largest trade deficit. It is also Vietnam’s second largest export market after the U.S, according to Vietnam Customs.

Source: VnExpress

 

Ngày 10/12

Vietnam among 10 fastest-growing economies

While growth is set to ease in 2019, Vietnam will still be among the top 10 fastest-growing economies globally, according to the “Economic Insight: South-East Asia” report recently released by the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales (ICAEW).

In the report, ICAEW predicts that economic growth across Southeast Asia (SEA) is expected to slow down in 2019 to 5 percent, after an estimated 5.3 percent in 2018. It attributed the slowdown to US-China tensions.

“The resulting slowdown in Chinese demand will weigh significantly on SEA growth, especially for export-dependent economies with a high level of exports to China, like Singapore and Malaysia,” the report said.

Economic growth continued to moderate across most SEA economies in the third quarter of 2018, with the average GDP growth slowing to 4.8 percent year-on-year, from 5.2 percent in second quarter of 2018, it said.

Vietnam was the exception, with GDP growth accelerating 6.9 percent on the year, up from 6.7 percent in the second quarter as FDI inflows continued to support growth in manufacturing activity and exports.

“GDP growth across the region is set to slow next year, as many of the region’s economies are small, open and heavily dependent on exports to China, due to both supply-chain linkages as well as tightening Chinese domestic demand,” the report said.

Domestic demand would likely provide some relief amid a more difficult outlook for exports. In addition, expansionary fiscal policy would also help, with fiscal spending expected to be strong in Indonesia, Thailand and the Philippines ahead of upcoming elections in the first half of 2019.

Many governments in the region, including Indonesia and Malaysia, are expected to miss their ambitious fiscal consolidation targets for 2019.

In Vietnam, while the Government’s fiscal position has improved, there is limited space for any expansionary fiscal policy next year, the report said.

However, Mark Billington, ICAEW Regional Director for South East Asia, said that although domestic demand had held up well this year, it was unlikely to reach the stellar pace achieved in 2018, partly due to lower monetary policy support.

“Combined with a moderation in export growth, we expect GDP growth across all of the SEA economies to ease next year, as a result of the ongoing US-China trade conflict and tighter global monetary conditions,” he said.

Source: VNS/VNA

 

181/ Vietnam, Senegal look to push trade cooperation

A trade promotion programme was held in Senegal by the Trade Office of the Vietnamese Embassy in Algeria and Senegal from December 2-8 to boost trade relations between the two nations.

The event saw the participation of many Vietnamese enterprises specialising in producing agricultural products.

In the framework of the event, representatives from the Trade Office had meetings and working sessions with those from the Senegalese Ministry of Commerce and the Ministry of Industry, as well as its Chamber of Commerce and Industry, to promote negotiations for the signing of a memorandum of understanding (MoU) on industrial and trade cooperation between the two countries.

A workshop to introduce the potentials of Vietnam-Senegal trade bonding was organised on December 4, attracting over 250 enterprises from the West African country.

Addressing the event, Vietnamese Commercial Counsellor Hoang Duc Nhuan updated participants on Vietnam’s economic development and proposed ways to enhance bilateral economic and trade links.

Senegalese Deputy Minister of Trade Makhtar Lah said his country is working hard to promote reform and open its economy, improve the business and investment environment towards luring foreign investment, and realise its goal of become an emerging economy by 2035.

According to Nhuan, trade between Vietnam and Senegal was 70.17 million USD in 2017. Vietnam’s main exports to the country were rice, tea, coffee, peppercorn, vegetables, aquatic and industrial products, footwear and textiles.

Nhuan added that at the meeting, the two sides agreed on the need to swiftly sign the MoU on trade and industrial cooperation, as well as ink agreements on double taxation avoidance and investment encouragement and protection to make it easy for their enterprises to expand investment and business collaboration in each other’s markets.

They also stressed the necessity to promote the role of trade promotion and diplomatic agencies in supporting activities of their businesses.

The Senegalese side called on Vietnamese firms to increase their investment in the West African nation, especially in processing farm produce.

The Vietnamese side took the occasion to visit the International Fair of Dakar – Senegal’s biggest trade event which sees the participation of some 670 domestic and foreign agencies and enterprises.

It also met representatives from Senegalese importers and learned about the country’s goods distribution systems.

Source: VNA

 

Ngày 12/11

175/ DG Azevêdo joins President Macron in discussions on strengthening multilateralism and WTO

Director-General Roberto Azevêdo joined world leaders in Paris on Sunday 11 November to mark the centenary of the World War One Armistice and to take part in the first Paris Peace Forum, an event dedicated to the idea that “international cooperation is key to tackling global challenges and ensuring durable peace”. Speaking during the Peace Forum, the Director-General urged leaders to “roll up their sleeves” and transform the current crisis of multilateralism into an opportunity to strengthen and improve it, including by reinforcing the WTO. DG Azevêdo participated in public and private discussions with President Emmanuel Macron, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, IMF Managing Director Christine Lagarde, World Bank Group President Jim Yong Kim, ILO Director-General Guy Ryder, UNESCO Director-General Audrey Azoulay and OECD Secretary-General Angel Gurría. DG Azevêdo congratulated President Macron for his leadership on this initiative and for his outspoken support for multilateralism.

During the public discussion Director-General Azevêdo argued for a strengthening of multilateral cooperation on trade. He said:

“Think about the world without the WTO. It would be the law of the jungle. It would be a return to unilateralism, with no global cooperation on trade issues. Our economists have been looking at the effects of such a scenario and the question is not whether people are going to lose – the question is how much. In fact, everyone would lose out. Two-thirds of products traded are produced in at least two countries, so if you disrupt trade it affects everyone in some manner. Trade is like oxygen – you only notice it when it’s gone.

“Today, we are seeing tensions rising, with new tariffs covering hundreds of billions of dollars of trade, and very real risks of further escalation. We must work together to lower those risks. In this context, a conversation about WTO reform has emerged. It is still at an early stage, so it’s difficult to tell how this will evolve. But clearly we can’t solve the current situation through bilateral channels only – we also need a broader conversation. I don’t think everybody realises the scale of the risks before us today. It is time for leaders to roll up their sleeves and find a way forward. The G20 summit in Buenos Aires in a few weeks’ time will be a good opportunity, and there will be others. We must transform this crisis into opportunity.”

Source: wto.org

 

176/ Goods Council considers revised transparency proposal to “reinvigorate” the WTO

The WTO Goods Council on 12-13 November discussed a revised proposal on enhancing members’ transparency and strengthening notification requirements. The proposal had been revised to reflect earlier feedback and is now sponsored by seven delegations. The Council also debated the European Union’s proposed changes to its tariff rate quotas in response to Brexit and took up issues related to technology products and other trade concerns.

The transparency proposal is sponsored by the United States, Argentina, Australia, Costa Rica, the European Union, Chinese Taipei and Japan. It is based on a US submission first circulated for consideration at the 11th Ministerial Conference last December.

The United States, introducing the proposal at the recent meeting, said there ought to be consequences for members failing to meet transparency obligations as a lack of notifications on trade-related policies hinders the functioning of the organization. The proposal is an effort to encourage better compliance with notification requirements, reinvigorate the organization and improve the transparency necessary to facilitate work across different negotiating topics, the US said. Other members behind the proposal similarly emphasized the need to enhance transparency and better monitor the implementation of the WTO agreements.

Thirty-seven members took the floor to respond to the proposal, signalling high interest in the issue. All 37 highlighted the importance of transparency as a fundamental pillar of the multilateral trading system. A number of members said the proposal was a good starting point for further discussions and noted the improvements compared to the previous US proposal on the same issue. Other members took issue with the use of punitive measures on members and noted the need to consider capacity constraints of developing and least-developed countries.

The proponents plan to hold discussions with all other interested members to further improve the proposal.

EU’s tariff-rate quotas in response to Brexit

Twenty-eight WTO members expressed concern over the European Union’s proposal to adjust its tariff rate quotas (TRQ) for agricultural and industrial goods as a consequence of the United Kingdom’s withdrawal from the bloc. Members expressed concern that the EU’s proposed TRQ changes would reduce the level and quality of access that WTO members currently have to the EU and UK markets.

Members emphasized that the EU is the world’s largest agricultural trader and that the EU proposal would have real commercial implications. Members further noted that the future trading relationship between the EU and the UK was not yet clear and Brexit’s impact on third parties’ market access thus remained uncertain. In addition, the EU’s proposed methodology for calculating the proposed change in TRQs came under criticism.  Members highlighted WTO principles which discourage members from leaving trading partners worse off and require appropriate compensation to be negotiated.

The EU confirmed that it had submitted revised data in October for its TRQ renegotiation and recognized that members may need more time to revise or update their claims of interest. The EU said it had received 25 claims of compensation from Brexit’s TRQ impact from interested trading partners. The TRQ changes will affect more than 365 tariff lines and is the largest one-time modification of commitments ever undertaken at the WTO.

Restrictions on Chinese technology products

China voiced its concern over the inclusion of a certain Chinese memory chip manufacturer in the US “Entity List of Export Controls”. This prohibits US companies from exporting products, software and technology necessary for the operation of the Chinese company based on national security considerations, China said.

China was of the view this restriction violates WTO rules and abuses the national security exemption set out in Article XXI of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. China said the US measure is intended to maintain US dominance in the industry.

The United States, in turn, said this was a law enforcement action meant to protect national security and intellectual property. China replied it was not appropriate for the United States to use export restrictions in lieu of a court ruling on intellectual property rights violations.

China further took issue with Australia’s decision to ban goods and services of two Chinese companies from 5G telecommunication projects in Australia. China said it opposed protectionism under the disguise of national security. Australia, in response, said it was committed to safeguarding critical national infrastructure in the telecommunications sector. Australia indicated that its approach is not targeted at any particular country or suppliers from a particular country. Furthermore, the restrictions apply equally to Australian-owned and foreign-owned telecommunication carriers, Australia said.

EU geographical indicators for wine

Argentina and the United States requested the European Union to explain the long wait to obtain permission for using certain traditional terms on labels of wine for export to the EU. They asked the EU to process their respective applications expeditiously.

The EU said it would respond to the matter in due time.

Enlargement of the EU to include Croatia

Contrary to the EU’s assertion that it had concluded renegotiations of its commitments to the WTO following Croatia’s accession to the EU, the Russian Federation countered that the EU had failed to engage in negotiations with Russia, which the EU had earlier recognized as having a principal supplying interest for certain products.

The EU reiterated its view that the indication of a WTO member as a principal supplier did not automatically entitle a member to a right for compensation for market access changes resulting from Croatia’s accession to the EU. At previous Council meetings, when negotiations were still ongoing, the EU had also responded by arguing that the Russian Federation’s claim of interest had been submitted past the deadline. Russia was of the view, however, that the procedures should not be so rigid.

Other agenda items

The meeting featured 38 agenda items, an unprecedented number which is said to demonstrate members’ confidence in WTO bodies. In addition to the five new trade concerns detailed above, the Council heard 18 other specific trade concerns raised at previous meetings.

Next meeting

The next Council meeting will be held on 11-12 April 2019.

Source: wto.org

 

177/ Vietnam, Cuba promote trade, investment ties

Deputy Prime Minister Trinh Dinh Dung and President of the Council of State and Council of Ministers of Cuba Miguel Mario Diaz Canel Bermudez chaired a dialogue with Vietnamese and Cuban firms in Hanoi on November 9.

Speaking at the event, the Deputy PM said Vietnam is now the second largest trade partner of Cuba in Asia. More and more Vietnamese firms are keen on promoting trade and investment projects in the Latin American country.

In the first nine months of this year, the Cuban government granted licenses to six Vietnamese firms. The Vietnamese businesses want the two governments to create favourable conditions for Cuba’s projects in priority fields of agriculture, consumer goods, construction materials, hospitality services, clean energy, telecommunications, health care, biology and pharmaceuticals, he said.

Deputy PM Dung added that the two governments’ signing of the new Vietnam – Cuba trade agreement during the President’s visit will lay a foundation for both sides to lift two-way trade to US$500 million by 2022 from over US$200 million at present.

As requested by Cuba, Vietnam will maintain stable export of rice to the country in the near future, as well as launch a new stage of a rice production project in Cuba.

Vietnamese businesses want to import more goods of Cuba’s strength, especially bio-tech and health care products, as well as pharmaceuticals, he said.

Bermudes, for his part, said Cuba has launched reform policies and promoted foreign investment attraction, adding that it has issued a new Law on Investment to lure more foreign investors.

According to him, the Cuban people trust many Vietnamese goods while Vietnamese firms are operating effectively in the country.

During the visit by Party General Secretary Nguyen Phu Trong in March 2018, both sides signed a number of important agreements on construction, infrastructure, electronic spare parts and food processing. Many projects on renewable energy, construction and food processing are underway.

Cuba wants Vietnamese firms to extend operations in civil aviation, biotechnology, pharmaceuticals, scientific research, academic and cultural exchange, he said.

The guest proposed both sides to work more closely together to improve the efficiency of the Inter-Governmental Committee cooperation mechanism. He wished that during the committee’s 36th meeting in Havana in late 2018, negotiations on many major projects would be concluded.

He pledged to clear barriers facing Vietnamese firms to contribute to Cuba’s development.

Source: NDO/VNA

 

178/ FCO Minister reaffirms UK’s commitment to Vietnam

FCO Minister of State for Asia and Pacific, Mark Field has reaffirmed the UK’s commitment to Vietnam marking 45 years of UK-Vietnam diplomatic relations.

The minister arrived in Hanoi today to attend the InspireMe festival and reaffirm and deepen the UK’s long standing relationship with Vietnam. The InspireMe Festival celebrates 45 years of diplomatic relations between the UK and Vietnam. The event will highlight different aspects of the relationship between the UK and Vietnam including Trade and Investment, Education, Illegal Wildlife Trade, Innovation & Science, and Culture.

The Minister will meet the Vice Minister of Industry and Trade to discuss the UK’s commitment to energy efficiency to tackle climate change. The two Ministers will visit the Business Corner of the Festival, where UK companies are exhibiting their products and services.

Mr Field will also sign a Memorandum of Understanding with the Ministry of Finance, which indicates both sides’ interest in bilateral cooperation in areas such as financial market cooperation, the adoption of accounting standards and green finance.

The minister will then visit the Illegal Wildlife Trade area in the Festival, meeting Vietnam’s Vice Minister of the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, to discuss the outcomes of the recent IWT conference in London, and Vietnam’s commitments to tackling the illegal wildlife trade.

In addition Mr Field will have a bilateral meeting with leaders from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and reaffirm the UK’s commitment to Vietnam as this year marks 45 years of diplomatic relations.

Finally, Minister Field will meet members of the British business community, and take part in a Remembrance service.

Minister for Asia and the Pacific, the Rt Hon Mark Field MP said:

As Vietnam transforms itself, our bilateral relationship has also evolved. The UK enjoys a Strategic Partnership with Vietnam. What you are seeing at the festival is a vivid display of our bilateral relationship in the fields of education, business, science, innovation, and culture. In my meeting with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, we agreed that our bilateral cooperation has achieved many things already, and we looked forward to strengthening our relations further over the next 45 years.

Source: Gov.uk

 

Ngày 13/11

179/ World Economic Forum panel discusses impact of globalization

The impact of globalisation in the face of the Fourth Industrial Revolution was the topic under discussion at the opening plenary session at the World Economic Forum’s (WEF) Annual Meeting of the Global Future Councils, which opened on Sunday at Madinat Jumeirah.

Taking part in the panel discussion titled “Globalisation 4.0” were Julie Bishop, Member of Parliament of Australia and former minister of foreign affairs; William Burns, President, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, US; Yoriko Kawaguchi, Visiting Professor and Fellow, Meiji Institute for Global Affairs, Musashino University, Japan; Miroslav Lajcak, Minister of Foreign and European Affairs of the Slovak Republic and Susana Malcorra, former minister of foreign affairs of Argentina. The session was moderated by Hadley Gamble anchor at CNBC.

SIGNIFICANCE OF NOV.11

Opening the discussion, Julie highlighted the significance of the Nov.11 date of the start of the forum and highlighted that during her time as a member of the Australian parliament, she noticed that certain countries and players were challenging the status quo of the norms and conventions that had shaped the policies of the international order that had arisen after the Second World War.

“I think that it’s noteworthy that we’re meeting today on the hundredth anniversary of the end of the First World War, which was followed by the Second World War, and after that the nations of the world came together and said ‘we need a framework to guide how nations behave and towards each other. My challenge is to nations that are seeking to undermine that rules-based order, or to nations that say ‘we can go it alone or we can cherry pick which parts of the order we will accept, or which be guided by or which we will not,’ where’s the alternative? I’ve yet to see an alternative model that can deal with the challenges of global cooperation and global competition,” Bishop said.

Highlighting the increasing disillusionment between citizens and their governments in this new Fourth Industrial Revolution era, Susana Malcorra stressed that there were voices that were exploiting the fears of the future by suggesting that a return to earlier values was the answer.

“At the heart of what we are facing here is the fact that the common citizen does not feel himself or herself represented well enough by the institutions – either national or international. There is a break, in my view, in the social compact between the citizens and their leadership. So, this is really an inward-looking perspective for the citizens. The citizens feel themselves not only not well represented but also that their future is at stake. It’s not clear to them why their future is at stake, but they blame their leadership.  Here comes the opportunity for other voices to say  that we can go back to the past. And guess what – we cannot go back to the past, that’s a fact,” said Malcorra.

10B PEOPLE

During his participation, Lajcak drew attention to the fact that there were still large swathes of the global population who do not have access to basic services and that it was just as important to address their needs, as it was to focus on gearing up for a technological future in the era of the Fourth Industrial Revolution. “As we are planning for the Fourth one, let us not forget that by 2050 this planet will be hosting close to 10 billion people,” Lajcak said.

Source: Gulf Today

 

180/ Japan initiates WTO dispute complaint against Korean support for shipbuilders

Japan has requested WTO dispute consultations with Korea concerning alleged subsidies provided by the Korean government to its shipbuilding industry. Japan’s request was circulated to WTO members on 13 November.

Japan claims that the challenged measures, which include funds, loans, guarantees, insurance and other financing, are inconsistent with the WTO’s Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM Agreement) and the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) 1994.

Further information is available in document WT/DS571/1

What is a request for consultations?

The request for consultations formally initiates a dispute in the WTO. Consultations give the parties an opportunity to discuss the matter and to find a satisfactory solution without proceeding further with litigation. After 60 days, if consultations have failed to resolve the dispute, the complainant may request adjudication by a panel.

• More on consultations
• Current status of disputes

Source: wto.org

 

181/ DG Azevêdo opens first workshop on government procurement and governance

On 13 November 2018, Director-General Roberto Azevêdo addressed the first “Advanced Global Workshop on Government Procurement and Governance Issues” held at the WTO. He highlighted the importance of good governance tools, such as the WTO Government Procurement Agreement, in helping to prevent corruption and supplier collusion in government procurement. He also stressed that effective and efficient procurement systems based on non-discrimination, predictability and transparency can help create economic opportunities for people across the world.

Good morning everyone.

Welcome to the WTO and to this workshop on Government Procurement and Governance Issues.

It’s great to have you all here today.

At the outset, I would like to thank Rob Anderson and the whole team for organizing this workshop.

The event stands out for many reasons. It is the first time that we are holding a three-day workshop of this kind here at the WTO. And it also brings a different perspective to the table.

Usually our capacity building efforts in this area focus on market access issues involved in government procurement. However, this initiative focuses primarily on governancematters.

More specifically, the discussions over the next days will look at issues such as: the prevention of corruption and supplier collusion in government procurement; and how domestic review processes and supplier complaint systems can help these efforts.

Ultimately, these issues are central to the efficient and effective operation of any national procurement system. So it is very encouraging to see your interest and engagement here.

We all know the importance of the government procurement sector to the global economy. Government procurement accounts for a significant proportion of GDP, on average 13-15% worldwide.

Moreover, government procurement is central in building infrastructure and in delivering essential public services, such as health, education and national defence.

However, there are also big challenges in the field. Issues such as corruption and supplier collusion, as I just mentioned, are present in many economies – both developed and developing.

Tackling this can make a huge impact across the board.

If we can ensure that government procurement systems work well, then we can unlock opportunities for people around the world. This can have a direct impact on economic wellbeing, helping promote growth, development and job creation.

It is positive therefore that we are bringing a lot of expertise and experience together to look at these big questions.

As you prepare for your discussions, I would just like to highlight a few thoughts.

First, I think we need to keep in mind the importance of the rule-of-law in all of this.

Effective enforcement of national competition laws is important to the detection and deterrence of supplier collusion. The clear prohibition of bribery and related practices is also vital. And, as you will discuss during the seminar, robust domestic review systems to address supplier complaints are also important.

However, good rules will be inadequate to the task if officials lack adequate training or support. Therefore, we also need to think of ways to build adequate capacity in procurement workforces.

Efforts should also be made to engage the private sector and civil society to develop and adhere to well-understood norms and practices.

And, of course, electronic tools have a vital role to play in increasing transparency and ensuring accountability in the government procurement sector.

Finally, the WTO’s Government Procurement Agreement – and particularly the modern, revised agreement which entered into force in 2014 – has a very significant contribution to make in this area as well.

This deal promotes good governance mechanisms in government procurement, built around the WTO’s fundamental principles of non-discrimination, transparency and predictability.

The GPA can help countries to manage the challenges that they face. For example, in grappling with corruption and supplier collusion issues, the GPA helps by strengthening competition and introducing new mechanisms to ensure transparency and accountability.

More specifically, the Agreement helps to:

• ensure standards of transparency and fair procedures for all market participants
• expand the number and diversity of suppliers competing
• encourage the use of modern e-procurement and data management tools, and
• guarantee the role of strong, independent domestic review systems.

In addition, the Agreement can also serve as an inspiration for related domestic reforms. Indeed, some of the countries that have recently joined the Agreement are using it precisely for this purpose.

Let me make a broader point here.

I think the GPA is a good illustration of what can be achieved at the WTO.

Its 2014 revision was one of a series of recent achievements, together with:

• the Trade Facilitation Agreement in 2013,
• the elimination of agricultural export subsidies in 2015, and
• the expansion of the Information Technology Agreement, also in 2015.

These agreements deliver real economic benefits. They illustrate the variety of initiatives that can be pursued under the WTO umbrella. And they illustrate the value of cooperation and engagement at the global level.

In the face of rising tensions in the trading system today, this is more important than ever.

The WTO provides the foundations on which trade is built today. WTO rules cover around 98% of global trade. The system has overseen a historic opening of markets and integration of economies. It has provided stability and predictability in global trade – holding firm even during the financial crisis. And, as a result, it has helped to fuel growth and development around the world as well as a dramatic reduction in poverty.

Without it we would surely face a future of uncertainty, lower growth and diminished opportunities everywhere.

So we must preserve what we have, even as we work to improve it.

With that in mind, your deliberations here this week are particularly welcome.

I hope that you will make the most out of these three days.

Sharing views and information on best practices can help advance conversations on procurement issues. And it can help us to find other concrete areas where we may be able to make a real difference.

So I wish you a very productive workshop. Be proactive. Get engaged. And I look forward to hearing the reports of your discussions.

Thank you.

Source: wto.org

 

182/ WTO hosts first workshop on government procurement and governance

Officials from more than 30 WTO members attended the first Advanced Workshop on Government Procurement and Governance which took place at the WTO headquarters in Geneva on 13-15 November. The workshop allowed capital-based experts responsible for the functioning of public procurement markets to exchange views on effective systems with the aim of promoting good governance practices.

Director-General Roberto Azevêdo welcomed participants by noting the importance of the government procurement sector to the global economy. Government procurement accounts for an estimated 13-15% of worldwide GDP on average.

“If we can ensure that government procurement systems work well, then we can unlock opportunities for people around the world,” he declared. “This can have a direct impact on economic wellbeing, helping promote growth, development and job creation.”

Participants at the workshop looked at how trade instruments, including the WTO’s Government Procurement Agreement (GPA), can be used to promote competition and good governance and how they can contribute to combatting corruption in government procurement markets. They also examined how competition policy instruments can contribute to the efficient functioning of government procurement markets, including in deterring supplier collusion.

In addition, the participants addressed the role of effective institutions and related domestic review systems in promoting transparency, predictability and the efficient functioning of government procurement markets as well as synergies and complementarities between the GPA and tools from other international organisations in this area.

Robert Anderson, Counsellor and Team Leader for Government Procurement and Competition Policy at the WTO, said that trade and good governance are mutually supportive.  He noted that the Revised GPA which came into force in 2014 broke new ground on this and is globally recognized as a good governance instrument, in addition to being a market access tool.

“Healthy trade in government procurement markets cannot take place unless good governance mechanisms exist in our countries,” he told participants, citing transparency, strong domestic institutions, the absence of corruption and easy-to-understand laws as important elements of good governance systems.

Experts in procurement practices addressed specific issues such as preventing corruption and supplier collusion in public procurement systems, additional tools for strengthening competition in procurement, and ensuring the effectiveness of domestic review systems as well as addressing challenges before domestic review bodies.

Professor Steven Schooner of George Washington University’s Law School highlighted the “dramatically significant role” the GPA has taken on since it was concluded nearly a quarter of a century ago, and particularly following the coming into force of the updated text of the Agreement in 2014.

“Today around the world most public procurement officials understand the GPA as the single best articulation not only of common rules but of shared lessons learned among the international procurement community,” he said.

Professor Sue Arrowsmith of The University of Nottingham, a leading European authority on public procurement issues, made several detailed presentations, particularly on the role, design and operation of domestic review systems.

Participating WTO members and observers

Participating WTO members and observers included: Angola; Argentina; Armenia; Belarus; Chile; China; Costa Rica; Egypt; Equatorial Guinea; Gabon; Georgia; Guyana; India; Indonesia; Jamaica; Jordan; Republic of Korea; Kyrgyz Republic; Macao, China; Malaysia; Mexico; Mongolia; Montenegro; Namibia; Paraguay; Peru; Sudan; Tajikistan; Turkey; and Ukraine.

External expert facilitators

External expert facilitators included: Professor Sue Arrowsmith (Nottingham University); Mr Karolis Granickas (Open Contracting Partnership); Professor Alison Jones (King’s College London); Professor William E. Kovacic (George Washington University); Professor Steven L. Schooner (George Washington University); Ms Astghik Solomonyan (European Bank for Reconstruction and Development); Judge Marc Steiner (Swiss Federal Administrative Court); and Mr Colin David Swan (World Bank).

Source: wto.org

 

Ngày 14/11

183/ Vietnam becomes 7th country to ratify Trans-Pacific trade deal

Hanoi says CPTPP spells great opportunities for nation; pact could also help it advance in labour reforms

Vietnam’s lawmaking body, the National Assembly, on Monday unanimously ratified a landmark 11-country deal that will slash tariffs across much of the Asia-Pacific.

One of the region’s fastest-growing economies, its status cemented by strong exports and robust foreign investment, the South-east Asian nation is believed to be among the largest beneficiaries of the trade deal.

The ratification makes Vietnam the seventh country to have passed the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP), the National Assembly said in a statement.

“It is not just a trade agreement, but it also requires breakthroughs in law making and enforcement, in government management and social governance,” the government said in a statement, adding that the deal spells great opportunities for Vietnam.

Vietnam has already signed around a dozen free trade pacts to scrap, or cut, taxes on several imports and exports.

Taxes on nearly 43 per cent of Vietnam’s apparel exports to Canada will be removed immediately after the agreement takes effect, and 100 per cent after four years, the government said.

The garment sector is Vietnam’s second largest export-earner after smartphones.

Exports of footwear products and seafood will also benefit.

The pact, which includes specific requirements on labour rights and conditions of work, is also expected to help Vietnam advance in labour reforms, the International Labour Organization said.

“This is really an opportunity for Vietnam to modernise its labour laws and industrial relations system, and the need for such reforms firstly comes from the country’s internal context,” said the agency’s Vietnam director, Chang-Hee Lee.

Australia, Canada, Japan, Mexico, New Zealand and Singapore had earlier formally ratified CPTPP, which takes effect at year-end.

The original 12-member deal was thrown into limbo early last year when US President Donald Trump withdrew from the agreement to prioritise protecting US jobs.

Brunei, Chile, Malaysia and Peru are the four remaining members yet to ratify the pact.

Source: Reuters

 

184/ Vietnam trade promotion area launched in Shanghai

A Vietnam trade promotion area was inaugurated at the Greenland Global Commodity Trading Hub in Shanghai, China on November 13.

Speaking at the event on behalf of the organiser, Chairman of the Board of Directors and General Director of Sunny World Investment and Development Corp., Truong Vincent said the display aims to realise the agreement reached by Prime Minister Nguyen Xuan Phuc and Chinese Party General Secretary and President Xi Jinping on increasing imports from Vietnam to China at the 2018 China International Import Expo.

Truong said besides promoting trade, the display area also serves as a venue to connect with Chinese investors and popularise the imagery of Vietnam and its people to Chinese and international friends, contributing to fully tapping the potential for bilateral cooperation between Vietnam and various countries worldwide.

Vietnamese Consul General in Shanghai Ninh Thanh Cong committed all possible support to Vietnamese firms to seek prestigious partners in trade, investment, and tourism, contributing to the balanced and sustainable development of bilateral economic and trade ties.

The Vietnam Trade Promotion Area is located on the second floor of the hub, covering an area of over 300 sq.m with four stalls showcasing Vietnamese fruit, processed foods, handicrafts, and lacquer paintings.

Traditional Vietnamese ao dai (long dress) and palm-leaf conical hats were also introduced.

On the inauguration day, hundreds of Chinese and foreign firms and partners visited the area to seek potential business opportunities.

Source: VNA

 

 

 

185/ China-backed trade deal pushed back to 2019

A China-backed bid to complete the world’s largest trade deal — without the United States — was pushed back to next year after Asia-Pacific trade ministers failed to agree key terms at a Singapore summit.

The Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), covering half the world’s population, is billed as an antidote to Donald Trump’s “America First” agenda, which has seen tariffs imposed on almost half of all Chinese imports to the US — and retaliatory levies by Beijing.

Chinese Premier Li Keqiang is in Singapore to give impetus to the deal on the sidelines of a gathering of Southeast Asian and world leaders.

But trade diplomats late Monday indicated negotiations on the RCEP, a sweeping 16-country deal that includes China, Japan, India and the 10 members of ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations), will carry on deep into 2019.

“We made significant progress, (but it) is not the final conclusion,” New Zealand Minister of State for Trade and Export Growth Damien O’Connor told reporters late on Monday.

“But we are very happy with that and is heading in the right direction, hopefully ready for conclusion next year.”

India’s concerns over opening its markets, in particular to Chinese firms, has been a key sticking point in the five years of negotiations.

“The future lies in RCEP,” Indian trade minister Suresh Prabhu told reporters, but urged a cautious and patient approach to talks to ensure “every country will benefit from it”.

Several general elections scheduled early next year including in India, Thailand and Indonesia have complicated the timeframe of a deal that will open markets in countries covering nearly half the world’s GDP.

A draft leaders’ statement on the RCEP seen by AFP said talks will be concluded next year, noting the urgency of reaching an agreement “given the current headwinds faced by the global economy”.

RCEP was given extra impetus after Trump pulled the US out of rival pact the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). The TPP is still alive even without Washington, but RCEP is now the world’s biggest trade deal.

However, the Beijing-backed pact is much less ambitious than the TPP in areas such as employment and environmental protection.

The ASEAN summit, which formally opens on Tuesday afternoon, is expected to sweep in trade, maritime disputes and the Rohingya crisis.

Key world leaders including China’s Li, Russian President Vladimir Putin and Mike Pence — Donald Trump’s number two — are also in Singapore for talks foreshadowed by the China-US trade war and its ripple effect on global economies, particularly in Asia.

Pence is also expected to keep pressure on Beijing over its growing aggression in the South China Sea.

Source: AFP

 

Ngày 15/11

186/ DDG Wolff stresses crucial role of business and farming communities in designing international trade rules

Speaking at the Geneva Grain Conference, on 15 November, Deputy Director-General Alan Wolff stressed the crucial role played by business and farming communities in designing international trade rules, and called on policy-makers, regulators and government officials to seek their consistent feedback to remain knowledgeable about the fundamental changes in the global economy. “Throughout the history of negotiations in the multilateral trading system, their expertise and advice has played a crucial role to identify the opportunities and challenges underpinning the services, intellectual property, investment, information technology, telecommunications and trade facilitation that affect grains trade,” he said. The text of his remarks is below:

Good afternoon,

I welcome this opportunity to join you as your intensive three-day programme at this Conference is drawing to a close.

On behalf of the WTO Secretariat as well as the Secretariat of the Agriculture Market Information System (AMIS) — an important collaborative transparency framework of the WTO, together with 10 international organizations — we appreciate what you have done here.

This year’s edition of the Geneva Grain Conference has delivered a remarkable line-up of experts and stakeholders from the public and private sector.  Much can be learned from this gathering.

Collectively, your businesses span the flow of agricultural goods around the world — in production, distribution, retail, trade, finance, insurance or shipping sectors.  Our job at the WTO with your support is to deliver, to the extent that we can, the stability and predictability of the multilateral trading system. Where we are successful, collectively and jointly, our efforts support supplying the need for food and feed worldwide, and provide for economic growth, development and job creation.

I have not spent my life in grains issues, but I have spent my professional life in trade policy.  And in earlier days I was deeply involved in two grains issues, one a global arrangement to deal with price volatility in those days stemming from the size of the Soviet grain crop, the other in recording the grains rights that the United States was intent on preserving with respect to access to the European Common market.  Agricultural issues have always been contentious, even between close allies.

This afternoon, I will briefly address two themes:

• The WTO agriculture negotiations and the difficult context in which these discussions are unfolding.
• The importance of your active engagement to help governments shape the future trade negotiation agenda.

Agriculture negotiations

Continued and progressive reform steps are needed to “establish a fair and market oriented agricultural trading system”, to which the WTO is pledged in the opening words of its Agriculture Agreement.

The WTO consists of 164 Member countries at widely different stages of economic development who favour greater market predictability and stability. The question going forward, of course, is the extent to which they are willing to assume further contractual obligations in a range of policy areas.

Agricultural negotiations are never easy.  Since his election in May, the Chairman of the Agriculture Negotiating Group, Ambassador John Deep Ford of Guyana, has been promoting a pragmatic, inclusive and fact-based approach. Technical papers and analyses are currently being tabled in virtually all negotiation areas.

• On market access, efforts are aiming at expanding export opportunities for agricultural commodities and value-added food products.

1. Markets continue to be obstructed by high and often complex tariffs; tariff peaks and tariff escalation.
2. Burdensome and restrictive import procedures often hinder access opportunities which are otherwise granted under WTO-bound tariff rate quotas.
3. Trade-restrictive regulations in the form of unjustified sanitary and phytosanitary measures (SPS), quality requirements, or other technical regulations are a matter of serious concern.
4. A substantial number of developing countries remain preoccupied by the adverse impact that sudden import surges may have on their domestic markets, farmers’ livelihoods, and food security situation.

• On domestic support, an increasing number of Members are determined to reduce the level of the trade-distorting support that favours domestic agricultural producers.

1. Of particular relevance to the grain and oilseed sectors, while governments may institute public stockholding programmes for food security purposes, a solution must be devised to prevent market distortions or commercial displacement stemming from the release of subsidized stocks in international markets.

• After agreeing to eliminate export subsidies almost 3 years ago, Members are now focusing on the other elements of the export competition package, namely:

1. Exports by state trading enterprises,
2. Non-interference with legitimate international food aid, and
3. subsidized export credits, export credit guarantees and insurance programmes

• With respect to export restrictions, while existing rules recognize Members’ right to temporarily restrict exports to relieve critical domestic shortages of foodstuffs, there is currently also support from net-food importers to enhance existing transparency provisions to mitigate uncertainty of supply and prevent food price volatility.

Of course, trade negotiations do not happen in a vacuum.

As is abundantly reflected in the Conference programme, commodity markets, and particularly grain and oilseed markets, are facing several challenges.  As a result, WTO’s role as a strong pillar of global trade governance, economic growth and development, is undergoing a serious stress test.

As to the challenges:

• Unilateral tariffs are being placed on imports worth hundreds of billions of US dollars and nobody knows when or how this spiral will end.

1. The WTO Secretariat has consistently urged Members to exercise restraint in escalating trade tensions through trade restrictions.
2. Unilateral measures are being imposed with no claimed justification under the WTO rules.
3. Those measures which are claimed to have a WTO-rules-based justification are challenged are being submitted to WTO dispute settlement procedures which have not yet been tested by the claims and counter-claims.
4. Efforts are under way among Members to address the current measures and to avoid their spiralling into larger conflicts that would further disrupt trade.

• In August, WTO’s World Trade Outlook Indicator predicted a further weakening of world merchandise trade growth for the third quarter of 2018, reflecting a loss of momentum in the near-term.
• Our last policy monitoring report showed that the number of new trade restrictive measures increased over a previous 6-month period.
• WTO economists are now cautioning that souring trade tensions could slash as much as 17% from global trade growth, and from 0.4% to up to 1.9% off global GDP growth.  While this is very serious, the net effects cannot be predicted with accuracy.  Exchange rates can compensate to some extent, as can re-routing of trade.  And macroeconomic factors, national growth rates are determined by many factors, and these can swamp the effects of trade restrictions.

We may be witnessing a current realignment in several commodity supply chains, perhaps with lasting consequences.   The editorial section of the October issue of the AMIS Market Monitor sums up the effects of current trade measures, just for one important product as follows:

“From a trader’s perspective [… ] the real world of global soybean shipping is unrecognizable.”

A few big grain and oilseed traders may be untroubled by market volatility, but smaller businesses engaged in trade may be struggling to take essential restructuring or investment decisions in the absence of certainty regarding tomorrow’s market access conditions.  The same is true for agricultural producers, who, in addition, have had to cope with severe climatic conditions.

Therefore, it is equally important to ask:

• How many have had to consolidate portfolios to hedge against future risks in the distribution, retail, packaging or shipping sectors?
• How many small traders with limited finance have had to postpone investments in expensive technologies to streamline processes and cut costs?

The impact on the WTO and the multilateral trading system of current trade measures taken and those threatened is mixed.  There are significant risks, concluding escalation of current trade restrictive measures and countermeasures, emulation by others, impact on third countries (which is also mixed), a lessening of cooperation where cooperation is needed to make progress, and a possible complication in finding a solution to the impasse in the appellate functions of the WTO dispute settlement system.

At the same time, the current ferment has led to a re-awakening among its members and their business communities to the value of having a working multilateral trading system, and the need to improve it and expand its scope. A discussion on WTO reform is gathering momentum, initially regarding improved transparency procedures and peer review mechanisms.

In addition, the fact that the WTO was founded almost a quarter century ago has caused sizeable groups of countries, representing over three-quarters of the global economy to agree to hold exploratory discussions that could lead to future negotiations on four main topics:

• the empowerment of women in trade
• investment facilitation
• meeting the needs of micro, small and medium-sized enterprises (MSMEs), relating to access to information on export opportunities, access to trade finance, and facilitation of border procedures; and
• bringing rules to E-commerce, which covers goods and services produced, distributed, marketed, sold, or delivered through electronic means.

These initiatives are being sponsored and pursued by different subsets of the WTO membership although participation remains open to all.

The real world in which companies exist accounts for an estimated $25 trillion in annual trade already taking place online. Technology and innovation are expected to boost global trade by 1.8-2.0 percentage points annually until 2030, increasing efficiencies, traceability and transparency.

I welcome the fact that you have incorporated  a “Technology and Innovation Stream” throughout the Conference programme. On Tuesday, panellists in the Black Sea Forum noted that commodity supply chains could not afford to ignore the fast-growing importance of blockchain technology. While tangible benefits in terms of decentralisation, added security, traceability and efficiency, were evoked, Conference participants also gave detailed feedback on some of the regulatory challenges they faced.

E-phyto certification is the closest practical example of innovation, which, like blockchain technology, facilitates paperless trade in plant products and affords similar benefits, such as enhanced traceability and digital inclusiveness, across supply chains. Launching E-phyto certification as part of a project funded by the Standards Trade Development Facility (STDF) has been a very positive experience. The automated system is now fully managed by the Secretariat of the International Plant Protection Convention.

Direct, timely and accurate feedback from you on the obstacles faced by blockchain technology is exactly the kind of information that policy-makers, regulators and government officials, and we at the WTO, need to hear about. As business practitioners and leaders, you are best placed to know what is commercially relevant to your trade.

Similarly, the design and launching of E-phyto certification has benefited from the invaluable assistance and advice of the International Grain Trade Coalition, our STDF partners, as well as the public and private sectors.

These two examples take me to my last point: you are the interested stakeholders. Your active engagement and communication are crucial because they can help ensure that coherent and targeted regulatory frameworks are developed at home and internationally. Your own assessments need to be conveyed so that the obstacles you face are understood at a political level. The formulation of government policies should not be made in the dark. Nor should international rules and procedures.

For example, the list of topics that would form the basis for intensive WTO negotiations in digital trade is far from closed. Now is the time for those in the business communities that are involved in the entire commodity supply chain to make their views known so that:

• best practices are identified in the digital environment that are compatible with the nature of your business operations,
• delays in the transmission of electronic documents are minimized, and predictability for the delivery of goods and services is enhanced;
• the flow of data crossing borders takes place in a non-discriminatory environment in terms of the application of customs duties and other potentially burdensome requirements;
• legitimate privacy, law enforcement, security and data integrity concerns are taken on board without unduly restricting e-commerce;
• the digital divide is bridged between small and big firms; developed and developing countries.

Conclusion

This is not the first time that business or farming communities are deeply involved in the design of international trade rules.  Throughout the the history of negotiations in the multilateral trading system, the expertise and advice of business has played a crucial role to identify the opportunities and challenges underpinning the services, intellectual property, investment, information technology, telecommunications and trade facilitation that affect grains trade.

Your consistent feedback will assist policy-makers, regulators and government officials to keep their eyes open and remain knowledgeable about the fundamental changes in the global economy that need to be reflected in modern areas of trade policy. This will allow your governments to upgrade the WTO rule-book and facilitate its serving trade as it evolves.

With your active support, the WTO can continue delivering the stability, predictability that all those who are engaged in trade or benefit from it require.

Thank you.

Source: wto.org

 

187/ WTO farm negotiators reopen talks on export competition and export restrictions

WTO members continued their series of thematic discussions on issues central to the farm trade negotiations at a special session of the Agriculture Committee on 15 November. Several members called for further work under the export competition pillar regarding export financing, food aid and state trading enterprises. Some members stressed the need to address market distortions arising from export restrictions and to ensure these measures do not impede delivery of food aid by international organizations. Members also discussed submissions regarding gaps between bound and applied farm tariffs and special safeguards on agricultural imports.

Export competition

Canada kicked off the discussions with a presentation outlining its views on the remaining work in this area.  For Canada, eliminating export subsidies means that WTO members must be diligent in ensuring that measures with equivalent effect are not used to circumvent the December 2015 Ministerial Decision on Export Competition, a historic agreement committing the membership to timelines for the elimination of agricultural export subsidies.

Canada emphasized the critical importance of improved transparency on export financing (which covers export credits, export credit guarantees and insurance programmes), agricultural exporting state trading enterprises (STEs) and international food aid.  Looking at confidence-building steps to be considered by members, Canada suggested reducing the current maximum limit on repayment of export financing support which, under the Nairobi Decision, is fixed at 18 months. Canada also said members should consider whether more binding disciplines are needed with regards to the operations of agricultural exporting STEs (in particular, monopoly powers and whether members should continue working on improved disciplines on international food aid, including on a possible ban on export restrictions for food aid purchases).  Small but credible steps in these areas can help move forward the agriculture negotiations overall, Canada argued.

Seventeen delegations took the floor to comment, some of them representing larger groups.  A number of members agreed that unfinished business remained or that further work was needed on the export competition pillar, with some suggesting that members try to achieve an outcome in this area by the 2020 Ministerial Conference in Astana.

However, some other members took a more cautious tone, arguing that priority should be given to the areas causing the biggest distortions in agricultural trade, most notably farm subsidies (domestic support).  Others cited the need for progress first on a permanent solution to public stockholding for food security purposes and a special safeguard mechanism for developing countries.

Export restrictions

Japan presented an overview of agricultural export restrictions (JOB/AG/149), a paper it drew up jointly with Israel, Korea, Singapore, Switzerland and Chinese Taipei.  The paper describes the situation in relation to transparency and duration of measures. Japan said export restrictions impact markets and make them more volatile by reducing supply; this has a negative impact for both importing countries in terms of higher prices and greater food supply insecurity as well as the exporting countries themselves, where some groups lose income from the restrictions.

Singapore presented a paper on the impact of export prohibitions or restrictions on foodstuffs purchased for non-commercial humanitarian purposes by the UN’s World Food Programme (WFP) (JOB/AG/148). Singapore said these prohibitions/restrictions lead to significant inefficiencies in humanitarian food assistance delivery by the WFP; the result is increased amount of time to deliver food, increased risk of food being lost due to longer transportation, increased administrative, transportation and distribution costs, and ultimately fewer beneficiaries receiving food from the WFP.

More than a dozen members took the floor to comment on the joint paper presented by Japan, with many agreeing that export restrictions can impact food security in countries dependent on food imports; they also agreed that more transparency was needed. One member however said that the problem was not export restrictions per se, which may be needed to provide stability and predictability in domestic food supply, but the illegitimate use of such measures.

A similar number of members took the floor to comment on Singapore’s submission, with most of those agreeing on the need to ensure international food agencies can continue to carry out their relevant work.  One member however cautioned that a balance needed to be struck between the need to restrict food exports in a given situation and overcoming any negative effects these restrictions may have on the supply of food aid.

In a general discussion on export restrictions which took place immediately thereafter, some developing countries expressed their concern about any new requirements or restrictions which could limit their policy space.  One member said export restrictions were a vital policy instrument for handling sudden shocks in domestic food supply. The critical importance of this discussion for net food importing developing countries was also highlighted.

Market access

The United States made a presentation on its paper regarding tariff implementation issues, and specifically on bound tariffs — the maximum tariffs permitted in each member’s WTO schedule of commitments — versus the tariffs actually applied on farm imports (JOB/AG/147).  According to the US, the gap between bound and applied tariffs – commonly referred to as “water” – is prevalent in all major agricultural product groups.  Overall, the average WTO bound rate on agricultural goods is 54.7% compared to a 14.5% average applied rate. The gap is greater in developing countries and smaller trading economies than developed members and larger trading economies, and greater for certain product sectors such as beverages and tobacco, dairy products and sugar.

The US said that further information and understanding of the situation is necessary and it called on the WTO Secretariat to compile more complete figures; WTO members should also ensure that all market access-related notifications and submissions are brought up to date.

Fifteen members took the floor to comment; while several questioned the methodologies used by the US, many welcomed the paper as a positive contribution for possible future market access negotiations.  Three members cited specific examples where large gaps between bound and applied tariffs have led to recent sudden and sharp changes in tariffs on certain farm imports, to the detriment of their producers.

Members that joined the WTO after its creation in 1995 noted that average farm tariffs for those party to the original General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade were four times greater than what the newer members were obliged to accept in order to become WTO members; any outcome on market access must result in a better balancing of commitments, they said.

Questioned about its intentions regarding the paper, the US said the purpose was to provide a comprehensive understanding of the current landscape with regards to market access, not to identify specific areas for negotiation.

The Russian Federation noted that it had submitted a series of follow-up questions to members with regards to a paper it presented in October on the current state of play in the usage of special agricultural safeguards (SSG) and its effects on exports of WTO members (JOB/AG/145). Russia asked members applying SSGs to provide additional information on their practices on how (or whether) they exempt trade under free trade agreements (FTAs) and tariff rate quota (TRQ) commitments from SSG application.

One member shared its practice in not exempting FTA trade from the application of SSGs and not applying SSGs on importers holding a TRQ licence. Another member expressed interest in examining the linkage between SSGs and TRQs.

Next steps

The chair of the agriculture negotiations, Ambassador John Ronald Dipchandra (Deep) Ford of Guyana, said the next meeting of agriculture negotiators on 6-7 December would take stock of the progress to date and prepare the way forward in 2019. The chair said he would present his own views on the current state of play and suggestions on the way forward at  that meeting.

The chair said he intended to move towards a problem-solving mode and to intensify and deepen the discussions next year, with special sessions taking place monthly and with topic by topic small group meetings between these sessions.

More information on the agriculture negotiations is available here.

A guide to some of the terms used in this news item is available here.

Source: wto.org

 

188/ Guidance on integrated management system standards just updated

The number of management systems has risen dramatically in recent years, reflecting the needs and demands of more and more organizations looking to improve their performance across a wide range of areas and sectors. And most companies have more than one. ISO’s useful guide to integrating management system standards – whether they be from ISO or not – has just been updated.

From improving quality to energy efficiency, environmental performance or even road traffic, the use of management systems has grown rapidly in recent years, reflecting increasingly complex operating environments and contexts. The quest for continual improvement and sustained performance has prompted the need for a handbook to help guide organizations through effective management system design that is agile and integrated, to respond and grow.

ISO 9001 (quality), ISO 50001 (energy) and ISO 14001 (environment) are some of ISO’s most well-known and used management system standards (MSS), amongst more than 60 that make up the ISO portfolio, which also covers areas such as organizational health and safety (ISO 45001), food safety (ISO 22000), education (ISO 21001) and information technology (ISO 27001). Unlike other types of standards, MSSs have an impact on many different aspects and functions of an organization and, increasingly, companies have more than one.

First published in 2008, The integrated use of management system standards brings together international expertise, diverse industry case extracts and implementations, and best-practice guidance on integrating management system standards. It has just been updated to reflect the vast number of changes to both ISO and non-ISO standards.

Michael McLean, Convenor of the ISO working group that developed the handbook, said having effectively integrated management systems can assist an organization in a variety of ways.

“Many organizations benefit from multiple management systems to help them ensure their systems and processes are in line with their objectives and help them maintain their business model through ever-changing environments,” he said.

“This handbook provides a practical guide for organizations to effectively align their management systems with their strategies, plans and operations. It features illustrations as applied in real-world organizational contexts and relevant case studies, all of which can be applied to all kinds of sectors and industries. It is applicable to any kind of MSS, not just those published by ISO.”

The integrated use of management system standards was developed by the ISO technical committee ISO/TMB/JTCG-TF 05, IUMSS Handbook revision. It is available from your national ISO member or through the ISO Store.

Source: iso.org

 

189/ The challenges facing APEC leaders

The Asia-Pacific Economic Conference (APEC) Summit is being held at a time of enormous global and regional geopolitical uncertainty.

It is a tumultuous time for the region, and APEC 2018 provides a real opportunity for leaders to agree on the kinds of reforms that could make a positive difference. Will the host, Papua New Guinea, be able to steer the summit to achieve its stated goals?

On Saturday, leaders from 21 APEC member countries will meet in Port Moresby, following this week’s business leaders’ forum and a year of preparatory meetings. According to its website, APEC’s overall goal is “to create greater prosperity for the people of the region by promoting balanced, inclusive, sustainable, innovative, and secure growth by accelerating regional economic integration.”

It aims to do so by, inter alia, liberalising and facilitating trade and investment at the border, across the border, and behind the border; reducing the costs of cross-border trade to assist businesses; and simplifying regulatory and administrative processes.

APEC decisions are reached by consensus and commitments are made on a voluntary basis.

Yet tensions between the US and China are making it increasingly difficult for Asia-Pacific countries to maintain what has always been a delicate diplomatic balancing act – especially for those concerned about or with competing claims in the South China Sea.

Several countries such as Sri Lanka, Indonesia, and Malaysia have been reconsidering existing infrastructure deals with China. President Rodrigo Duterte in the Philippines uses language emphasising his meek and humble attitude towards China, and working on cooperation in the South China Sea. At the same time, he maintains robust security cooperation with the US.

The dynamics between the US and China are also affecting how countries in the region interact with each other, and how they view regional and global institutions. The apparent thaw in relations between China and Japan is a good example. Fears over deepening global trade tensions are further encouraging some countries, such as South Korea, Thailand, and Indonesia, to actively consider joining the revamped Trans-Pacific Partnership. Concern over how to mitigate the fallout of the trade war has galvanised increased interest in the China-backed Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership.

The rising US dollar, which has affected economies like Indonesia, and the existential crisis of adapting to and mitigating climate change also loom menacingly on the horizon for many Asia-Pacific countries.

In addition to global and regional instability, like much of the rest of the world, countries in the Asia-Pacific are also facing profound domestic challenges, many of which are related to the regional or global trends that are outside of their control. And, like the rest of the world, leaders in these countries are balancing political and economic demands as they make their policy decisions.

For example, as the ANU’s Stephen Howes points out, in PNG, the “Taskforce Sweep” campaign has been abolished, economic growth has stalled, one in two children under the age of five are stunted from malnutrition, and eradicable diseases like polio that were virtually wiped out are now returning.

In this tense geopolitical environment, how will the host country lead participants to negotiate the kinds of policies that can lead to positive outcomes? PNG will need to steer participants towards a focus on broader and longer-term agendas for the region as a whole.

There are also significant politics around how the agenda and discussions at the summit will be steered. As is well known, US President Trump and Russian President Putin are not attending – reportedly to the great dissapointment of the host country. China’s President Xi Jinping, however, is arriving a day early, clearly demonstrating China’s interest in the region. Australia, too, is, of course, trying to ensure its voice is heard.

This year’s APEC provides a real opportunity for Asia-Pacific leaders to grapple with issues that are affecting countries all around the world. The PNG Summit could be where Asia-Pacific leaders get together to craft solutions that are designed to promote sustainable and equitable growth and development according to the specific circumstances of the Asia-Pacific region. Ideally, Pacific island countries will work together to ensure their collective and individual interests are best represented.

There are some fairly uncontroversial economic policy reforms that many accept will – if implemented properly – be able to make a real and positive impact. But as this summit shows, it is the tumultuous swirl of geopolitics that surrounds the economics that will really determine the region’s future. The host nation PNG has its work cut out for it in the days ahead.

Source: Iowy Institute

 

Ngày 16/11

190/ Weighing it all up

We’ve been using measurement since the beginning of time. Today, the world’s scientific community is making a fundamental change in how we measure things by redefining the kilogramme, the kelvin, the ampere and the mole, four of the seven base units of the International System of Units (SI). An ISO and IEC series of standards plays a crucial role.

Did you know that the humble kilogramme has, until now, been defined by an object that weighs… one kilogramme? And that the measurement unit of temperature – the kelvin – is based on an intrinsic property of water? While this has worked for centuries, the world’s leading scientists have found that, over time, these definitions have been shown to not be 100 % stable. So, today, they formally agreed that all of the measurement units will now be defined by constants of nature rather than physical objects – the biggest change in international measurement since 1875.

The definitions are consecrated in the scientific community’s bible, the SI Brochure, published by the Bureau International des Poids et Mesures (BIPM), in which the ISO and IEC 80000 series of standards, Quantities and units – published respectively by ISO and the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) – is referenced. The series provides the internationally agreed names, definitions and symbols of quantities used in science and engineering, and their corresponding units, thus guaranteeing a unified language and reducing the risk of error.

Measurement scientists from more than 60 countries met today at the General Conference on Weights and Measures (CGPM) held in Versailles, France, to ratify the redefinitions of the SI.

Also during the conference, ISO Secretary-General Sergio Mujica signed an updated joint declaration on metrological traceability to demonstrate ISO’s commitment to continued cooperation with the BIPM, OIML (International Organization of Legal Metrology) and ILAC (International Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation). The declaration stated that international consistency and comparability can only be guaranteed if measurement results are metrologically traceable to internationally recognized references, and thus is fundamental to all four organizations.

Commenting from the four-day conference, Mujica said the decision to redefine four of the seven base units for the SI was an historical breakthrough.

“The adoption of standardized measurements is what has created the global economy – impacting every aspect of science and engineering,” he said.

“This redefinition means we no longer have to rely on physical objects for measuring accurately. This will have a huge impact on the world by accelerating innovation and reducing the costs of technological development. It will advance measurement science for generations to come.”

The ISO and IEC 80000 series of standards underpins the international harmonization of terms, definitions and symbols of quantities and units used in science and engineering and thus guarantees a unified language and writing of formulae. It reduces the risk of error and facilitates and encourages communication between scientists and engineers of many disciplines.

Referenced in the SI Brochure, the series consists of 13 different parts, featuring 11 from ISO and two from the IEC. It gives terms, definitions, recommended symbols, units and any other important information related to quantities used in science, engineering, metrology and industry. Moreover, it provides a reference for those writing scientific or technical documents, textbooks, standards and guides.

The revision of the ISO 80000 series has been occurring simultaneously with the revision of the SI Brochure over the past few years and is expected to be complete early in 2019.

The ISO and IEC 80000 series is available from your national ISO member or through the ISO Store.

Source: iso.org

 

191/ Launch of the WTO Data portal

The WTO launched on Friday 16th November its new online database. The WTO Data portal brings together a wide range of statistical indicators on international trade and other WTO-related information.

Users can now find in one database both annual and short-term (quarterly and monthly) data on merchandise trade and trade in commercial services as well as information on bound, applied and preferential tariffs, non-tariff measures and Foreign Affiliate Trade Statistics.

The interface retains data retrieval functionalities from current databases while adding new features such as pre-built indicators to ease data selection.  Users are now also able to customize the data display in rows and columns.

The following resources are provided to facilitate the use of the database:

• The User Guide may be consulted for quick assistance on the functionalities.
• The Database Inventory gives an overview of the full list of indicators available in the database, with their frequency of update and coverage details.
• The Technical Notes include detailed information on indicators’ definitions, sources and compilation methods.

The WTO Data portal replaces the current Statistics Database. Economy-based profiles previously accessible as links on the former Statistics Database can be accessed directly at the links below:

• Trade Profiles
• Tariff Profiles
• Aid for Trade Profiles

Source: wto.org

 

192/ DG Azevêdo: we must turn the crisis of multilateralism into an opportunity to strengthen it

Addressing a conference in Paris on 16 November 2018, entitled ‘A WTO Fit for the 21st Century: What Needs to Change’, Director-General Roberto Azevêdo argued that the international community must strive to “turn the current crisis of multilateralism into an opportunity to save it, and strengthen it for the generations to come.” During his visit to Paris DG Azevêdo held bilateral meetings with France’s Minister of Economy and Finance, Bruno Le Maire; Minister of State, attached to the Minister for Europe and Foreign Affairs, Jean-Baptiste Lemoyne; and EU Trade Commissioner Cecilia Malmström. The three were also taking part in the conference. DG Azevêdo’s full speech is available below.

Ministre Le Maire,
Commissaire Malmström,
Mesdames et Messieurs,

Bonjour. C’est un grand plaisir de vous rejoindre aujourd’hui et de discuter de l’avenir de l’Organisation mondiale du commerce. Et si vous me le permettez, je vais passer maintenant à l’anglais.

Any discussion about the future must begin with a clear understanding of the past.

On Sunday, on the centenary of the Armistice which brought the First World War to a close, I was proud to take part in the first Paris Peace Forum. It was surely right that the international community marked this solemn date with a renewed pledge to peaceful cooperation between nations, for the good of humankind.

At the commemoration, President Macron spoke of:

“…un monde où la parole des hommes doit parler plus fort que le fracas des armes, où l’esprit de conciliation l’emporte sur la tentation du cynisme, où des instances et des forums permettent aux ennemis d’hier d’engager le dialogue et d’en faire le ciment de l’entente, le gage d’une harmonie enfin possible.”

The multilateral trading system, like other international bodies, was born out of the conflicts of the early 20th century, with the aim of making this vision a reality.

It was created to advance the cause of co-operation between nations, to preserve peace and stability, and thereby to support growth, jobs and development – the essential conditions for economic wellbeing.

This mission is just as important today as it was back then. Co-operation, under shared rules, through the multilateral system, remains the best way of delivering it.

So let me take a moment to underline the value of what we have today.

The trading system may not be perfect, but it is essential and it has proved very effective.

The WTO now covers around 98% of global trade. It has overseen a historic opening of markets and integration of economies. The negotiations that led to the WTO resulted in global tariff reductions of around 40 per cent.

The system has provided stability and predictability in global trade.

It held firm even during the financial crisis, when, despite negative expectations, there was no outbreak of protectionism.

People often cite the lack of progress in many areas of WTO negotiations. This is valid. We are working to change this, and we have recently made very significant progress.

But if we focus only on that, then we are missing the fundamental point about the value of the system.

It provides the constitution for global trade, establishing shared principles which underpin trading practices around the world. It provides the only global forum for discussion and debate on trade issues. It provides the mechanisms for countries to monitor and review each other’s trade policies. And it provides the means to settle disputes when they arise.

Yes, we must keep improving the system and advancing new deals. But let’s not forget that the system represents the very foundation on which world trade is built today.

And of course this is brought into sharp focus by the current circumstances.

New tariffs announced so far this year cover hundreds of billions of dollars of imports. Further measures have been proposed.

A continued escalation of tensions would pose real risks.

Our economists have been assessing a variety of possible scenarios to develop this picture, including the impact of a full, global trade war.

By this we mean a breakdown in international trade cooperation, where instead of tariffs being set cooperatively in the WTO, they are set unilaterally.

Under this more mercantilist, nationalist mindset, tariffs would rise sharply.

We would see a reduction of global trade by around 17%.

This would cause a very significant slowdown in GDP growth, and bring major disruptions for workers, firms, and communities as they adjust to this new reality. Potentially millions of workers would need to find new jobs; firms would be looking for new products and markets; and communities for new sources of growth.

Clearly, we can’t afford to go down this road.

There is a responsibility on the whole international community to help ease tensions, in the interests of all of our citizens. We need to see more dialogue – both bilaterally and through the WTO.

In fact, this situation is putting a new focus on the multilateral trading system as a place where solutions may be found.

At the root of the current tensions is the argument that the trading system is allowing distortive trade practices to go unchecked. Therefore, the argument goes, the system needs to change to be more responsive to such measures.

Some see this as an opportunity to update the organization and revamp the trading system for a new century. Others have doubts about this emerging discussion and would prefer to focus on completing longstanding work.

Whatever the precise arguments, there’s no question that this focus on WTO ‘reform’ or ‘modernization’ is growing rapidly. A serious and substantive debate is beginning to emerge, driven by leaders around the world.

Before I go into detail on all of this, I think it’s useful at this point to consider the context in which this debate is playing out.

In some senses we are still in the long tail of the crisis of 2008. Many countries are still dealing with its after-effects.

At the same time we are experiencing a new era in the form of the 4th industrial revolution, as new technologies reshape many aspects of our lives and the economy – including the workplace.

These historic events have combined to foster a sense of fear and uncertainty about the future, creating an upsurge in anti-trade and even anti-foreign sentiment.

One important element here is the perception that trade is taking people’s jobs and sending them overseas. In reality the driving force behind job losses is innovation and higher productivity enabled by technology. 80% of jobs lost are because of these forces – not because of trade.

Regardless of the causes, it’s clear that people feel left behind by economic change.

This requires real action – and much of this will be about domestic policies on education, skills, adjustment support and other labour market reforms, to help workers adapt to the new economic realities.

But no one is going to be helped by choking off trade. Quite the opposite. If we turn our backs on trade and the outside world, in the end everybody loses.

So while members debate WTO reform, we need to keep a proper perspective on all of these issues.

The momentum behind this conversation is growing.

Reform was at the top of the agenda at the G20 trade ministers meeting in Argentina back in September. The ministers issued a communique where they committed to work on ways of improving the WTO to ensure that it can meet “current and future challenges”. There was also a very constructive ministerial gathering convened by the Canadian Government in Ottawa in October.

WTO reform has been raised with me in my interactions with a variety of leaders – including President Macron. And no doubt it will be a key issue when we meet at the G20 summit in Buenos Aires in two weeks’ time. That meeting will be an important moment.

On the substance, a variety of initiatives and meetings are being prepared, and a range of priorities have been suggested by WTO members, including by the EU, US, China, Japan, Canada and many others. These priorities include, for example:

• resolving disputes and reaching agreements more rapidly and effectively,
• addressing a variety of trade distorting practices that are either not covered or are just partially covered by existing disciplines,
• avoiding protectionism and unilateral actions,
• advancing current work,
• and improving notifications and transparency.

These are all important issues. But at present there is no common view on whether and how they should be taken forward.

The question for today’s conference is “what needs to change?” Only the WTO members can answer this question – and all voices should be heard.

I will be supporting our members at every stage to find ways to facilitate their work and to strengthen the system for the future.

With this in mind, I’d like to share a few personal thoughts and perspectives.

First, I want to stress that even as this debate rages, there is a lot of activity already underway at the WTO – and we must not let this lapse.

For example, members are working hard to meet next year’s deadline for an agreement on fisheries subsides. This is a very important piece of work, that would deliver on a key element of the Sustainable Development Goals.

At the same time, we must continue work to advance other important and longstanding issues, such as: agriculture, food security, services and development.

And I would also note the intense activity that we are seeing from the new ‘joint initiatives’ that groups of members have launched on a range of areas of emerging economic interest. These areas include: e-commerce, investment facilitation, support for small businesses to trade, and the economic empowerment of women.

Time will tell exactly how all this work develops. Some members do not support these joint initiatives, but the proponents are building real momentum. Members themselves will decide what they want to discuss and how they want to do it.

Second, our recent experience has shown that when we have creativity and flexibility progress is possible.

We set about reviving our negotiating work in 2013 and since then members have delivered a run of deals, including:

• The Trade Facilitation Agreement.
• The expanded Information Technology Agreement.
• A range of steps on food security and in support of LDCs.
• And a deal to abolish export subsidies in agriculture.

On this last point it is worth noting that just this week, US legal commitments in the WTO have been modified to reflect their earlier undertaking to abolish their farm export subsidies. This is very welcome.

This series of agreements remains a historic achievement for WTO members. Together, the agreements constitute the biggest reforms in the global trading system in a generation. And they will have a significant economic impact.

In addition, they also provide valuable lessons on the wide range of approaches and flexibilities that are permissible under the rules of the WTO.

For example:

• We can have flexibility in substance, such as the multilateral Trade Facilitation Agreement, where each developing country may ask for technical assistance and may itself decide how fast it can implement each specific commitment.
• We can have flexibility in geometry. This is the case of the Information Technology Agreement, where only a group of members participate, but which is signed on a Most Favoured Nation basis – so the zero tariffs apply for all members.
• And we can also have initiatives like the Government Procurement Agreement (which applies only to the signatories).

The WTO has 164 members – all are different sizes, with different priorities and at different stages of development.

With such a diverse membership I think the only way to advance is by being truly flexible. This may prove an important factor if the reform debate is to bear fruit.

Finally, in all of the current discussions, probably the most urgent issue facing us is the crisis in the dispute settlement system.

The specific issue here is the impasse in appointments to the Appellate Body.

This could eventually threaten the functioning of the whole dispute settlement system as we know it.

There are some signs that members are engaging more deeply here. And proposals are being brought forward. But we need to see a major shift in gears and positions if we are to make progress.

I am redoubling my own efforts in this area and I continue to urge members to do all they can to expedite this discussion and find ways forward.

This is a real systemic risk – and it demands urgent action.

This brings me back to where I started today – we have to remember the importance of the trading system, and we have to work together to strengthen and safeguard it for the future.

The generations who lived through the World Wars came to the clear conclusion that trade, under shared rules, was essential for peace and prosperity around the world.

The evidence shows that they were right.

We must turn this current crisis of multilateralism into an opportunity to save it, and strengthen it for the generations to come.

Thank you.

Source: wto.org

 

193/ WTO members adopt roadmap for reducing technical barriers to trade

breakthrough at a 14-15 November meeting of the Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) by agreeing on a list of recommendations that aim at reducing obstacles to trade and improving implementation of the WTO’s TBT Agreement. Members also discussed 62 specific trade concerns at the committee meeting, including eight new concerns. In addition, the committee welcomed a new “best practices” guide for national TBT Enquiry Points.

8th Triennial review

WTO members agreed on almost thirty recommendations that will improve the way members deal with standards, regulations and trade in the TBT committee. The triennial review recommendations are contained in G/TBT/41.

Every three years, WTO members evaluate how they are applying the TBT Agreement. The review process started in November 2017 and was driven by members’ proposals for new work relating to specific topics addressed by the committee.

The recommendations approved by members cover the following areas:

• Transparency:
• notifying final TBT regulations when adopted and making it easier to access them online;
• improving access to national websites that make available all adopted final regulations;
• notifying impact assessments conducted as part of regulatory processes;
• improving the quality of information in notifications such as the products affected, relevant documents, and international standards used as a basis for the regulations;
• enhancing coordination between regulators and TBT enquiry points, including through ePing
• Testing, inspection and certification:
• work on guidelines to help regulators when choosing and designing conformity assessment procedures;
• find better ways to avoid duplicating procedures or restricting trade in the area of conformity assessment.
• Standards: Members agreed to hold a workshop on the role of gender in the development of standards. They also agreed to discuss best practices on incorporating standards by reference in regulation, taking account of existing guidelines and policy considerations.
• Marking and labelling: Members agreed to discuss how to facilitate compliance with marking and labelling requirements for products.
• Technical assistance: Members agreed to explore the feasibility of either expanding the present Standards and Trade Development Facility (STDF) to encompass measures covered by the TBT Agreement, or setting up a separate and dedicated TBT development facility
• Organizing debates in the committee: Members agreed to apply new procedures for raising specific trade concerns (STCs), on a trial basis, in order to give members more time to engage with each other and domestic stakeholders in advance of meetings

Specific trade concerns

WTO members discussed a total of 62 specific trade concerns, 8 of which were new. Below is a summary of the new concerns. A full list of the trade concerns is available here. For more information on previous trade concerns see the 19-21 June 2018 and 20-22 March 2018 meeting summaries.

European Union — Rules and procedures on compliance

China and Canada expressed concerns with proposed changes to EU rules which require exporters to identify or employ economic operators located in the EU that can provide compliance information, and to display their name and contact information on product labels. Canada and China said that this requirement would create financial and administrative burdens for exporters, particularly for small and medium sized businesses (SMEs) and the e-commerce sector. In addition, China urged the EU to keep market surveillance under the control of government authorities, and not to extend it to non-governmental bodies.

The EU said product safety and compliance is an important issue for consumers and that the proposal aims at increasing consumer trust and confidence in products bought online. The proposal introduces an updated framework for market surveillance to ensure better effectiveness in light of the growing importance of e-commerce. The EU said the proposal is under legislative discussions, and that it will keep WTO members informed of developments.

Chile — Description and labelling of milk products deriving from milk

The EU and US expressed concern with Chile’s draft law which does not allow cheeses made from powdered milk or recombined/reconstituted milk to be labelled as “cheese”, but to be labelled differently. According to the EU, this is not in line with the Codex General Standard for Cheese, CODEX STAN 283-1978. The EU said that changing labels specifically for the Chilean market would put an unnecessary burden on industries and could adversely impact trade.

Chile said the draft law is under debate in its parliament. Chile said it would keep members informed of any updates through the notification process.

Russian Federation – Labelling of various products including clothes, shoes and tobacco.

The EU expressed its concern over a new Russian measure imposing mandatory labelling on a wide range of products, including tobacco, perfumes, clothing including footwear and pharmaceutical products. The EU urged Russia to notify the measure to the WTO and to allow members to comment. Information, they said, is needed about the means of compliance so that industry could adapt.

Russia said it published a list of products for which the identification and traceability labelling will apply and the date for the introduction of this system to different products. According to Russia, the purpose of this measure is to improve trademark protection and to protect sensitive products against counterfeiting. Russia said this measure does not fall under the scope of the TBT Agreement.

Brazil – Standards of wine and derivates of grapes and wine products.

The EU expressed concerns with an amended regulation on identity and quality standards for wines. According to the EU, this regulation may cause future disruptions of EU wine exports to Brazil due to differences with standards adopted by the Paris-based International Organisation of Vine and Wine (OIV). The EU invited Brazil to consider the recommendations of the OIV when preparing its regulations on wine and to accept imported wine made according to OIV-authorized practices.

Brazil said its legislation was developed in accordance the provisions of the TBT Agreement, and that several opportunities for comment were provided. According to Brazil, comments received from the EU in the development of the measure were mostly taken on board in its final version. Brazil said that OIV standards were used as a basis for developing the measure, except when these standards were ineffective or inappropriate for the fulfilment of the legitimate objectives of the measure. Brazilian authorities also gave a 360-day transition period to allow industry time to adapt.

Chile – Chemical substances and mixtures

Mexico expressed its concern with a draft regulation under development in Chile establishing criteria for the classification, labelling and risk assessment of hazardous chemical substances and mixtures.  Issues of specific concern included a lack of clarity regarding information on compliance, and the alignment of the measure with international standards (the Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals – or GHS). Mexico asked Chile to provide the technical justification and scientific basis for the measure.

Chile noted that the regulation is not yet in force, and that the responsible regulatory agency was in the process of responding to comments received form domestic and international stakeholders. Chile also said it would keep the committee informed on further developments.

Egypt – Halal requirements for poultry parts and offal

The US said that its exporters of poultry parts and offal are unable to access the Egyptian market, despite demonstrated assurance that they comply with Egypt’s Halal and food safety standards.

Egypt responded that it is trying to strike  a balance between verifying the compliance of imported goods with Halal requirements, and ensuring this does not impose excessive trade burdens on its partners. Egypt said that its authorities are facing difficulties in verifying the compliance of poultry parts with Halal requirements, including identifying the source of all imported parts and the sourcing partners. In this context, Egypt is limiting the importation to whole poultry that fully compliance with Halal requirements in order to protect consumers.

GCC – Restrictions on hazardous substances in electronic and electrical devices and equipment

The US asked for clarification from members of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) regarding a draft regulation aiming at restricting the use of certain hazardous substances in electrical and electronic equipment. The US asked if each GCC member will implement the regulation separately or simultaneously, and whether the GCC Standardization Organization (GSO) technical regulation will replace national regulations currently in place, such as in the United Arab Emirates. In addition, the US inquired about the applicable conformity assessment procedures, and whether these would be recognized by other GCC countries. The EU expressed interested in the questions raised by the US.

Kuwait, on behalf of the GCC, said that the regulation is still under discussion and that the GCC and GSO will coordinate and respond to all questions raised.

Dominican Republic – Regulation on cosmetic and hygiene products

Mexico and the US expressed concern with requirements imposed by the Dominican Republic on cosmetic and hygiene products which they believe are more trade restrictive than necessary. Mexico encouraged the Dominican Republic to notify this technical draft regulation to the committee and allow for comments, and to provide the scientific basis for the measure.

The Dominican Republic said that the draft regulation covers a number of aspects such as production, quality control, marketing, storage and sale of these products to ensure that they comply with health requirements and laws in the country. This proposal was subject to national consultation and was published on the web portal of the Ministry of Health, where a number of comments were received from national and international stakeholders. The draft regulation will be revised based on those comments and will be notified to the WTO afterwards, the Dominican Republic said.

TBT Enquiry Point Guide Launched

Over 2,750 notifications related to product requirements have already been circulated in 2018, a process involving 80% of member TBT Enquiry Points. Improving the functioning of Enquiry Points is key to making transparency work.

At the committee meeting, the TBT Enquiry Point Guide was launched. The guide was developed in response to a request by the TBT Committee at the end of 201, that the WTO secretariat prepare a guide on best practices for enquiry points. In 2016, the secretariat conducted an online survey for enquiry points to collect information on members’ experiences. The results of the survey formed the basis for this guide. Input was received from 66 members and one acceding country.

The guide compiles practical information on how Enquiry Points are performing their tasks and overcoming everyday challenges, drawing from the practices of members It is structured according to the tasks that an enquiry point or other governmental entity might normally undertake when implementing the TBT Agreement’s transparency provisions. The guide includes insights ranging from different models for coordination with domestic stakeholders to useful tips on how to complete the TBT notification format. This new tool supports the WTO’s TBT training and capacity-building activities for enhancing the capacity of Enquiry Points.

ePing update: notifications alert system

The committee received an update on ePing, the notification alert system for TBT and sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) measures. ePing enables swift access to regulatory information and facilitates dialogue among the public and private sector in addressing potential trade problems at an early stage.  Since its launch 2 years ago, over 5,000 users from 169 countries have registered on ePing.

Source: wto.org

 

Ngày 19/11

194/ APEC should uphold role in regional, global connectivity: PM

Prime Minister Nguyen Xuan Phuc urged the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum to carry forward its role in driving regional and global connectivity while addressing a working session within the 26th APEC Economic Leaders’ Meeting on November 18.

APEC should continue to send out the message on its pioneer role in supporting an open, rule-based, transparent and non-discriminatory multilateral trading system, along with further promoting the central role of the World Trade Organisation (WTO), he said at the session themed “Connecting for inclusive growth through digital future”.

In the context of unprecedented challenges that threaten the stability of the global trade system, each APEC member should display its strong resolve, he said, stressing the acceleration of the liberalisation of trade and investment, and respect for international orders based on law as well as the role of global institutions, especially the WTO.

The Vietnamese PM suggested stepping up the structural reform in order to narrow gaps among economies and integrating the Renewed APEC Agenda for Structural Reform in the agenda of APEC members, thus ensuring benefits brought about by innovation and technology will reach all citizens and businesses, while supporting disadvantaged groups and small- and medium-sized enterprises.

APEC needs to push ahead with the effective implementation of the initiative on cross-border e-commerce, and internet and digital economy, he added.

Besides, APEC should invest in digital infrastructure, speed up digital transformation towards comprehensiveness, trustworthiness and safety, focusing on digital trade infrastructure and fin-tech, connect innovative and creative centres, promote startups and upgrade organisation and administration skills, he proposed.

PM Phuc appealed to developed economies to assist developing ones in structural transformation, administration capacity building and technological application to improve connectivity ability in the digital era.

He informed APEC leaders that Vietnam had approved the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) on November 12, noting that it is a specific step forward for the country to participate deeper in the global value chain.

The PM also highlighted Vietnam’s efforts in economic reform, growth model transformation and improvement of business environment, personnel quality and social welfare.

At the session, the APEC leaders reached consensus on the digital economy action programme, and agreed to strengthen cooperation in capacity building, skill development and narrowing digital gaps.

They emphasised the participation of all social elements in the digital economy, technological application, innovation and creation for sustainable and quality growth.

The leaders also committed to accelerating the completion of Bogor Goals by 2020 and the implementation of the APEC Connectivity Blueprint by 2025, gearing towards the Free Trade Area of the Asia-Pacific (FTAAP).

Most of them showed their support for the rule-based, transparent, non-discriminatory and open multilateral trading system with the WTO playing the central role.

However, there still remained major gaps in viewpoints of some members on issues regarding trade and the multilateral trading system.

Also on November 18, PM Phuc delivered a speech at another working session on promoting inclusive growth in the digital economy, in which he underlined the urgent need to spur inclusive growth amidst unstable and uneven growth of the global economy.

It is time for APEC to take the lead in boosting inclusive and creative growth in Asia-Pacific, creating momentum for sustainable development globally and the implementation of the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), he said.

The PM suggested APEC take the pioneer role in incubating innovative and creative initiatives, thus turning Asia-Pacific into a global technological centre.

At the same time, APEC should increase cooperation programmes on structural and growth model reform, the improvement of innovative and competitive capacity of economies, the promotion of innovative startups, the building of innovative and creative ecosystem in Asia-Pacific.

The PM held that the APEC members need to utilise great opportunities generated by the digital era, put people at the centre of development, and support vulnerable groups, especially women, girls and people with disabilities, in accessing digital technology, adapting to changes and coping with risks.

He called on APEC to step up gender inclusion, create favourable conditions for female entrepreneurs, increase women’s economic empowerment and set up a network of APEC female entrepreneurs.

APEC should contribute more to efforts to counter global challenges, especially food security, he said, stressing the need to materialise APEC action plans on food security and climate change, and rural and urban area development, invest in infrastructure, develop smart agriculture and manage natural resources sustainably.

The PM urged APEC to help its developing members apply high technologies in risk control, early warning and post-natural disaster rehabilitation.

Vietnam is building a growth-facilitating Government, with attention paid to sustainable and inclusive growth, he said, adding that the country has encouraged startup spirit, innovation and creation, and worked to ensure social welfare, protect the environment and implement the national strategy on the fourth Industrial Revolution.

Vietnam will continue to accompany other APEC members in efforts towards a community which is economically dynamic, socially inclusive, and stable in terms of security, whilst truly working for the people and businesses, PM Phuc said.

Source: VNA

 

195/ DDG Wolff: Maintaining and improving the multilateral trading system is vitally important

Speaking at the UK Trade Forum in London on 19 November, Deputy Director-General Alan Wolff said: “There has not been as much interest in improving the multilateral trading system in a generation, not since the mid-1990s when the WTO was created.” He highlighted that the interest lies in making positive changes to monitoring and implementing WTO agreements, rulemaking and dispute settlement. Each and every WTO member needs to make a net positive contribution to keep the multilateral trading system, the WTO, relevant and effective, he stressed. This is what he said :

This talk is based on my experiences.  Of this approach Somerset Maugham wrote:

Fact is a poor story-teller. It starts a story at haphazard, generally long before the beginning, rambles on inconsequently and tails off, leaving loose ends hanging about, without a conclusion.  It works up to an interesting situation, and then it leaves it in the air to follow an issue that has nothing to do with the point; it has no sense of climax, and whittles away its dramatic effects in irrelevance.

I will try to avoid some of these pitfalls to the extent possible in my narrative.

I will start by stating my conclusion:  I am optimistic about the future of the WTO and the multilateral trading system that it seeks to manage.   The fundamental interests of all WTO members require a positive outcome.

My view is grounded in the WTO’s 11th Ministerial Conference held in Buenos Aires this last December.  Most came away disappointed.  I had the opposite reaction.  Several important things happened at Buenos Aires.  For one thing, the United States, reputed to have turned its back on the trading system, attended and contributed.  This was not a foregone conclusion given pronouncements from the new U.S. Administration about its preference for bilateral agreements.  And importantly, the U.S. Trade Representative told his fellow trade ministers that the United States was committed to the WTO while also specifying needed reforms that in several respects were concerns that were shared by other members.

The second positive element was that groups of members accounting for over three-quarters of the world economy announced that they would move forward to consider how best to expand the scope of the WTO to address new subjects of importance, for example E-commerce, investment, and domestic regulation of services.  Similarly, groups of Members also said that they would work on making the trading system more inclusive, regardless of the size of any entity engaged in international trade, no matter how small, and that will allow more women to participate in trade to reap its benefits.

In Buenos Aires, Japan, the European Union and the United States announced that they were joining together to propose ways to deepen the substantive rules of the trading system to address under-regulated measures that affect trade, such as industrial subsidies, the problem of excess capacity, the role of state-owned enterprises and concerns over transfers of technology.

While not all WTO members see a need for change of the kind foreseen in the various joint initiatives, others see these efforts as being initiated none too soon.  This is a time of testing for the world trading system that is different in degree and kind from any other in the post-World War II era.  International trade relations are in more turmoil than they have been since the creation of the multilateral trading system seventy years ago.

Reading the current headlines here in London, I am struck by the parallels between the current crises affecting the WTO and Brexit.  Both occurred through the ballot box — Brexit occurred through a targeted referendum; the election of Donald Trump through a presidential election.  Neither vote was just about trade, but both profoundly affect their national trade policies.  Both resulted in formal government actions to cancel a major trade agreement – the single market, in the case of the UK and the Trans Pacific Partnership in the case of the U.S.  Both votes were sold in part on the basis of a call for new bilateral agreements.  The votes were expressions of nationalism, with more than a tinge of populism.  In the aftermath of the votes, it became clear that there was widespread public concern that the existing economic system was not providing hoped-for benefits for all.

I leave it to this audience to determine the odds on how Brexit turns out.  I will confine myself to looking at the future of the WTO.

It will take some effort on the part of a considerable number of WTO Members to deliver as bright a future as I believe possible for the WTO and the multilateral trading system.  One major challenge is that the role of the United States at the WTO changed:  It no longer views itself as being the primary steward of the world trading system.  It expects more of the burden to be taken up by other major trading partners, including the European Union.  Success will also require that Japan, China and the pro-trade middle countries join in.  All have a stake in a successful outcome.

While this adjustment to new circumstances is beginning to take shape, global trade news is dominated by stories of increased tariffs, generally headlined as trade wars – increased U.S. tariffs on steel and on aluminum, the retaliatory tariffs on U.S. exports in response; increases in U.S. tariffs on a range of Chinese imports into the United States, and the retaliation in kind imposed on U.S. exports to China.  No WTO member with trade affected by increased tariffs sees the measures as being legitimate.  With respect to the latest round of U.S.-China tariff increases, there is, as far as I am aware, no attempt by either country even to justify the measures under any WTO rule.

And there may be more trade restrictions to come:  Further rounds of tariffs on the part of both China and the United States are threatened.  In addition, the U.S. is investigating whether automobiles — a very substantial portion of Canadian, Mexican, Japanese and European trade with the United States — are a threat to U.S. national security.

Add to this litany of pressures on the system one more:  The WTO’s dispute settlement system is under siege.  The U.S. will not allow vacancies to be filled in the Appellate Body.  Absent a solution, the WTO’s dispute settlement system, in its present form, will cease to exist.  Were litigants, frustrated by the lack of an enforceable response after winning an adjudication to turn to self-help as a remedy, every case could end up with exchanges of retaliatory trade measures.  The result would not be dispute settlement but numerous outbreaks of fresh trade hostilities.

A casual critic of the WTO might readily conclude that the organization was either ill-designed or that it was being overwhelmed by current events, or both, and that it was headed toward assuming a vegetative state, albeit one in which there was still a lot of talk taking place in countless meetings with no major outcomes.

The reality is far different.  Most of world trade is still conducted within the rules.   The current trade measures, while substantial, are exceptions to a functioning world trading system. The work in the regular WTO committees continues — it is actually thriving.  For example, assuring that trade is not strangled by the imposition of discriminatory and burdensome standards – a far more effective means to prevent trade from crossing borders than are tariffs – is essential work.  Moreover, upon examination, one would also find that all bilateral and regional agreements rely for their foundation on the WTO rules.

Chinese and Indian mythology places the entire world on the back of a giant turtle.  Not what we at the WTO might have chosen as an image for the organization, but in some ways it suits.  Slow moving perhaps, but stable, supporting the international trading system, and up to the task of bearing great weight.   Since we are all concerned with the health of the turtle, we need to take a closer look at its prognosis.

It is increasingly and perhaps glaringly clear that the system needs updating, and it needs stronger support from its Members and from the chief beneficiaries of the system, those engaged in commerce.

Three broad outcomes of the current turmoil are possible – (1) the system becomes ineffective, (2) muddling through, or (3) change for the better.  Muddling is likely to be no more than a variant of the first outcome but that may not be immediately apparent; a turtle in slowly declining health.  I am surprised when I hear that we can get along with a system in which both the rule-making and dispute settlement machinery have seized up, with no additional means to improve compliance with the current rules.  When ancient Rome collapsed there were outposts of civilization where inhabitants thought life might continue unchanged indefinitely.  That was an illusion. This is not the time to hide WTO agreements away in the hands of monks on remote islands off the coast of Ireland, to be recovered after a period of years of if not darkness the twilight of open international trade.  It is a time to act aggressively to improve the trading system.

The risks need to be listed, evaluated and managed; the opportunities weighed and taken advantage taken of.

First, the risks:

• Risk # 1.  Escalation –Further increases in U.S. and China bilateral tariffs would further slow world economic growth, and further reconfigure global supply chains. U.S. national security action on automobiles would fracture the alliance for reform.
• Risk # 2.  Emulation – There is no evidence of other countries emulating the current combatants.  Since 2008, following the global financial crisis there has been a growing and substantial number of trade measures that observers say are restrictive.
• Risk # 3.  Rolling back global supply chains – This is currently occurring.  There will be varying effects on the trade of third countries – ranging from often negative, to large positives for a few countries.
• Risk # 4.  Inadequate collective responses – As noted, WTO members are becoming more pro-active in dealing with current realities.
• Risk # 5. A sharp decline in investor and consumer confidence.   Last Thursday, the headline in the Financial Times was that quarter on quarter the German economy, central to European growth, had shrunk, and attributed this in part to the U.S.-China reciprocal increases in tariffs.
• Risk # 6.  Decline in growth in global GDP.  Forecasts have been revised downward repeatedly in recent months.  The estimated range given by economists is a negative effect on global GDP of from under 0.5% to about 2.0%.  The actual effect is now much less for a variety of reasons:  Businesses to the extent possible re-route purchasing to other sources to escape the tariffs, exchange rates adjust in part due to trade restrictions, macroeconomic factors including national growth rates swamp trade effects, and exemptions from tariffs are granted, among other factors.
• There has not been as much interest in improving the multilateral trading system in a generation, not since the mid 1990s when the WTO was created.
• There is a recognition in governments, business and civil society, that maintaining and improving the multilateral trading system is vitally important.

The possibilities:

1. The interest lies in making positive changes in all three aspects of improving the global trade regime
2. the executive functions (monitoring and implementing the agreements),
3. rulemaking (the legislative function), e.g. first in requirements to enforce obligations for transparency; and
4. dispute settlement.

• Extension of the rules to new and vital substantive areas such as E-Commerce is now a work in progress.
• WTO reform provides one means of achieving a truce in U.S. – China exchanges of tariff increases.
• Relations can also be substantially improved between the US and EU through agreements reached concerning application of the WTO rules.

Looking forward

The systemic challenges are creating substantial opportunities, and there is a good chance the outcomes can be very positive.  As my father used to say about the process of growing old, the alternative is not good.

Robert Kagan in his recent book The Jungle Grows Back presents his view that the last seventy years during which there has been a liberal world order — characterized by the absence of global wars, an open world economy, and the improvement in the economic well-being overall of the world’s inhabitants — is an aberration.  He posits that the norm is tribalism, nationalism, international hostilities, and nations carving up and restricting international trade.  His message is not one of despair.  He simply holds that active efforts at maintenance of the system are essential, both with respect to geopolitical and economic challenges; that the garden we inhabit must be vigorously and unceasingly tended or the jungle will grow back.  And he cites evidence that this is beginning to happen now.

Governments have increased their interventions in trade. Simon Evenett’s Global Trade Alert cites nearly 12,000 government trade measures (interventions) over the last twelve months that are harmful to foreign commercial interests.  These include subsidies (excluding export subsidies), export-related measures (including subsidies), tariffs, contingent trade-protective measures, and government procurement restrictions.   Ten years ago, the number of measures was under 1400, and that was during the global financial crisis, when world economic growth was a negative 1.7%.  However one measures trade restrictions on an annual basis, they are up markedly.

At the same time forces have been mobilized to seek more open trade. Besides the reform efforts at the WTO, NAFTA is be replaced by USMCA, which once ratified keeps North American economic integration mostly on course; more exemptions from current restrictions on trade in aluminum and steel may be granted; and the U.S. Administration’s intention to enter into a series of negotiations has been notified to the Congress to achieve broad bilateral trade-liberalizing agreements between the U.S. and, respectively, Japan, the UK and the EU.           At the G-7 Summit, the U.S. President called for the seven to go to zero tariffs on all their trade.  Trade agreement initiatives not involving the United States are also moving forward on a regional basis in Asia, Africa – in the case of Africa, for the first time continent wide, and Latin America, among others, and at least some in the UK government hope that the UK will emerge from Brexit as the world’s most active seeker of bilateral free trade and similar arrangements.

There are three specific areas that deserve particular attention where changes in WTO rules can provide solutions

1. a. The WTO and U.S.-China détente

In the exchange of measures and threats between the U.S. and China, we do not know the End Game.  There is a hardline position in various parts of the Washington policy community that call for a “decoupling” of the two economies — having virtually no bilateral U.S.-China economic relationship.

What could exist is a Middle Game.  A form of détente.  Even during the Cold War between the United States and the Soviet Union, there were agreements that could be reached on some subjects, and there could be a lessening of tensions.  An interim understanding could prevent an escalation of mutual economic restrictions.  A crucial part of a package might be proposals regarding some of the issues that were announced by the U.S.-Japan-EU trilateral WTO reform effort.  Any reforms in the WTO are very likely to need the support of at least these four countries – including China — before gaining sufficient support for adoption by a consensus formed of the WTO’s Members.

The possibilities for achieving an interim solution may be evanescent, opportunities may be perishable.  Alacrity is not part of the DNA of WTO negotiations.   A decade or more is a more usual timeframe for major WTO initiatives to be formulated, ruminated, digested and end up as a final agreed product.  We have available a small fraction of that amount of time.

1. b.  WTO dispute settlement

Members may disagree on the degree of danger to world trade inherent in the loss of the WTO’s Appellate function.  We do not know whether trade rules would lose their force gradually or quickly were there no effective WTO dispute settlement.  Doing nothing would constitute taking an unnecessary increase in level of risk.  Without the rule of law, in domestic society or international relations, the end result can easily be chaos.

Progress toward a solution is uncertain.  The U.S. has listed at considerable length the problems that it sees with the AB’s conduct, decisions and processes, but it has not stipulated what would be an acceptable outcome.

If attempts to find a solution are to have a chance of success, the first step is to recognize the nature of the underlying problem.  U.S. complaints are not new, having been stated over several administrations, Democratic and Republican.  The U.S. asserts that the Appellate Body has overreached, acted beyond its authority, and in so doing has destroyed the bargain upon which binding WTO dispute settlement was in its view based: acceptance of binding dispute settlement in return for an iron-clad commitment that dispute settlement would neither add to nor subtract from the rights and obligations of the parties, particularly with respect to trade remedies. The U.S. considers that Appellate Body interpretations narrow the scope for use of trade remedies and that this has progressively eviscerated that bargain.

Most WTO Members, while having some of their own criticisms of the operation of the Appellate Body, do not agree with the United States.  They appear to be content with the resulting decisions and call for the appointment of members to fill current vacancies.

The impasse stems from deeply divided views about the appropriate mandate of the Appellate Body and the nature of the WTO dispute settlement system: is the system one similar to “a court or tribunal of judges” or is the goal of the WTO dispute settlement system more narrowly to settle disagreements and disputes, where third party adjudication is one of several means to reconcile parties’ differences.  While a greater mutual understanding of respective legal interpretations might have aided a resolution at an earlier time, there now appears to be an unbridgeable gulf among WTO Members on this point now.

With the benefit of hindsight, perhaps there was insufficient reflection at the end of the Round when it came to the design of the dispute settlement system’s Appellate Body – with its commuting judges, tight time frames for decision, and a somewhat functionally unclear relationship to a Dispute Settlement Body made up of all Members.  None of the negotiators drafting the Uruguay Round that resulted in the WTO’s dispute settlement system imagined they were creating a kritarchy – rule by judges, with no effective role of the WTO Members in making rules or in determining what they mean.

Dispute settlement was and is an integral part of an effective world trading system.  There must be enforcement of rules and an agreed means to achieve that end.  An agreement was reached once, and it can again.  Pragmatism and creativity characterized the establishment of the WTO in the first place, including the dispute settlement system. Technical fixes aimed at increasing the clarity and efficiency of Appellate Body procedures are useful, but in the end a political resolution will be required to reach a successful resolution of the current impasse.

1. c. WTO reform more generally

As noted, at the Buenos Aires at the WTO Ministerial last December, the American trade minister, Robert Lighthizer, called for reform.  In May, at the OECD Trade Ministerial, French President Emmanuel Macron picked up the theme of reform.  Reform found support with the European Union which tabled a paper that to discuss reform and is actively seeking co-sponsors for this initiative.   Honduras has made a specific suggestion for reform in the area of dispute settlement.

The first outcome of the Japan, U.S., EU trilateral effort was tabled two weeks ago at the WTO, calling for administrative sanctions on countries failing to comply with their obligations to file notifications.  Examples of notification requirements include those relating to domestic subsidies to industry and domestic support for agricultural commodities.

There is now clearly momentum for reform of the WTO.  While reforms almost certainly will be adopted piecemeal and not in large interrelated packages, time as noted is not on the side of waiting for extensive period for reflection on any of the topics under current consideration.  The Appellate Body ceases to exist in reality not later than December 2019. The threat to the continuation of the current WTO dispute settlement system, its appellate function, is real but progress in consideration of solutions is not sufficiently well-advanced.

1. d.  Back to the future

When I joined the U.S. government, now decades ago, when the multilateral trading system was just a generation old, many of my speeches began with a description of the prolonged and difficult progress of moving up from the protectionist tariffs of Smoot Hawley in 1930 to create a more liberal trading system.  Progress was slow and hard won. The Congress refused to formally recognize the existence of the GATT until 1974, if recollection serves.

I have never questioned the proposition that international cooperation to continually improve the international trading system was the natural objective of interaction among its members.  The visionaries who founded the multilateral trading system assumed that a common purpose among nations was to avoid a repetition of past disastrous trade policies and to lay an economic foundation for peace and prosperity.  Now it is our turn.  Complacency would be both dangerous and unwarranted.

No small part of the hope that I see for the future of the system is to be found in the number and nature of countries who have recently acceded to the WTO and those who are at the door seeking entry.  The last two countries to join were Afghanistan and Liberia in 2015.  Among those in the present queue for entry are Somalia, Sudan, South Sudan and East Timor, all poor, all conflict-affected.  They have a shared aspiration and vision, that integration of their countries into the world economy through joining the WTO will improve the well-being of their peoples and provide a better chance at stability and peace.

Each of us has some part of a shared responsibility to fulfill the promise that an improved multilateral trading system can deliver.  I did not accept Director General Azevedo’s offer of the job of WTO Deputy Director General to play a second violin in the orchestra on the boat deck of the HMS Titanic as it settles into the icy deep, as noble as that role might be.  Each and every WTO member needs to make a net positive contribution to keep the multilateral trading system, the WTO, relevant and effective.  For the poorest, the domestic reforms required to join the organization may be its primary contribution, a benefit not only for themselves but for the international order.  They can also contribute innovative ideas to improve the benefits of the system.  For the largest, the obligation is much greater.  For all, the reward is having a system that not only serves specific national economic interests, but more generally, benefits them through its continued existence.

Ultimately, we sit in judgement on ourselves as well as being judged by posterity.  The one true test is: Did we leave the world in better condition than the way we received it?

I strongly believe that we can do so.  I do not see the creation of a liberal international economic order as an aberration but as the foundation for future progress.

Source: wto.org

 

196/ WTO members review regional trade agreements covering EU, Ghana and EAEU

WTO members reviewed the interim Economic Partnership Agreement between the European Union and Ghana at the 19 November meeting of the Committee on Regional Trade Agreements. Members also considered the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) treaty and EAEU accessions of Armenia and the Kyrgyz Republic.

Parties to the EU-Ghana interim Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) spoke of the growth in trade since the Agreement, which liberalizes trade in goods, entered into force on 15 December 2016.  The EU eliminated almost all tariffs immediately upon entry into force of the Agreement, while Ghana will eliminate 78% of its tariff lines by 2022. The Agreement also has provisions on financial and non-financial cooperation. Development cooperation and support for implementation of the EPA is provided under the Cotonou Agreement , which the EU described as an agreement responsible for laying down the framework for its relationship with countries from Africa, the Caribbean and the Pacific (ACP).

The EU said it was the top destination for Ghana’s exports and the second-largest source of imports. Ghana further noted that the EU was its largest source of foreign direct investment. The Agreement was crucial for Ghana’s goal of diversifying the type of products it exports and increasing their value-added content. The long-standing relationship between the two parties is gradually evolving from a focus on developmental assistance to a stronger focus on trade and investment, Ghana said.

Members commenting on the EPA sought more information on safeguard exemptions and technical regulations and trade facilitation efforts. The EPA was further lauded for eliminating tariffs to the benefit of economic growth and regional integration.

Members also considered three regional trade agreements relating to the EAEU: the EAEU treaty, the accession of Armenia and the accession of the Kyrgyz Republic to the EAEU. The EAEU was established on 1 January 2015, at which time it was composed of Belarus, Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation. Armenia and the Kyrgyz Republic acceded to the EAEU on 2 January 2015 and 12 August 2015 respectively. All EAEU members are part of the WTO, save for Belarus which is in the process of acceding to the organization. Armenia and the Kyrgyz Republic are currently renegotiating their bound tariffs at the WTO to account for changes arising from their accession to the EAEU while Kazakhstan will start doing so in 2023.

The EAEU establishes a common market for goods, services, capital and labour as well as coordinated and agreed policies in different areas such as agriculture, energy and transport services.  EAEU members apply a common external tariff to imports from third countries, subject to some exceptions applied by Armenia, Kazakhstan and the Kyrgyz Republic.

EAEU members spoke of the benefits of their regional integration at the meeting, noting that the market of the union represents 183 million consumers and a combined gross domestic product of US$ 1.8 trillion. The purpose of the EAEU is to increase competitiveness and increase the welfare of its members’ populations. Decisions are made by consensus among the EAEU members and an EAEU court resolves disputes among member states. EAEU members also emphasized that their treaties and practices are consistent with WTO rules. Trade with third parties is also a strength for the EAEU and the union has already concluded free trade agreements with Viet Nam. Negotiations are ongoing with Singapore and Israel while those with Egypt and India are expected to start soon.

WTO members who made interventions at the meeting sought clarification on the consistent application of trade measures across different EAEU members in areas such as technical barriers to trade, import licensing, sanitary and phytosanitary standards, and transit of goods. Discussions also touched on claims for compensation being negotiated with Armenia and the Kyrgyz Republic who are modifying their WTO commitments following their accession to the EAEU.

Improving transparency

The chair of the Committee, Ambassador Julian Braithwaite (United Kingdom), told members that 79 RTAs currently in force have not been notified to the WTO as of 12 November, acknowledging that the document makes reference to a forthcoming communication on some of the agreements on the list involving members of the Latin American Integration Association (LAIA). Members continue to debate whether and how to notify certain LAIA agreements. A number of members also raised questions about the consideration of the Gulf Cooperation Council Agreement and asked GCC members to provide a clear timeline on when responses to questions could be expected.

The chair further noted that factual presentations for 29 RTAs involving only WTO members and those for a further 25 RTAs involving non-members remain pending, counting goods and services agreements separately. “End of implementation” reports were likewise due for 141 RTAs; however, none have been received in 2018. A number of members took the floor to raise concern over the continuing backlog of work and lack of notifications.

The WTO Secretariat again called on members to submit data and comments in a timely fashion. It also provided details of technical assistance activities in 2018 and those scheduled for 2019.

Next meeting

The next meeting of the Committee is scheduled for 1 and 2 April 2019.

Source: wto.org

 

197/ Vietnam-RoK trade up but deficit grows

Over the past 25 years, the economic ties between Vietnam and the Republic of Korea have flourished, but the trade imbalance between the two countries has reached an alarming level.

Bark Tae-ho, former RoK Minister of Trade, spoke on the topic during a seminar in Hanoi on November 16.

The seminar – themed “Future prospects for Vietnam -RoK investment-trade ties” – was organised by the Global Commerce Institute Lee & Ko, the RoK’s Trade-Investment Promotion Agency and the Vietnam Chamber of Commerce and Industry.

At the event, delegates assessed achievements in Vietnam’s bilateral trade ties after three years of the Vietnam-Korea Free Trade Agreement (VKFTA) and discussed remaining issues.

“Vietnam is the RoK’s fourth biggest trade partner after China, the US and Japan,” Bark Tae-ho said. “Two-way trade jumped from 500 million USD in 1992 to 64 billion USD in 2017, 14.8 billion USD of which came from Vietnam’s exports, up 30 percent from the previous year, and 46.7 billion USD from its imports, up 45.3 percent.”

“Two-way trade is expected to grow to 100 billion USD by 2020, equivalent to an annual increase of 18 per cent over the next two years,” he said.

“The RoK is the third largest export market for Vietnam after the US and China,” he said. “It is also Vietnam’s second largest import market behind China.”

Since the VKFTA took effect in 2015, Korean firms have capitalised on lower tariff duties under the FTA to boost exports to Vietnam while Vietnamese firms have not taken the same step. As a result, Vietnam’s trade deficit with the Republic of Korea has widened sharply, Bark said.

According Bark, exports from the RoK to Vietnam in 2017 were worth 48 billion USD, up 70 percent after three years of the VKFTA. However, exports from Vietnam to the RoK that year reached only 17 billion USD.

In 2017, Korean firms poured 1.9 billion USD into projects in Vietnam, which spent only 4 million USD on projects in the RoK.

The RoK remains by far the largest foreign investor in VIetnam, having signed on to pour 58 billion USD into more than 6,500 foreign direct investment (FDI) projects in the country as of the end of October, said Nguyen Duy Loi, Deputy Editor-in-Chief of the World Economic and Political Issues, Institute of World Economics and Politics under the Vietnam Academy for Social Science.

“Vietnam is a key investment destination of Korean firms in the ASEAN region,” Loi said. “Among 8,600 Korean enterprises investing in ASEAN, about 5,500 are in Vietnam.”

“Assessing products imported from Vietnam to the RoK by technological level, 44 percent of the products are using low technology and only 20 percent of them use high technology,” said Heo Yoon, a professor from Sogang University Graduate School of International Studies and President of the Korean Association of Trade and Industry Studies. “The rest use medium technology or are resource-based products.”

He added that Korean investment in Vietnam is moving from labour-intensive industries to capital-intensive industries, especially in manufacturing sectors.

In the future, Vietnam and the RoK should speed up the negotiation of the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), promote infrastructure exports from the RoK to Vietnam, widen and deepen the machinery production network between the two countries and accelerate technology transfer from the RoK to Vietnam as the Vietnamese government has changed the FDI strategy to induce more high-value-added industries, Heo said.

Source: VNS/VNA

 

Ngày 20/11

198/ PM Phuc meets with New Zealand, Hong Kong leaders on APEC sidelines

Prime Minister Nguyen Xuan Phuc and his New Zealand counterpart Jacinda Ardern have agreed the two sides should accelerate exchange of visits at all levels to further enhance the comprehensive partnership towards the level of strategic one.

The agreement came following their meeting on November 18 on the sidelines of the 26th Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Economic Leaders’ Meeting in Port Moresby, the capital city of Papua New Guinea.

Phuc asked New Zealand to continue facilitating exports from Vietnam, particularly of agricultural products like mango, dragon fruit and rambutan.

Later the same day, PM Phuc had a meeting with Chief Executive of Hong Kong (China) Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor, during which he told her that there is plenty of room for cooperation between Vietnam and Hong Kong.

The two agreed to further step up exchange of visits between not only administrative bodies but also business-to-business and people-to-people meetings.

They also agreed to take into account simplifying immigration procedures to allow easier entry for their people and enterprises into the other side. At the same time, Lam affirmed that Hong Kong stands ready to provide scholarships to Vietnamese students.

In addition, they discussed measures to boost two-way trade, investment and cooperation in finance, banking, education and tourism.

Vietnam welcomes and will create all possible conditions for enterprises from Hong Kong to expand their business in the country, particularly in the fields of transport services, infrastructure development, manufacturing of electronic parts, support industries, and processing, PM Phuc said.

He added that Vietnam wants both sides to share experience in urban development and planning, developing smart city and application of high technology.

PM Nguyen Xuan Phuc and his entourage later left Port Moresby on the evening for home, concluding his trip to Papua New Guinea for the 26th APEC Economic Leaders’ Meeting.

This year, the APEC Economic Leaders’ Meeting took place from November 17 – 18 under the theme “Harnessing Inclusive Opportunities, Embracing the Digital Future”, focusing on three priorities – improving connectivity, deepening regional economic integration’ promoting inclusive and sustainable growth, and strengthening inclusive growth through structural reforms.

Source: VNA

 

199/ PM Phuc receives US enterprises on sidelines of APEC summit

Prime Minister Nguyen Xuan Phuc on November 17 hosted a reception for representatives of several prestigious US companies on the occasion of his attendance at the 26th APEC Economic Leaders Meeting.

These firms are running many investment, production and business projects in Vietnam in the fields of biotechnology, product quality inspection, health care, rare disease treatment and tobacco industry.

The Vietnamese government leader congratulated the US enterprises on their successes in business in Vietnam, saying that they have earned credibility among people and businesses in Vietnam.

The US-ASEAN Business Council (USABC) has worked closely with Vietnam, and supported Vietnam in promoting cooperation between Vietnamese and US enterprises, thus contributing to balancing the trade ties between the two countries, PM Phuc said.

He noted that US firms have invested over US$12 billion in Vietnam so far, and the two-way trade hit over US$55 billion. The bilateral trade scale surged by 35 times in the last 18 years, with the US’s export to Vietnam was up 37% – the highest level in recent year.

According to the PM, there is plenty of room for the two nations to strengthen cooperation in the coming time, especially in trade, investment and business. He affirmed that the Vietnamese Government is willing to listen to proposals and dialogues from US investors during their operation in Vietnam.

The US business representatives said they want to expand their investment in Vietnam in health care, hi-tech application in inspecting product quality, and in supporting Vietnamese farmers in improving economic value of the livestock industry.

Touching upon a number of policies and Government’s documents in health care, agriculture, livestock and tobacco industry, the business delegates said they wish to hold more dialogues with Vietnam’s authorities, especially State management agencies. They added that their firms are ready to arrange for US experts and scientists to join the Vietnamese Government in building State management policies for a number of specific sectors.

PM Phuc affirmed that the Vietnamese Government always creates favourable conditions for foreign investors, including those from the US to operate in Vietnam, noting that Vietnam is constantly improving its policies and institutional system to be in line with international practices and comply with trade agreements that Vietnam has joined, towards opening the market for more foreign investors to enter Vietnam.

Vietnam is open to feedback and recommendations from foreign investors so as to remove obstacles to production and business activities, the PM said and called on US firms to continue promoting their investment, production and business in the Vietnamese market.

Source: VNA

 

200/ APEC leaders fail to agree on joint statement

Leaders from 21 Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) economies on November 18 were unable to sign a joint statement at the 26th APEC Economic Leaders’ Meeting in Papua New Guinea in the context of deep divisions between the US and China over trade and investment.

For the first time in the history of APEC, the leaders have failed to come up with a formal joint statement.

Speaking at a closing press conference, Papua New Guinea Prime Minister Peter O’Neill said as APEC host, he would release a Chairman’s Statement later on the day.

He said the reform of the World Trade Organisation (WTO) was the main issue causing differences among the APEC leaders.

Canada’s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau admitted that different visions on particular elements with regard to trade hindered the release of a statement document.

The annual gathering, held for the first time in Papua New Guinea since it joined the forum in 1993, was overshadowed by trade differences and competence for greater influence in the Pacific region between the US and China.

However, US Vice President Mike Pence and Chinese President Xi Jinping had held talks for two times within the framework of the APEC summit, Pence told the press.

At the 26th APEC Economic Leaders’ Meeting, themed “Harnessing Inclusive Integration, Embracing the Digital Future”, the leaders of the 21 member economies discussed measures to enhance integration, maintain comprehensive growth and promote the digital economy.

APEC groups Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, China, Hong Kong (China), Indonesia, Japan, the Republic of Korea, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, Peru, the Philippines, Russia, Singapore, Chinese Taipei, Thailand, the United States and Vietnam.

Source: VNA

 

201/ Pricing it right

Price transparency is one way of gaining consumer trust by making purchasing choices easier. A new standard for unit pricing will help consumers compare products quickly and effectively, a win-win solution for all.

Unit pricing – or comparative pricing – is a way for retailers to show the price of a commodity in relation to a standard unit of measure, such as the kilogramme or litre. For example, for a 500 ml carton of milk offered at USD 1.95, the unit price would be USD 3.90 per litre.

However, this is not always consistent across retailers or products, creating an added layer of perplexity for shoppers and doing little for consumer trust. ISO 21041, Guidance on unit pricing, aims to clear up the confusion by defining unit pricing systems and enhancing transparency of pricing information.

In a recent study1) conducted by the Queensland University of Technology, Australia, consumers reported a significantly greater ability to process price information and higher confidence in their price judgements when unit prices are presented consistently within stores. Additionally, the research indicated that standardized unit price presentation was associated with more favourable attitudes toward retailers. John Furbank, Chair of the ISO project committee that developed the standard, said that by simplifying the price comparisons of products, ISO 21041 will benefit retailers and consumers alike.

“Shopping has never been more complex, with not only a greater choice but a wider range of packaging, in terms of weights and sizes,” he said.

“The Queensland study shows that clear and effective unit price information won’t necessarily drive consumers to just buy the cheapest product, but rather allow them to make more informed choices – and that reflects positively on retailers.

“ISO 21041, then, is a key tool for retailers, enabling them to provide clear and consistent pricing, ultimately building trust and loyalty as a result.”

The standard provides guidance on how unit pricing should be displayed in-store (both on-shelf and on packaging), online and in advertisements. It also highlights the importance of clarity and consumer education.

ISO 21041 was developed by ISO project committee ISO/PC 294, Guidance on unit pricing, the secretariat of which is held by Standards Australia, ISO’s member for the country. It can be purchased from your national ISO member or through the ISO Store.

Source: iso.org

 

202/ DG Azevêdo meets President Grybauskaitė of Lithuania; welcomes firm commitment to WTO

Director-General Roberto Azevêdo welcomed Lithuanian President Dalia Grybauskaitė’s firm commitment to the WTO today (20 November) when they met in Vilnius, Lithuania. The President stressed the importance of the WTO for Lithuania, particularly in combination with its membership of the EU. She outlined the WTO’s value for Lithuania as a small, open economy and for the country’s strategic engagement with the world. Their discussion focused on how to strengthen global trade cooperation for the future, through the WTO.

While in Lithuania the Director-General also met with the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Linas Linkevičius, and the Lithuanian Confederation of Industrialists. In addition, he gave a keynote speech at a Trade Policy Conference entitled ‘Global trade – what’s in it for us?’, held at Lithuania’s National Gallery of Art, and took part in a panel discussion. The Director-General’s speech is available below.

Remarks by DG Azevêdo

Excellencies,

Ladies and gentlemen,

Good afternoon.

It is an honour to be here today.

This is my first visit to Lithuania. And it is a particular pleasure to be here during this special year, as you mark the 100th anniversary of the restoration of your independence. Congratulations!

This is a very significant moment for the Lithuanian people. It is an important occasion to reflect on the progress made and, of course, to set the path for an even brighter future.

We had a moment earlier this afternoon to tour the exhibition of Antanas Sutkus, here at the National Gallery.

It gave a powerful insight into Lithuanian life and culture through the years. And one thing in the literature about the exhibition struck me very clearly. It talked about the photographer’s conception of the country in the 1950s as: “Planet Lithuania, which in those days was almost as difficult to reach from the west as the moon.”

Well, what a journey you have been on since then.

With a range of reforms, together with membership of the European Union and the World Trade Organization, today Lithuania is an open and connected economy. It is well integrated with its neighbours and the wider world.

I congratulate President Grybauskaitė on her leadership in taking the country through the latest stage of this journey.

I’m proud that the WTO has been an important partner here. And I want to ensure that we continue to be an important partner in the years to come.

With that in mind I’m pleased to have this opportunity today to set out why trade and the WTO are so vital for Lithuania, for the EU, and for the entire global community.

We are meeting against the backdrop of a rather uncertain and mixed global economic landscape.

New tariffs announced this year cover hundreds of billions of dollars in trade. Further measures have been proposed. And, at present, continued escalation is a real possibility.

Although only some countries are directly involved at this stage, the potential impacts of these tensions could spread far and wide. Further escalation would cause significant disruptions for workers, companies and communities everywhere.

We need to maintain openness and stability in global trade.

In fact, in these times of rising tensions, I think it’s vital to remember the fundamental importance of maintaining, developing and improving our trading relations.

The question posed by today’s conference is:  ‘global trade – what is in it for us?’

And I think the answer is clear. What’s in it for all of us is:

• First, lower prices in the shops, and greater choice.
• Second, jobs – in fact one in five Lithuanian jobs are export-related – and these jobs tend to be better paid as well.
• Third, opportunities to sell your goods and services abroad, and
• Fourth, stronger and more stable economic growth.

These benefits are certainly vital but they only capture the economic effects – and this is only part of the picture. Trade also connects us with the world – to other people and other cultures.

It’s because of trade that here in Vilnius you can buy Italian shoes, or South African wine, or a smart phone which contains parts from hundreds of suppliers around the world.

It’s because of trade that we can watch American films or use Japanese apps.

And it’s because of the closer and more stable relationships that trade fosters that we can enjoy more peaceful relations with other nations.

In all of these ways, trade makes our lives better.

And it is the WTO that underpins the smooth flow of trade around the world, and which enables us to seize these benefits.

When Lithuania joined the WTO, the then President Valdas Adamkus welcomed the “more reliable, transparent and predictable rules and regulations” which the system brings.

This is exactly right.

The WTO provides the constitution for global trade, establishing shared principles which underpin trading practices around the world. It provides the only global forum for discussion and debate on trade issues. It provides the mechanisms for countries to monitor and review each other’s trade policies. And it provides the means to settle disputes when they arise.

The WTO is also tasked with negotiating new agreements to update the rules. For a long period little progress was made on this front. But more recently we have begun to change that, delivering a number of important agreements with significant economic benefits.

In the last five years members have struck a range of deals, such as:

• the abolition of agricultural export subsidies,
• the expansion of the Information Technology Agreement, and of course
• the Trade Facilitation Agreement.

Together, these measures represent the biggest trade reforms in the WTO’s history.

In each case, the EU was at the centre of the negotiations – and I want to pay tribute to Lithuania’s leadership as well.

The Trade Facilitation Agreement is particularly notable. It was the first multilateral deal ever done by the WTO. Its impact could be greater than the abolition of all remaining tariffs around the world.

Lithuania held the Presidency of the EU Council during the crucial period when the deal was struck. And so you played a key role in achieving that historic outcome.

You continue to play a leading role today. Lithuania’s Permanent Representative in Geneva — Dalia Kadišienė – currently chairs the Committee which oversees the implementation of this agreement.

And of course we don’t want to stop there – we want to keep delivering.

At present members are working hard to meet a 2019 deadline for an agreement on fisheries subsidies. This is a very important piece of work that would deliver on a key element of the Sustainable Development Goals.

We are also striving to advance other important and longstanding issues, such as agriculture, food security, services and development.

And it is important to note the activity in a range of other areas as well.

Groups of WTO members have launched new ‘joint initiatives’ to discuss a range of areas of emerging economic interest. These areas include e-commerce, investment facilitation, support for small businesses to trade, and the economic empowerment of women. It won’t surprise you to hear that the EU is closely involved in all of this work.

Time will tell exactly how these initiatives develop. Although these initiatives are not supported by all members, the proponents are building real momentum. Members themselves will decide what they want to discuss and how they want to do it.

While this goes on we are also working to tackle the tensions that we see rising between major trading partners.

There is a responsibility on the whole international community to help ease tensions and avoid the risks that further escalation could bring.

Our economists have been assessing a variety of possible scenarios to develop this picture, including the impact of a full, global trade war.

By this we mean a breakdown in international trade cooperation, where instead of tariffs being set cooperatively in the WTO or in other trade agreements, they are set unilaterally.

Under this mindset, tariffs would rise sharply.

We would see a reduction of global trade by around 17%.

This would cause a very significant slowdown in GDP growth, and bring major disruptions for workers, firms and communities as they adjust to this new reality. Potentially millions of workers would need to find new jobs; firms would be looking for new products and markets; and communities for new sources of growth.

Clearly, we can’t afford to go down this road.

We need to see more dialogue – both bilaterally and through the WTO.

In fact, this situation is putting a new focus on the multilateral trading system as a place where solutions may be found.

At the root of the current tensions is the argument that the world has changed significantly and that the trading system is not responsive to the new realities on the ground. Therefore, the argument goes, the system needs to change in order to properly address these new challenges.

Some see this as an opportunity to update the organization and revamp the trading system for a new century. Others have doubts about this emerging discussion and would prefer to focus on completing longstanding work.

Whatever the precise arguments, there’s no question that this focus on WTO ‘reform’ or ‘modernization’ is growing rapidly. A serious and substantive debate is beginning to emerge, driven by leaders around the world.

And we should keep in mind the wider context in which this debate is playing out. These are not ordinary times…

• In some senses we are still recovering from the crisis of 2008. Many countries are still dealing with its after-effects.
• At the same time we are experiencing a new era in the form of the 4th industrial revolution, as new technologies reshape many aspects of our lives and the economy.

These historic events have combined to foster a sense of fear and uncertainty about the future, creating an upsurge in anti-trade and even anti-foreign sentiment.

One important element here is the perception that trade is taking people’s jobs and sending them overseas. In reality the driving force behind job losses is innovation and higher productivity enabled by technology. Eighty per cent of jobs lost are because of these forces – not because of trade.

Regardless of the causes, it’s clear that people feel left behind by economic change.

This requires real action – and much of this will be about domestic policies on education, skills, adjustment support and other labour market reforms to help workers adapt to the new economic realities. Each country will have its own recipe here – there is no single right answer.

But one thing is clear, no one is going to be helped by choking off trade. If we turn our backs on trade and the outside world, in the end everybody loses.

So while members debate WTO reform, we need to keep a proper perspective on all of these issues.

The momentum behind this conversation is growing.

WTO reform has been raised with me in my interactions with a variety of leaders. And no doubt it will be a key issue when we meet at the G20 summit in Buenos Aires in two weeks’ time. That meeting will be an important moment – and I know that the EU is coming with ideas to put on the table.

I will be there and I will be bringing a strong message about the vital importance of maintaining and strengthening the trading system, in everyone’s interests.

On the substance, a variety of initiatives and meetings are being prepared, and a range of priorities have been suggested by WTO members, including by the EU, US, China, Japan, Canada and many others. These priorities include, for example:

• resolving disputes and reaching agreements more rapidly and effectively,
• addressing a variety of trade distorting practices that are either not covered or are just partially covered by existing disciplines,
• avoiding protectionism and unilateral actions,
• advancing current work, and
• improving notifications and transparency.

These are all important issues. But at present there is no common view on whether and how they should be taken forward.

I will be supporting our members at every stage to find ways to facilitate their work and to strengthen the system for the future.

In all of the current discussions, probably the most urgent issue facing us is the crisis in the dispute settlement system. The specific issue here is the impasse in appointments to the Appellate Body.

This could eventually threaten the functioning of the whole dispute settlement system as we know it.

There are some signs that members are engaging more deeply here. And proposals are being brought forward. But we need to see a major shift in gears and positions if we are to make progress.

I am redoubling my own efforts in this area and I continue to urge members to do all they can to expedite this discussion and find ways forward.

This is a real systemic risk – and it demands urgent action.

To conclude, I think it’s clear that we have many challenges before us today.

But the key challenge is for us to transform this crisis into an opportunity.

The trading system has been under pressure before, and each time it has emerged stronger.

In 2008, faced with the worst economic crisis for many decades, the system proved its value, preventing an outbreak of protectionist measures.

In 2013, after years of deadlock, we proved that we could deliver negotiated results.

Today, we must rise to the challenge again.

Indeed, I believe that if we want this system to thrive, we need to fight for it like never before.

We cannot take the system for granted. It is only as resilient as its members’ commitment to defend and strengthen it.

Lithuania’s history is one of resilience in testing times – rising up to face challenges to build a more prosperous future.

This is the kind of leadership that we need.

So I count on your continued support, together with the EU, to ensure that the trading system continues to underpin all of those benefits that I have detailed today.

Together we can ensure that trade plays its full role in building the brighter future that we all want to see.

Thank you.

Source: wto.org

 

203/ Panama files appeal against compliance panel ruling in dispute with Colombia over import measures

Panama filed an appeal on 20 November concerning the WTO compliance panel report in the case “Colombia — Measures Relating to the Importation of Textiles, Apparel and Footwear (Recourse to Article 21.5 of the DSU by Colombia and Panama)” (DS461). The compliance panel report was circulated to WTO members on 5 October.

Further information will be available within the next few days in document WT/DS461/28

Parties to a dispute can appeal a panel’s ruling. Appeals have to be based on points of law, such as legal interpretation — they cannot re-open factual findings made by the panel. Each appeal is heard by three members of an Appellate Body comprising persons of recognized authority and unaffiliated with any government. Each member of the Appellate Body is appointed for a fixed term. Generally, the Appellate Body has up to 3 months to conclude its report.

Source: wto.org

 

204/ Morocco files appeal against panel ruling in dispute with Turkey over steel duties

Morocco filed an appeal on 20 November concerning the WTO panel report in the case brought by Turkey in “Morocco — Anti-dumping Measures on Certain Hot-Rolled Steel from Turkey” (DS513). The panel report was circulated to WTO members on 31 October.

Further information will be available within the next few days in document WT/DS513/5

Parties to a dispute can appeal a panel’s ruling. Appeals have to be based on points of law, such as legal interpretation — they cannot re-open factual findings made by the panel. Each appeal is heard by three members of an Appellate Body comprising persons of recognized authority and unaffiliated with any government. Each member of the Appellate Body is appointed for a fixed term. Generally, the Appellate Body has up to 3 months to conclude its report.

Source: wto.org

 

Ngày 21/11

205/ Panels established to review US steel and aluminium tariffs, countermeasures on US imports

At its meeting on 21 November, the WTO’s Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) agreed to requests from seven members for the establishment of panels to examine tariffs imposed by the United States on steel and aluminium imports. The DSB also agreed to four US requests for panels to examine countermeasures imposed by China, Canada, the European Union and Mexico on US imports in response to the steel and aluminium tariffs.

The DSB additionally agreed to a request from the United States for a panel to examine Chinese measures which the US said discriminate against foreign intellectual property rights holders in China and an EU request for a panel to examine the Russian Federation’s compliance with a WTO ruling concerning its import bans on live pigs and pork products from the EU.

DS544: United States — Certain Measures on Steel and Aluminium Products

DS548: United States — Certain Measures on Steel and Aluminium Products

DS550: United States — Certain Measures on Steel and Aluminium Products

DS551: United States — Certain Measures on Steel and Aluminium Products

DS552: United States — Certain Measures on Steel and Aluminium Products

DS554: United States — Certain Measures on Steel and Aluminium Products

DS564: United States — Certain Measures on Steel and Aluminium Products

China, the European Union, Canada, Mexico, Norway, Russia and Turkey submitted their second requests for panels to challenge the decision by the United States to impose an additional customs duty of 10% on imports of aluminium products and an additional customs duty of 25% on imports of certain steel products.  The first requests were blocked by the US at a DSB meeting on 29 October.

The seven members reiterated their belief that the US measures, allegedly taken for national security reasons, were, in their content and substance, safeguard measures taken to protect the US steel and aluminium industries from the economic effects of imports. The seven disagreed with US arguments that the US resort to the national security exception under Article XXI of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) precluded WTO panels from examining the claims, arguing that while national security was a sensitive matter, panels were fully within their right to examine whether such claims are justified under the exception.  Several argued that resort to Article XXI by the US would frustrate the purpose of WTO dispute settlement and could render all WTO obligations effectively unenforceable.  The seven said that because the complaints involve the same US measures and essentially the same arguments, a single panel should be established to examine their claims.

The United States said the tariffs imposed under Section 232 of the US Trade Expansion Act were necessary for the protection of its essential security interests given the key role steel and aluminium plays in US national defence; these measures were therefore justified under Article XXI of the GATT and not subject to review by a WTO panel.  The US position on the national security exception has been consistent for 70 years and a position the EU and others supported in the past, most notably in 1982, when certain EU actions were examined before the GATT Council.  The US at the time supported the EU’s argument that an Article XXI defence required neither notification, justification, nor approval.  If these members maintain their misguided requests for panels on the steel and aluminium tariffs, there is no finding a panel could make other than to note the US has invoked Article XXI, the US said.

With regards to the requests for a single panel to review all seven complaints against the US tariffs, the US said it did not agree and that the DSB must decide by consensus whether to accept such requests.

The DSB agreed to the establishment of the seven panels.  More than 20 WTO members reserved their third-party rights to participate in each of the respective proceedings.

DS547: United States — Certain Measures on Steel and Aluminium Products

DS556: United States — Certain Measures on Steel and Aluminium Products

India and Switzerland submitted their first requests for panels to rule on the US steel and aluminium tariffs.  The two argued that the US actions were in effect safeguard measures and that they were concerned the US was using national security as a justification for the tariffs.

Switzerland said the tariffs will have a harmful effect on the multilateral trading system as a whole and in particular on global value chains.  India said it shared the view that the WTO system will be undermined if it fails to allow for review of another member’s unilateral actions, and that Article XXI is an affirmative defence and therefore reviewable. Both India and Switzerland said consultations with the US on the matter had failed to resolve the dispute, prompting their requests for panels; they also asked that a single panel be established to rule on their claims and those of the other seven complainants.

The United States said it could not agree to the establishment of the two panels. The US said India and Switzerland were undermining the trading system by asking the WTO to do what it was never intended to do.  It is simply not the WTO’s role, nor its competence, to review a sovereign nation’s judgment of its essential security interests. The US said if the WTO were to undertake a review of a member’s invocation of Article XXI, this would undermine the legitimacy of the WTO’s dispute settlement system and even the viability of the WTO as a whole.

The DSB agreed to revert to the matter.

DS557: Canada — Additional Duties on Certain Products from the United States

DS558: China — Additional Duties on Certain Products from the United States

DS559: European Union — Additional Duties on Certain Products from the United States

DS560: Mexico — Additional Duties on Certain Products from the United States

The United States submitted its second request for four dispute panels to challenge increased duties imposed by Canada, China, the European Union and Mexico on certain US imports. The first US requests were blocked by the four at the DSB meeting on 29 October.

Every sovereign has the right to take action it considers necessary for the protection of its essential security as enshrined in Article XXI, the US said; what is inconsistent with WTO rules is the unilateral retaliation against the US by various WTO members.  These members base their actions on the pretence that the US actions are safeguards; this is the height of hypocrisy, the US said. The US has not invoked WTO safeguard provisions for its actions, and because the US has not done so, other members cannot simply act as if these provisions should have been invoked to apply safeguard rules that are simply inapplicable.

Canada said it would vigorously defend its measures, which were taken in response to the “unwarranted” US steel and aluminum tariffs.  China expressed its disappointment with the US actions and said the US refused to hold consultations with China to discuss compensation under the WTO’s Safeguards Agreement, thus giving it little choice but to introduce appropriate suspension measures.

The EU said that just because the US does not label its tariffs as safeguard measures does not mean it can be allowed to escape an appropriate response under the Safeguards Agreement. Mexico said it was exercising a right which was expressly permitted under the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).

The DSB agreed to the establishment of the four panels. Around 20 WTO members reserved their third-party rights to participate in each of the respective proceedings.

DS542: China — Certain Measures Concerning the Protection of Intellectual Property

The United States submitted its second request for a panel to examine certain Chinese measures pertaining to the protection of intellectual property rights. China has implemented policies that consistently seek to disadvantage foreign companies for the benefit of Chinese industry, the US said. This includes denying foreign patent holders, including US companies, basic patent rights to stop a Chinese entity from using the technology after a licensing contract ends and imposing mandatory adverse contract terms that discriminate against, and are less favorable for, imported foreign technology. These policies are in violation of the WTO’s Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS), the US said, adding that the policies are causing an estimated $50 billion in annual harm to the US alone with the aggregate impact to all WTO members being much higher.

China said it was disappointed with the US second request. The so-called “forced technology transfer” alleged by the US is not within the request for consultations or panel and therefore not relevant to this dispute, China said. The US accusations on this point are meritless and founded on the deliberate misrepresentation of Chinese laws and practices. China said that it takes its WTO commitments seriously and would safeguard its legitimate interests in the proceedings.

Japan noted that it is a major exporter of technology to China and has repeatedly raised concerns with the Chinese laws and practices identified by the US in its panel request, which impair the ability of foreign rights holders to protect their IP rights. The European Union said it shared the US concerns and welcomed the establishment of the panel, noting that it had requested its own consultations with China on these policies which discriminate against foreign firms and are contrary to China’s WTO obligations.

The DSB agreed to the establishment of the panel. Japan, the EU, Switzerland, Norway, Russia, Singapore, Kazakhstan, Ukraine, Chinese Taipei and Turkey reserved their third-party rights to participate in the proceedings.

DS475: Russian Federation — Measures on the Importation of Live Pigs, Pork and Other Pig Products from the European Union

The European Union submitted its second request for a compliance panel to examine whether measures taken by Russia to implement an earlier WTO dispute ruling regarding Russia’s import bans on live pigs and pork products from Lithuania, Poland, Latvia and Estonia as well as the EU-wide import ban on live pigs and certain pork products brought the original measures at issue into conformity with Russia’s WTO obligations. The EU said it has been waiting a long time for Russia to open its market to EU imports but that Russia was keeping its ban in place while claiming compliance.

The Russian Federation said it regretted the EU decision to request the panel a second time and that it had fully implemented the WTO ruling.

The DSB agreed to the establishment of the panel. Japan, Ukraine, Kazakhstan, India, China, the United States and Australia reserved their third-party rights to participate in the proceedings.

DS234: United States – Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act of 2000

The European Union reiterated its request that the United States cease transferring anti-dumping and countervailing duties to the US domestic industry, arguing that every such disbursement was a clear act of non-compliance with the DSB’s recommendations and rulings on the matter. Brazil and Canada thanked the EU for keeping the item on the agenda and called on the US to fully comply. The United States referred to its previous statement and said it had taken all action necessary to comply with the DSB’s recommendations and rulings.

European Communities and Certain Member States – Measures Affecting Trade in Large Civil Aircraft: Implementations of the recommendations adopted by the DSB

The United States again said the European Union has not provided a status report concerning the dispute DS316, “EU — Measures Affecting Trade in Large Civil Aircraft”. The EU has argued that Article 21.6 of the WTO’s Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU) requires that the issue of implementation remain on the DSB agenda until the issue is resolved and that where a member disagrees with another member’s assertion that implementation of a ruling has been achieved, the issue remains unresolved for the purposes of Article 21.6.

The stated EU position contradicts its actions in this dispute, the US said, where the EU has admitted that there remains a disagreement on compliance. Under the EU’s own view, the EU should be providing a status report, yet it has failed to do so. The US urged the EU to provide the DSB for the first time any details on its alleged implementation efforts.

The European Union said there was a difference between the position it has taken in the DS234 and DS316. In the former, the case has been adjudicated, no proceedings are pending and the EU disagrees with the US assertion that it has complied; thus the issue remains unresolved for the purposes of Article 21.6. In the DS316 case, the EU notified its compliance measures, the US disagreed that compliance had been achieved and a compliance panel has been established to rule on the matter. The matter is subject to litigation and the EU is concerned with a reading of Article 21.6 which would require a member to notify the status of implementation while litigation is ongoing.

Appellate Body appointments

Mexico, speaking on behalf of 71 WTO members, once again introduced a proposal calling for the establishment of a selection committee for the appointment of new Appellate Body members, the submission of candidates within 30 days and the issuance by the committee of recommendations within 60 days. Four vacancies now exist on the Appellate Body, which normally has seven members. The considerable number of members supporting the proposal reflects a common concern with the current situation in the Appellate Body that is seriously affecting its workings and the overall dispute settlement system against the best interest of its members, Mexico said.

The United States again said it could not agree to the proposal. As it explained in previous meetings, the US said the systemic concerns it has identified remain unaddressed, including “persistent overreach” by the Appellate Body in its rulings which have added obligations the US never agreed to. Another example is Rule 15 of the Working procedures for appellate review, which allow the Appellate Body to decide whether a member can continue working on assigned cases after his/her term as an Appellate Body member has ended, in disregard of WTO rules.  The US said it will continue its efforts and its discussions with WTO members and with the DSB chair to seek a solution.

Around 20 members made statements expressing growing concern with the continued failure to launch the selection process.  These delegations urged all members to show flexibility in order to resolve the deadlock as soon as possible.  Singapore noted that it has now been exactly one year since the group first issued its joint proposal calling for the launch of the selection process.  Mexico, again speaking for the 71 proponents, said the fact a member may have concerns about certain aspects of the functioning of the Appellate Body cannot serve to impair and disrupt the work of this body.

Statement by China – right of a member to decide the composition of its delegation for consultations

China drew attention to what it said was the recent practice of the United States during dispute consultations in refusing to allow outside legal counsels in China’s delegation on the grounds the consultations are inter-governmental and confidential.

The practice of engaging legal counsels to assist with participation in WTO dispute settlement proceedings is a longstanding practice and facilitates the efficient resolution of disputes, China said.  Members have the right to determine their representation at all stages of a dispute, a right recognized by the Appellate Body.  China agrees with the US that consultations are to be kept confidential. However, this obligation applies irrespective of whether a member’s delegation includes legal counsels. The US objections impair the rights of members and disadvantage developing countries, which do not have the resources to set up in-house departments to litigate WTO disputes as the US does. The ability to seek assistance from outside legal counsels at all stages of dispute settlement proceedings, including during consultations, is necessary to ensuring a level playing field, China said.

The United States said China was asserting a unilateral right to decide whether to allow non-government officials in a delegation and that such an assertion went against the idea of dispute consultations, which aims to bring the two sides together to discuss and resolve their dispute.

The DSU does not contain the right asserted by China, and the Appellate Body’s statement on the matter concerned oral hearings, not consultations. The US said parties in a dispute should discuss and work out a solution among themselves.

Ten delegations took the floor to comment. They said that while confidentiality must be respected, concerns about confidentiality should not preclude any member from deciding on the composition of their delegation.  Several developing countries said that excluding outside legal counsel from delegations creates an unlevel playing field and deprives developing members the means to participate effectively in the dispute settlement system.

Surveillance of Implementation

The United States presented status reports with regard to DS184, “US — Anti-Dumping Measures on Certain Hot-Rolled Steel Products from Japan”,  DS160, “United States — Section 110(5) of US Copyright Act”, DS464, “United States — Anti-Dumping and Countervailing Measures on Large Residential Washers from Korea”, DS471, “United States — Certain Methodologies and their Application to Anti-Dumping Proceedings Involving China” and DS488, “US — Anti-Dumping Measures on Certain Oil Country Tubular Goods from Korea”.

The European Union presented status reports with regard to DS291, “EC — Measures Affecting the Approval and Marketing of Biotech Products” and disputes  DS473 and DS480,  ”EU — Anti-Dumping Measures on Biodiesel”.

Indonesia presented its status report in DS484, “Indonesia — Measures Concerning the Importation of Chicken Meat and Chicken Products”.

Other business

Indonesia informed WTO members that it had reached an agreement with Chinese Taipei and Viet Nam under which it will implement the WTO rulings in DS490 and DS496,  ”Indonesia — Safeguard on Certain Iron or Steel Products,” by 27 March 2019.

Next meeting

The next regular meeting of the DSB is scheduled for 18 December.

Source: wto.org

 

206/ Members urge follow-up to Bali decision on monitoring flexibilities for developing countries

At a meeting of the Committee on Trade and Development on 21 November 2018, WTO members expressed regret at the lack of submissions regarding the Decision on the Monitoring Mechanism adopted by ministers five years ago to assess the flexibilities available to developing countries in WTO agreements. At the meeting, members also discussed several regional trade agreements among developing countries, with a view to making these trade arrangements more transparent.

The Bali Decision established the Monitoring Mechanism as the main channel for monitoring special and differential treatment (S&D) provisions contained in WTO agreements. These provisions give developing and least-developed countries special rights in multilateral trading rules. Adopted by ministers at the Ninth Ministerial Conference in Bali in 2013, the Mechanism also allows WTO members to make recommendations on ways of strengthening the provisions and making them more precise, effective and operational.

The objective of the WTO S&D provisions is to increase poorer members’ trading opportunities and safeguard their interests to help them integrate more fully into the global economy. Longer transition periods to implement WTO agreements and technical assistance and training are examples of some of these provisions.

WTO members have met twice a year over the last five years in a dedicated session, as mandated by the Decision, but no submission related to the review of S&D provisions has been made. At the meeting, some members said this is a “big concern” and said they were concerned about potential repercussions for other ministerial decisions.

The Chair of the Committee, Ambassador Diego Aulestia of Ecuador, urged members to come to a common understanding on the way forward for the Monitoring Mechanism.

At the meeting, members also discussed notified regional trade agreements (RTAs) among developing countries based on factual presentations by the WTO Secretariat. Under WTO rules, members are expected to make early announcements of RTAs and to notify their RTAs to the Committee.

The Committee is mandated to consider trade arrangements between developing countries under the WTO Enabling Clause. Under discussion at this meeting were the Agadir Agreement between Egypt, Jordan, Morocco and Tunisia and a partial scope agreement on trade in goods between the Dominican Republic and Panama.

The related WTO Secretariat factual reports can be accessed here:

• Agadir Agreement
• Partial scope agreement between the Dominican Republic and Panama

Some members recalled the obligation under WTO rules for members to notify all RTAs in force under the transparency mechanism so that a discussion can take place among the whole WTO membership.

As Chair of the Joint Advisory Group on UNCTAD/ITC/WTO, Ambassador Cedeño of Costa Rica reported on the latest developments in the group’s work, including the suggestion to set up a SheTrades certification to monitor and incentivize progress in the area of women’s economic empowerment. The SheTrades initiative was launched by the International Trade Centre to promote ways of empowering women through trade.

Members also reiterated the importance of the digital economy as an engine for growth and development, including for developing countries, and reemphasized their readiness to discuss this topic in the Committee and within the WTO generally.

Source: wto.org

 

207/ Research finds tax incentives key for Asean FDI

Tax incentives have played a vital role in multinational firms investing in Asean, but their effectiveness has been reduced for high-tech companies and those that already operate in the region, according to research conducted by a lecturer at Chulalongkorn University’s economics department.

Tax holidays have a significant effect in attracting multinational companies to invest, particularly in Asean, where competition has intensified among member nations, said Athiphat Muthitacharoen.

The effective average tax rate has declined over the past two decades as fierce competition among tax holidays has drawn more foreign companies to Asean.

If Thailand revokes all tax holidays, while tax incentives offered by other countries remain unchanged, the study found Thailand would lose 8.2% of multinational firm investment, he said.

By contrast, Thailand would gain 11% in multinational investment value if tax incentives’ were extended for another year, said Mr Athiphat. The effectiveness of the incentives would be neutralised if other Asean countries offer the same measures, he said.

His research was based on information from 6,616 multinationals that invested in five Asean countries — Thailand, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, and Vietnam — during 2000 to 2016. The top five nations with multinational firms investing in Asean were Japan, Singapore, the US, Britain and Germany.

Mr Athiphat said tax holidays have a lower impact on the investment decisions of high-tech companies and return investors that already have operations in the region.

Rather than tax incentives, high-tech companies prioritise ease of doing business, policy continuity and regulations when deciding on investments, he said.

For return investors, who account for 30% of the 6,616 companies, tax holidays are less important than new investors as they are familiar with business opportunity, risk and supply chain in host countries.

Mr Athiphat recommends the government focus more on innovation than tax incentives to draw high-tech foreign companies to invest in Thailand.

“The research also found multinational companies that have operations in tax havens paid less attention to tax incentives than those without connection with tax havens,” he said.

Multinational companies with tax haven connections represented 60% of the 6,616 companies, and tax evasion was found to have happened the most in Thailand of the five Asean countries, said Mr Athiphat.

“Thailand should seriously tackle international tax dodging by enforcing preventive measures to close loopholes. Transfer pricing laws will be enforced next year and the country does not have laws concerning thin capitalisation,” he said.

Transfer pricing describes a transaction where taxable income is distorted by a price strategy used by multinational enterprises to move profits to a lower-tax jurisdiction.

Source: Bangkok Post

 

208/ Vietnam, India aim for US$15 billion bilateral trade volume by 2020

The two-way trade revenue between Vietnam and India is on course to increase and is expected to hit US$15 billion by 2020, heard the Vietnam India Business Forum, held in Hanoi, on November 19.

Entitled “Building stronger ties for economic integration”, the forum witnessed the participation of Indian President Ram Nath Kovind, Vietnamese Deputy Prime Minister Trinh Dinh Dung, and hundreds of Indian and Vietnamese enterprises.

The event held four sectorial sessions, including “Agri, Agro-processing, agro chemicals, food and food processing and food products”, “Healthcare and Pharmaceuticals”, “Power, Energy, Renewable Energy, Oil & Gas, Infrastructure” and “Service – Information Technology, Communications, Education, Aviation and Tourism”.

Nguyen Quoc Toan, Acting Director General of Agro Processing and Market Development Department, under the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, emphasised the fruitful comprehensive strategic partnership between Vietnam and India, particularly the agricultural cooperation, which has brought about practical results.

Since the establishment of the Vietnam-India Comprehensive Strategic Partnership in 2016, the bilateral trade revenue has increased from US$7.8 billion in the 2015-2016 period to US$12.8 billion in the 2017-2018 period. India is also one of the 10 largest trading partners of Vietnam.

He noted that the two sides are working to approve the import of five Vietnamese fruits to India including blue dragons, longans, pomelos, rambutans and durians, and the export of three Indian fruits to Vietnam including grapes, pomegranates, and millet.

Through the forum, Vietnam expects more cooperation with India in the areas of India’s strength such as farmer training, agricultural disease control, and the application of technology in tracing the origin of farm produce, Toan said.

Vietnam is also one of the world’s leading exporters of rice, coffee and seafood, which boasts huge opportunities for the Vietnam and India bilateral agricultural cooperation, Toan noted.

Speakers and businesses of both countries also introduced the potential, strength and cooperation opportunities in the areas of healthcare, pharmaceuticals, energy, services, information technology and other sectors.

Addressing the forum, Vietnamese Deputy PM Trinh Dinh Dung expressed his wish that Indian enterprises would boost investment in the Vietnamese market, particularly in the areas of renewable energy, manufacturing, information technology, infrastructure development, and others.

Meanwhile, the Indian President said that the Vietnam-India business relationship presents prospects for engagement in financial services, information technology, digital economy, hydrocarbons, defence, renewable energy, mining, healthcare, tourism and civil aviation, among others.

He affirmed that Vietnam is a very important trading partner for India in ASEAN, and India is now among the 10 largest trading partners of Vietnam. He noted that the bilateral economic relations have made significant achievements, but a lot more is waiting to happen. The Indian President called on Indian and Vietnamese enterprises to cooperate for enhanced trade as well as technology and investment partnership.

Business representatives also raised problems that they have encountered during their business operations and hoped for more support from the Governments and authorised agencies of both sides to facilitate their operations.

The forum, which is part of the Indian President’s State visit to Vietnam, is jointly held by the Indian Embassy in Vietnam, Indian Business Chamber in Vietnam (INCHAM), Vietnam Chamber of Commerce and Industry (VCCI), the India IMC Chamber of Commerce and Industry (IMC), and the Associated Chambers of Commerce of India (ASSOCHAM).

Source: NDO

 

Ngày 22/11

209/ DG Azevêdo commends 2018 cohort of WTO young professionals for their excellent work

Director-General Roberto Azevêdo commended the 2018 cohort of WTO young professionals on 22 November for the group’s excellent work during their one-year placement at the organization, setting “good examples” for this initiative to keep moving forward. The 15 participants in the 2018 Young Professionals Programme said they will carry the knowledge and skills gained at the WTO throughout their future careers as trade policy practitioners.

The group, which included professionals from Antigua and Barbuda, Armenia, Cameroon, Georgia, Indonesia, Ivory Coast, Kazakhstan, Madagascar, Mongolia, Panama, Paraguay, St Vincent and the Grenadines, and Togo, was chosen from more than 1,500 candidates following a competitive selection process.

They spent their 12 months at the WTO Secretariat developing their knowledge, skills and experience, and learning about the organization’s work and activities. This is the second year for the Young Professionals Programme following the inaugural programme in 2017.

DG Azevêdo recalled that the programme was launched with the objectives of enhancing knowledge of WTO issues among young professionals from developing and least-developed members and widening the pool of qualified applicants for future recruitment at the WTO, with a special focus on those members that are not currently represented at the professional level in the Secretariat.

“Congratulations to you. I have received very good feedback from directors which means that we are moving in the right direction. The competition was fierce and you are the lucky few who have made it through the selection process. You have set good examples for this programme to move forward. There is now higher demand from directors. They want more people like you,” he said.

“We are very proud this is a merit-based selection process. It was a rare opportunity for you to work at the WTO and with this one-year experience you can be ambassadors of the WTO and spread the knowledge and expertise you acquired in your country and in your region when you go back.”

Speaking on behalf of the group, Deah James from Saint Vincent and the Grenadines said: “It’s been a privilege working here and I appreciated the experience accumulated through the interaction with colleagues in the division. All WTO colleagues have been so welcoming and helpful. I learned the expertise that’s most in demand for which I am very grateful. I believe that we are leaving the WTO with knowledge and skills that will be useful for our future careers.”

Participants in the WTO Young Professionals Programme in 2018

Name	Nationality	Division
Mr Kossivi Balema	Togo	Agriculture and Commodities
Ms Helen Chang	El Salvador	Market Access
Mr Worabhatra Chantramitra	Thailand	Rules
Ms Jeanelle Clarke	Antigua and Barbuda	Information and External Relations
Ms Ani Gabrielyan	Armenia	Trade and Environment
Mr Vakhtangi Giorgadze	Georgia	Legal Affairs
Mr Jorge Gutierrez	Panama	Intellectual Property, Government Procurement and Competition
Ms Deah James	St Vincent and the Grenadines	Development
Ms Carolle Kempa Nangue	Cameroon	Economic Research and Statistics
Ms Justine Lan	Indonesia	Trade in Services and Investment
Mr Doffou Marc Elisée Monsoh	Ivory Coast	Trade Policies Review
Ms Feruza Nabiyeva	Kazakhstan	Accessions
Ms Nydiane Razafindrahaingo	Madagascar	Institute for Training and Technical Cooperation
Ms Antonella Salgueiro	Paraguay	Intellectual Property, Government Procurement and Competition
Ms Onon Sukhbaatar	Mongolia	Agriculture and Commodities

In their own words – reflections on their experience

Ms Jeanelle Clarke

“Working in the Information and External Relations Division taught me so much about the importance of communication and openness to new ideas. This is something I will carry with me throughout my career as a trade policy practitioner.”

Mr Doffou Marc Elisée Monsoh

“What I really appreciated from this YPP experience is the work in a cross-cutting topics division such as Trade Policies Review, which helped me gain not only a huge amount of knowledge and expertise, but also an understanding of the importance of multilateral cooperation within the context of free trade, and how African states could better take part in this.”

Ms Helen Chang

“The YPP is an unparalleled opportunity to learn from and collaborate with top experts in the international trade arena, and an enlightening opportunity to research current relevant topics.”

Ms Feruza Nabiyeva

“The YPP allowed me to look at the multilateral trading system from a different – the Secretariat’s – perspective, which has definitely advanced my expertise in international trade. But most importantly, this experience provided a brand-new vision of the ways I can contribute to the strengthening of the rules-based system.”

Mr Vakhtangi Giorgadze

“The programme gave me a unique opportunity to understand the importance of WTO dispute settlement in the multilateral trading system.”

Mr Worabhatra Chantramitra

“My tenure as a Young Professional has been imbued with opportunities to work with the renowned experts in the purview of trade remedies and to gain hands-on experience in how the work of the WTO Secretariat has played a pivotal role in helping make the rules-based global trading system a reality.”

Source: wto.org

 

210/ More actions needed to boost reforms: businesses

Businesses expect to see quicker actions from State management agencies in the enforcement of the Government’s Resolutions No 19 and 35 to boost reforms and promote business development.

This need was highlighted at the launch event for the report on the implementation of the resolutions from the view of businesses, held by the Việt Nam Chamber of Commerce and Industry (VCCI) on Tuesday in Hà Nội.

“More than anyone, businesses have felt the results and efficiency of reforms over the past few years,” VCCI’s Chairman Vũ Tiến Lộc said. “They understand best how changes in the business environment affect their operations. The satisfaction of enterprises is the most important measure for the success of reforms.”

The VCCI survey, which was conducted on some 10,000 private firms, found that the companies saw significant improvements in the business climate in recent years. However, the level of improvement remained uneven across different sectors and localities.

Lộc said the space for reforms remained large, adding more efforts were needed for the State management agencies and local authorities to boost efficiency and benefit enterprises.

Lộc said the report would serve as a reference for the evaluation of the Government’s Resolution 19 about improving the business environment and national competitiveness and Resolution 35 about business development for the compilation of new resolutions.

According to Đậu Anh Tuấn, Head of VCCI’s Legal Department, surveyed businesses felt that starting a business and getting electricity were the two areas that saw the most improvements. However, trading across borders, protecting investors and resolving insolvency did not improve much.

The deregulation of business conditions, an important task in Resolution 19, was still far below the goal, although Ministry of Planning and Investment statistics showed that as of October, 15 decrees about deregulation of business prerequisites had been issued, Tuấn said.

The application for sub-licences remained difficult, he said, citing the report’s finding that 42 per cent said that they met difficulties when applying for these licences.

It was necessary to have an independent organisation to evaluate the progress of deregulation and the level of transparency in applying business prerequisites, Tuấn said.

The VCCI survey also found the procedures for registering a property lacked co-ordination between relevant agencies, such as land management agencies, tax agencies and notary offices. In some provinces, databases of these agencies had not been linked to each other.

Tuấn added that reforms in import inspections had also progressed slowly. As of September, 68 procedures were conducted via the national single window, out of 284 targeted by 2020. To date, only one was conducted completely electronically while others still required hard copies.

Tuấn said firms complained that they were inspected more than once per year, citing statistics of the 2017 provincial competitive index report that said nearly 40 per cent of firms were inspected at least two times per year and 13 per cent saw overlaps in the inspections of different groups.

“Many reforms are introduced but it is a long road before they truly benefit businesses,” Tuấn said.

Nguyễn Đình Cung, Director of the Central Institute for Economic Management, said an independent organisation to review the issuance of legal documents should be set up, which would play important role in improving the business climate.

Source: VNS

 

Ngày 23/11

211/ WTO, UNCTAD, ITC sign MoU to provide businesses with better access to trade data

The WTO, the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) and the International Trade Centre (ITC) signed today (23 November) a Memorandum of Understanding to advance the development of an online platform — the Global Trade Helpdesk — aimed at providing businesses, and particularly small businesses, with faster and easier access to trade data and information on potential export markets.

An early version of HelpMeTrade.org was launched at the WTO’s 11th Ministerial Conference in Buenos Aires, Argentina, in December 2017. Under the MoU, the WTO, ITC and UNCTAD agree to further develop the platform, with the aim of improving the quality and accessibility of trade information needed by businesses – and in particular, micro, small and medium-sized enterprises (MSMEs) – to access market opportunities. As part of the agreement, the three organizations will provide technical assistance to developing countries to help them maintain up-to-date information in the Global Trade Helpdesk and will raise awareness among MSMEs about how to benefit from this trade information.

By making trade data freely available through a user-friendly interface, the Global Trade Helpdesk will make it easier for companies across the world to increase their participation in world trade and reduce trade costs. It will help policymakers make better-informed decisions about trade and investment policies and will ensure that the international community provides better support to MSMEs.

WTO Director-General Roberto Azevêdo said:

“Gaining access to information on tariffs and other requirements for accessing export markets imposes costs on firms wishing to trade, and for small businesses this can be a substantial barrier to market entry. The Global Trade Helpdesk is a joint endeavour to help remove this barrier by providing businesses with the critical information they need. It will be particularly helpful for micro, small and medium-sized enterprises, which need reliable data to pinpoint export opportunities. I look forward to continuing this partnership with UNCTAD and ITC – and with WTO members. Much of the success of this initiative will depend on the engagement of all WTO members to make information related to trade available so that it can be fed into the Global Trade Helpdesk. We all have a role to play to make this vital project a success.”

Mukhisa Kituyi, Secretary-General of UNCTAD, said:

“The Global Trade Helpdesk is a practical tool that enables companies to access the data they need to make informed decisions about trade. It is an innovation that helps level the information playing field. Working hand in hand with our partners at the ITC and WTO, we’re addressing the needs of the trade community in a concrete fashion, and helping to transform actions into real results.”

Arancha González, Executive Director of the ITC, said:

‘‘ITC is extremely pleased to partner with UNCTAD and the WTO to ensure greater coordination and efficiency on trade information. Trade and market intelligence is fundamental for companies’ decision-making and competitiveness, in particular for micro, small and medium sized enterprises, and the Global Helpdesk is an important platform to facilitate greater coordination amongst the three agencies in delivering effective trade-related capacity building on the ground.”

The Helpdesk will contain comprehensive information from various sources on market requirements (such as tariffs, taxes, relevant health and safety standards for export products), export and import procedures (such as pre-shipment formalities, certification and inspection processes), business opportunities (such as market prices and upcoming events) and current trade statistics. Development of the Helpdesk will take place over three three-year phases. However, it is scheduled to be fully functional in phase 1.

In addition to drawing on data from ITC, UNCTAD and the WTO, the Global Trade Helpdesk will integrate trade information from a number of other international organizations and development banks, including the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB), the United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO) and the World Bank Group.

Source: wto.org

 

212/ Ministry of Transport connects 100% of procedures to NSW in 2018

This is an important content included in the Action Plan to promote the National Single Window (NSW) and ASEAN Single Window (ASW), the reform of specialized inspection for import and export and trade facilitation for the period 2018-2020 of the Ministry of Transport (MOT) has just been issued in the Decision 2413/QD-BGTVT.

Using electronic documents in the implementation of administrative procedures

According to the plan, the Ministry of Transport set out objectives that all administrative procedures related to state management of the Ministry for import, export and transit goods; passengers and means of transport on exit, entry or in transit are handled through NSW in the form of online public service level 4.

The Ministry fully participates in and realizes the ASW in line with the commitments and roadmaps of ASEAN countries, are technically ready for connecting and exchanging information with non-ASEAN trade partners under agreements to which Vietnam has acceded.

For the specialized inspection, the Ministry of Transport is determined to reform comprehensively this work on the principle of border inspection only for goods which affect social safety, national security, social morality, customs and fines, or are subject to quarantine or seriously affect the people’s health.

For other goods, the quality inspection of standards and technical regulations is implemented in the post clearance stage or based on the assessment of the enterprise level, the risk level of goods in each period and based on the system of specific standards; In cases where it is impossible to promulgate technical regulations or standards, there must be a method of public inspection.

Specifically, by the end of 2018, 100% of administrative procedures must be handled through NSW.

By the end of 2020, 100 % of administrative procedures of the Ministry of Transport handled through NSW will be levied on fees and charges (if any) electronically.

Notably, electronic documents (electronic licenses, electronic certificates and equivalent electronic documents) issued through NSW are used to carry out other related administrative procedures.

In addition, the Ministry of Transport implements the exchange and mutual recognition of commercial documents issued in electronic form with ASEAN countries and exchanges and handles commercial documents with countries and economic communities under international agreements to which Vietnam is a contracting party.

According to the Ministry of Transport, in 2019, all shipments subject to specialized inspection prior to customs clearance (under the management of the Ministry) must meet all standards, technical regulations and inspection criteria.

In the Plan, the Ministry of Transport sets out the objective of being one of the leaders in the NSW implementation

Pilot outsourcing of IT service

According to the Ministry of Transport, in the coming time, the Ministry will focus on reviewing and proposing amendments and supplements to decrees and regulations on administrative procedures in the field of specialized inspection for import and export and transit goods; passengers and means of transport on entry, exit and in transit.

The above activities are implemented towards reducing unnecessary administrative procedures; simplifying the administrative process; simplifying the dossiers and documents in the direction for the maximum application of electronic documents; reusing information, electronic documents, administrative decisions saved on the NSW Portal, instead of requesting submission or presentation of information, documents and administrative decisions in paper form.

At the same time, ensuring legal basis for the supply of public service level 4 through NSW; reviewing documents on conditions, standards, technical regulations and criteria for specialized inspection for amendments and supplements in the direction of publicity and transparency; and encouraging the socialization of specialized inspection.

The Ministry of Transport also attaches importance to building and upgrading IT system for the implementation of NSW, ASW in the direction of centralized processing on the basis of unified technology in order to save costs and ensure investment efficiency, utilize resources as well as enhance information security.

Remarkably, in the Plan, the Ministry of Transport refers to the pilot outsourcing of third-party service in the provision of IT facilities to state agencies in the implementation of administrative procedures through NSW and ASW.

Another solution that MOT is particularly interested in is training, advocacy and support.

Accordingly, the Ministry continues to develop plans, carry out training, propaganda to raise awareness for people and enterprises on NSW and ASW.

Besides, organizing the training for IT staff at IT centers and in departments and general departments to meet the task’s requirements, MOT is training officers to handle information on the professional software system to solve administrative procedures.

By November 10, 2018, the Ministry of Transport finished the construction and officially connected 70 administrative procedures to the NSW. This is a unit which has the largest number of administrative procedures connected to the NSW to date, accounting for nearly 54% of the total number of administrative procedures of other ministries and sectors joining the NSW at the same period (70/130 procedures).

For connecting 100% of the procedures to NSW, the Ministry of Transport strives to complete the connection of the remaining 5 procedures in this November.

Source: VCN

 

212/ WTO reform: EU proposes way forward on the functioning of the Appellate Body

Today, the EU together with other members of the World Trade Organisation (WTO) – Australia, Canada, China, Iceland, India, Korea, Mexico, New Zealand, Norway, Singapore and Switzerland – unveiled a proposal for concrete changes to overcome the current deadlock in the WTO Appellate Body.

The proposal will be presented at the meeting of the WTO General Council on 12 December.

Commissioner Malmström said: “The appellate body function of the WTO dispute settlement system is moving towards a cliff’s edge. Without this core function of the WTO, the world would lose a system that has ensured stability in global trade for decades. Now, together with a broad coalition of WTO members, we are presenting our most concrete proposals yet for WTO reform. I hope that this will contribute to breaking the current deadlock, and that all WTO members will take responsibility equally, engaging in good faith in the reform process.”

The WTO dispute settlement system with its Appellate Body has been key to the security and predictability of the multilateral trading system. Without a proper system of enforcement, the multilateral rules can no longer work effectively. If no solution is found to address the current deadlock on the appointments to the Appellate Body, the whole system is at risk.

The proposed amendments to the WTO Agreement submitted now to the organisation membership follow up on the EU’s ideas to modernise the WTO, published on 18 September, and are part of a broader effort that includes the recently submitted proposal on notification and transparency rules within the WTO that was co-sponsored among others by US and Japan.

They are the result of intense discussions over the past weeks with other WTO countries. The proposals address in a systematic and constructive manner all of the concerns expressed in recent months with respect to the Appellate Body. They show the EU’s willingness to engage in the process of reform of the WTO in all its functions.

The textual proposals submitted today seek to address all the concerns raised with regard to the WTO Appellate Body, by:

- Putting in place new rules for outgoing Appellate Body members which make clear in which cases they can stay on to complete the appeal proceedings they are working on;

- Ensuring that appeal proceedings are finished on time in line with the 90-day timeframe set out in the WTO rules, unless the parties in the dispute agree otherwise;

- Clarifying that the legal issues that are subject to appeal by the Appellate Body do not include the meaning of domestic legislation;

- InIndicating that the Appellate Body should only address issues necessary to resolve the dispute;

- Introducing annual meetings between WTO members and the Appellate Body to discuss in an open way systemic issues or trends in jurisprudence.

At the same time, the EU is also making proposals to reinforce the Appellate Body’s independence and impartiality and to improve its efficiency. These include having a single, longer term for Appellate Body members of 6 to 8 years, as well as increasing the number of members from 7 to 9 working full-time, to support the Appellate Body’s capacity to deliver.

The proposals also include rules to ensure that the selection process of Appellate Body members starts automatically when a post is vacant and that there is an orderly transition with outgoing members.

These proposals will be presented by the EU and co-sponsoring WTO countries to the entire membership at the meeting of the WTO General Council on 12 December. The EU hopes that all WTO members can engage swiftly on this basis and that we avert the looming crisis.

Source: Europa.eu

 

213/ India’s cotton, sugar policies under the spotlight at WTO farm committee meeting

India’s policies for supporting its cotton and sugar producers were under the spotlight at a 26-27 November meeting of the WTO’s Committee on Agriculture. Members also continued their review of a 2015 ministerial decision on improving the administration of tariff rate quotas (TRQs) and heard an update from several members regarding implementation of their commitment to eliminate agricultural export subsidies.

India’s support for cotton and sugar producers

The United States and Australia presented WTO members with “counter-notifications” outlining what they said were high levels of support payments for cotton and sugar producers which India failed to notify to the WTO. These notifications follow an earlier counter-notification from the US on India’s wheat and rice support in May 2018, the first-ever counter-notification to be submitted to the committee.

On cotton, the United States referred to its communication from 9 November (G/AG/W/188). Using what it said were publicly available sources, the US said India was substantially under-reporting the value of its market price support (MPS) for cotton, or government purchases of cotton at guaranteed prices; for example, in its 2015/2016 notification to the WTO India reported 1.2 billion rupees in MPS for cotton whereas the US estimated India’s support at over 504 billion rupees.  This level of support would imply that India was in excess of its WTO spending limits on cotton support, which is fixed at 10% of the total value of overall production.

The US noted that, since 2007, India is the world’s second-largest cotton producer. The US also underlined specific concerns with the methodologies being used by India to report its support, including reporting support levels in dollars rather than rupees, reporting only volumes actually purchased as eligible production for the purpose of determining support levels, and failing to report total value of production.

Australia referred to its 16 November communication on India’s MPS for sugarcane (G/AG/W/189). Australia said that, as the world’s second-largest sugar producer and fourth-largest exporter, the dynamics in India’s sugar market have significant implications for both prices and trade in the global market. Each year the government of India sets floor prices for sugar mills to pay farmers for sugarcane, with farmers also eligible for paid premiums for increased production efficiency and additional payments for sugar mills under specific state-level support.

Using the latest publicly available information and a “conservative” calculation, Australia said it appears that India has provided support for sugarcane over a six-year period vastly in excess of its WTO spending limits, which is fixed at 10% of the total value of production. India has not included sugarcane or its derived products in any of its domestic support notifications since 1995-96; thus there is no evidence provided to the WTO from India to compare with the findings of this paper, Australia said.

India reiterated its commitment to transparency and the fact that it was up to date on its notifications. Support for both cotton and sugar was provided to prevent producers from resorting to distress sales. India considered that the US and Australian counter-notification were based on flawed assumptions and analysis which led to wrong conclusions. In regard to cotton, procurement by government agencies only accounts for a very small part of total production (less than 2%) while for sugar, India is a marginal player in the international market and accounts for less than 1% of global sugar exports; in any event, MPS does not qualify as reportable support as there is no procurement of sugar by the government. India said it has been using a consistent reporting approach since 1995 and that the methodology it uses is compatible with WTO rules.

More than a dozen members took the floor to comment on the counter-notifications. Most said they shared the concerns of the United States and Australia regarding India’s support programmes for cotton and sugar and the impact it may be having on international markets. Several members asked India to better clarify how its policies work.

Regular review of agriculture policies

The committee continued to review policies related to the three pillars of agriculture trade: market access, domestic support and export competition. Nine new questions were posed to various members regarding various developments under the three pillars.

China responded to questions from the United States regarding a June 2018 announcement by the People’s Bank of China that it would ease access to credit for small and green economy businesses, including agriculture. Canada posed questions regarding the 31 October decision by EU ambassadors to adopt a “safety-net” regulation that will allow the EU to unilaterally implement reduced agricultural products import quotas in response to Brexit. The European Union replied to a question from Ukraine about support provided to EU farmers in response to a drought earlier this year which hit cereal and other producers hard.

India responded to questions from the United States regarding reported “soft loans” being given by India to support state cooperative dairy federations as well as India’s decision to increase its import duty on whey milk powder.  Japan responded to a question from the US regarding fiscal year 2018 direct payments earmarked for a programme where farmers are eligible to receive payment for rice planted for overseas markets.

Pakistan was asked by the European Union about its recent decision to increase import tariffs for several products, including dairy products such as whey, cheese powder products and curd while Sri Lanka was asked by New Zealand about the exemption of domestic producers from a value added tax on imported milk powder.

A further 16 items were addressed in relation to issues that were already raised in previous committee meetings. The full list of questions can be found in G/AG/W/190. The questions and replies can also be found in the WTO’s Agriculture Information Management System (AG-IMS).

Review of the Bali Ministerial Decision on TRQ Administration

Members continued their review of the 2013 Bali Ministerial Decision on TRQ Administration, including a thematic discussion on TRQ administration and underfill involving the participation of industry representatives. One member noted that the Bali Decision sets out deadlines for action and that it wanted useful discussions on issues such as establishing the re-allocation mechanism for underfilled TRQs as mandated under the Decision.

Several members intervened on the matter, in particular with regards to exceptions granted to developing countries under the Decision; a number of developed members said it was important that all members be subject to the underfill mechanism while one developing member said that special and differential treatment provisions in the Bali Decision should not be diluted. The importance of members providing better and more notifications to the WTO on their TRQ fill rates and improving transparency of their TRQ administration was also stressed by members.

Implementation of the Nairobi Ministerial Declaration on the elimination of export subsidies

Several members provided updates on their efforts to incorporate the 2015 Nairobi Ministerial Decision on the elimination of export subsidies into their WTO schedule of commitments, thus making the commitments binding under WTO rules.

South Africa said it expected its revised schedule would be ready by the end of the year while Iceland said it hoped to submit revised draft schedules for members’ approval within weeks. Mexico said the draft schedule was still undergoing domestic review and would hopefully be ready as soon as possible and Brazil indicated that the draft revised schedule was expected to be sent to parliament by the end of the year.

The 2015 Nairobi decision required developed members to immediately eliminate their remaining scheduled export subsidy entitlements and for developing members to eliminate their export subsidy entitlements by the end of 2018, with some transitional exceptions granted.

Enhancing transparency and the committee’s review process.

The chair of the agriculture committee, Debora Cumes of Guatemala, noted that the committee has discussed ideas relating to improving the timeliness and completeness of notifications and that Norway introduced a paper on this at the last meeting in September (G/AG/W/185). In that paper Norway said some of the deadlines for submitting notifications are “unrealistic” and that the deadline for submitting notifications on total Aggregate Measurement of Support (AMS) should be extended from 90 days from the end of the calendar/fiscal year in question to 10-12 months.

Norway reiterated its call for extending the reporting deadline for AMS, noting that those with AMS commitments are reporting well beyond the 90-day deadline, with the submissions ranging between 8 and 55 months after the calendar/fiscal year for the most recent notifications. Several members took the floor to comment, underlining the importance of transparency but expressing different views on the Norwegian initiative.

Overdue notifications

Ms Cumes noted that G/AG/GEN/86/Rev.33, circulated on 16 November, reflects the current status of compliance with notification obligations of WTO members. The chair highlighted the good efforts by a few members to update their notifications since June, notably Indonesia, China, Sri Lanka, Australia and Turkey. Nevertheless, a significant proportion of domestic support (35%) and export subsidies (32%) notifications remain outstanding for the period 1995 to 2016; she said providing the notifications helps ensure the committee works effectively.

Next meeting

The next meeting of the Committee on Agriculture is scheduled for 26-27 February 2019.

Source: wto.org

 

Ngày 27/11

214/ New WTO publication analyses potential impact of Blockchain on international trade

Amid growing interest and debate on Blockchain, the WTO launched a new publication today (27 November) that seeks to demystify the technology and analyse its capacity to transform world trade. The publication entitled “Can Blockchain revolutionize international trade?” explores how the technology could enhance areas related to WTO work and examines challenges that will have to be tackled to unlock the technology’s potential.

The publication introduces the technology with a basic explanation of how, as a tamper-proof, decentralized record of transactions, it allows participants to collaborate and build trust with each other.  It describes different classifications of Blockchains and their current and possible applications in the various areas covered by WTO rules. In doing so, it provides an insight into the extent to which this technology could help with trade facilitation, including how it can hasten the transition to paperless trade transactions. It considers Blockchain’s potential and limits in transforming services by looking at payment systems, insurance and the automation of contracts. The publication also discusses how Blockchain could help ease the administration of intellectual property rights and enhance government procurement processes.

Other potential benefits identified by the publication include cross-cutting opportunities to reduce trade costs, enhance supply chain transparency and open up new trading opportunities for micro, small and medium-sized enterprises.

The publication reviews various challenges that must be addressed before the technology can be used on a wide scale and have a significant impact on international trade. These include issues such as whether the technology can be scaled up for large or complex applications, how immune it is to security threats, to what extent various Blockchain platforms can be used in an integrated manner, and which legal issues need to be ironed out to increase mainstream use of the technology. The publication calls for a multi-stakeholder dialogue to assess the practical and legal implications of the technology and to develop collective solutions to existing challenges while providing the flexibility for the technology to thrive.

“While this technology opens interesting opportunities, clearly it also raises legal, regulatory and policy issues that deserve our attention. We need to consider how to spread the opportunities and overcome the challenges. We can only do this if we are in full possession of the facts. We need to fully understand the technology – what it can do and what it can’t do. And most importantly for us, we need to understand what it means for international trade,” WTO Director-General Roberto Azevêdo said at the WTO workshop where the book was launched.

“This requires an informed debate. And it needs to go beyond trade experts. Blockchain is a technology that has the potential to break silos, so we should not create silos in this discussion. We need a debate among all stakeholders – the business community, blockchain experts, government authorities, representatives from other international organizations, and many others as well. With our new publication, and with today’s event, we are seeking to inform the debate and bring together this wider community,” he said.

Source: wto.org

 

215/ Research Workshop on Blockchain

Remarks by DG Azevêdo

Good morning everyone.

It is my pleasure to welcome you to this research workshop on blockchain and international trade. This is the first such event dedicated to blockchain organized here at the WTO.

Let me begin by thanking our Economic Research and Statistics Division for organising today’s session.

We are in the midst of an unprecedented digital revolution.

A few weeks ago, we launched this year’s World Trade Report, which examines how digital technologies are transforming global commerce and looks at the challenges and opportunities that this will create.

Blockchain is one of the technologies we looked at in the Report.

Today, we are launching a further publication entitled “Can Blockchain revolutionize international trade?”

This publication further develops the research of the World Trade Report. It focuses specifically on blockchain and discusses in depth the potential impact that distributed ledger technology could have on international trade.

The author of this new publication is Emmanuelle Ganne. And she will provide an overview of her findings in a few moments.

But first, let me share a few thoughts with you.

Everyone has heard of Blockchain. It has become one of these buzzwords that you hear all the time. But it bears closer examination.

The technology first emerged during the 2008 financial crisis, at a time when people’s trust in institutions, in particular financial institutions, was very low. And it came to prominence as the technology underpinning Bitcoin – the famous and highly controversial cryptocurrency.

Blockchain is still often associated with Bitcoin. But it is about much more than that.

The term Blockchain itself hides a complex reality.

It is often used in a generic way to refer to distributed ledger technology. But there are, in fact, different distributed ledger technologies, and multiple potential applications of these technologies.

What does Blockchain mean for international trade? Well, it could mean a lot.

International trade transactions often involve dozens of actors along the supply chain and remain highly paper intensive.

Blockchain could enhance the transparency and traceability of supply chains, accelerate the digitalization of trade transactions and automate processes.

It could give rise to a new generation of services, particularly in areas like transportation and logistics, financial services and insurance.

It could facilitate small businesses’ access to global markets and trade finance by enabling them to create a digital identity and build trust with partners around the world.

It could also impact the administration and enforcement of intellectual property rights, thereby shaping the competition landscape.

And it could generate significant cost reductions and revenue gains. In fact, a recent study has estimated that the gains from Blockchain could deliver 3 trillion dollars of value worldwide by 2030.

To get a sense of the potential impact of the technology on international trade, one does not need to look far. Increasingly, the technology is now moving to real life applications.

Some retailers are already using it on a day-to-day basis to track millions of packages along their supply chains. Some blockchain-powered trade finance and trade transportation platforms are now processing live operations. Customs authorities and other government agencies are also investigating the technology. Some of these examples will be presented in more detail this morning.

But Blockchain is not suited to all situations. A lot of the hype is deserved – but it is not a solution to all problems.

In fact, the technology comes with its own set of challenges.

Existing blockchain platforms still do not talk to each other – or if they do it is only to a limited extent.

This is the “digital island problem”, as some have called it.

In addition, many Blockchain applications require more than simply the Blockchain technology.

A few minutes ago, I noted that Blockchain could accelerate the digitalization of trade transactions. But it can only do so if the legislative framework allows for transactions to be carried out through digital means, and if laws recognize the validity of e-transactions and e-signatures.

Putting in place a conducive regulatory framework is essential. Without a policy environment that allows the technology to thrive, we may be losing the opportunity to make international trade more efficient and more inclusive.

The use of Blockchain also raises important policy questions.

The technology could, as I said earlier, facilitate small businesses’ access to global markets and trade finance by enabling them to create a digital identity.

But what about the small farmers that do not even enjoy a mobile internet connection? How can they access the potential benefits?

While this technology opens interesting opportunities, clearly it also raises legal, regulatory and policy issues that deserve our attention.

We need to consider how to spread the opportunities and overcome the challenges.

We can only do this if we are in full possession of the facts. We need to fully understand the technology – what it can do and what it can’t do. And most importantly for us, we need to understand what it means for international trade.

This requires an informed debate. And it needs to go beyond trade experts. Blockchain is a technology that has the potential to break silos, so we should not create silos in this discussion.

We need a debate among all stakeholders – the business community, blockchain experts, government authorities, representatives from other international organizations, and many others as well.

With our new publication, and with today’s event, we are seeking to inform the debate and bring together this wider community.

So I hope that your discussions today will be very fruitful. And I hope that the ideas that emerge will help guide members’ thinking and actions going forward.

Unfortunately, I cannot stay for the whole event, but I look forward to receiving a full report of the proceedings.

We have a fantastic set of panellists with us today. So I know you’ll be in good hands.

Thank you for listening. I wish you a very productive event.

Source: wto.org

 

216/ Parties to government procurement pact approve UK’s terms of participation post-Brexit

At a meeting of the WTO’s Committee on Government Procurement on 27 November 2018, parties to the Government Procurement Agreement (GPA) approved in principle the United Kingdom’s final market access offer to take part in the GPA, in its own right, following its departure from the European Union. Parties to the Agreement are now deliberating on the language of a decision to be put for formal acceptance at a later stage. Australia also announced that ratification of its GPA accession is under way.

GPA parties have agreed in principle to the UK’s final market access offer, which is intended to replicate its current GPA schedule of commitments as an EU member. Parties welcomed the possibility for their suppliers to continue enjoying the same access to the UK’s government procurement market. All parties re-emphasized their clear desire for the UK to continue participating in the Agreement in a seamless manner post-Brexit.

The GPA is a WTO plurilateral agreement covering 47 member governments which have opened procurement activities worth an estimated US$ 1.7 trillion annually to international competition. This includes government purchases of goods, services and construction services. The Agreement aims to ensure open, fair and transparent conditions of competition in parties’ government procurement markets, based on principles of reciprocity and to the extent agreed by members.

Under the draft EU withdrawal agreement negotiated separately between the EU and the UK and currently subject to internal approval procedures in those jurisdictions, the UK would remain bound by international treaties signed by the EU, including the GPA, until the end of the transition period foreseen in the agreement. In the meeting of the GPA Committee, the EU and the UK confirmed their joint position that the UK would join the GPA at the end of the transition period and would be treated as an EU member state until then. Parties are now consulting with each other to agree on appropriate language for a draft GPA Committee decision which will be put for their formal approval at a later stage.

The Chair, Mr Carlos Vanderloo of Canada, highlighted “a very positive discussion which revealed clear support by parties for the UK’s final market access offer” and expressed hope for “a swift conclusion” of the accession process.

The UK reiterated that it intends to update its proposed GPA schedule of commitments within three months of their coming into effect, to reflect evolutions within its government procurement market. Members welcomed the UK’s commitment to ensuring transparency and clarity.

The UK launched its GPA negotiations in June 2018 by submitting to parties an initial market access offer and replies to a checklist on its national government procurement system. As an EU member, the UK has been participating in the GPA for over 20 years.

Also at the meeting, Australia announced that its terms of accession to the GPA were expected to be tabled in its national parliament on 28 November, just one month after Australia’s related bid was accepted by the GPA parties. Parties welcomed Australia’s efforts to formally conclude its GPA accession.

Next

The next regular meeting of the GPA Committee is scheduled for the end of February 2019. A short informal meeting may be scheduled as early as mid-December to resolve the wording of the expected draft decision on the United Kingdom’s GPA accession.

Source: wto.org

 

Tin bài 28/11

217/ Trade talks: Government study to weigh RCEP impact

Move suggests anxiety over potential losses from the deal hasn’t yet subsided

Concerned over domestic resistance to the 16-nation Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) agreement, and pressured by RCEP partners to extend greater commitment to liberalise its goods trade, India has decided to conduct a study on potential gains or losses to its economy from such a regional trade pact.

Earlier this year, a government panel under commerce and industry minister Suresh Prabhu had decided to remain engaged in RCEP negotiations, but not to sweeten offer for goods trade further. The latest move to commission a study suggests New Delhi’s anxiety over potential losses from the mega deal hasn’t yet subsided.

“The study will be conducted by the Centre for Regional Trade and the IIM Bangalore,” an official source told FE, adding it will also come handy during further RCEP negotiations.

Negotiators from the RCEP members will next meet in February 2019 in Indonesia, which will be followed by a ministerial meeting in Thailand in April next year, the source said. Domestic industry and even certain ministries, including steel, have been critical of the RCEP deal on fears of dumping, especially by China.

In the RCEP negotiations in Singapore in August, members agreed to provide India a time frame of over 20 years to eliminate tariff on key items for China, Australia and New Zealand with which it doesn’t have a free trade agreement. The members also agreed to include the free movement of skilled services professionals under the RCEP, acceding to another demand by India.

The members also accepted India’s demand that it could also negotiate with its non-FTA partners, including China, bilaterally, and separately, on concessions they are willing to grant each other under the RCEP framework. RCEP negotiations, which were supposed to achieve substantial progress in 2018, will continue in 2019 as well.

For its part, India has proposed to eliminate tariffs on 80% of products with a margin of 6%, depending on level of development of the other country as part of RCEP negotiations. This means India may have to scrap duties on 74% of goods from China in the long run. However, many RCEP members want India to commit to abolish duties on 92% of its goods.

From steel to pharmaceuticals, industries have been criticising India’s existing trade agreements with Asean, Japan and South Korea on grounds that New Delhi’s trade deficit with these countries have only widened after these pacts came into force and there is little for domestic industry to benefit from. Also, India had a record $63 billion goods trade deficit with China in 2017-18. If, on top of this, a free trade agreement with China is effected through the RCEP (of which Beijing is a key member), cheap products will flood the market, they have pointed out.

The steel ministry, for instance, argues that without any FTA, India has a trade deficit (in steel) of two million tonne with China and “considering the trend, it is imperative that pursuant to signing of the RCEP, the trade deficit will further widen”. The pharma industry, too, fears that cheap Chinese products will have unrestricted entry to India.

Apart from the Asean members, China, Japan, Korea, Australia and New Zealand are engaged in talks for the RCEP agreement. China was the biggest contributor to India’s $104-billion goods trade deficit with all the RCEP partners in 2017-18. The scrapping of tariff lines means import duties on specified items would be cut to zero over a mutually agreed-upon time frame.

India has already made it clear that it is opposed to an “early harvest”. This means it wants agreements on all the three pillars of negotiations — goods, services and investment — be implemented only as a package, not one at a time. So even if a consensus is reached early on goods (which is what most nations want), India feels it shouldn’t be enforced in isolation.

Source: Financial Express

 

218/ Vietnam, Singapore enhance economic, trade ties

More than 150 Vietnamese and Singaporean enterprises attended a conference in Singapore on November 27 to look for cooperation and investment opportunities.

The event is part of activities held by the Vietnam-Singapore Friendship Association (VSFA) in collaboration with the Vietnamese Embassy and relevant agencies in Singapore from November 26-29 on the occasion of the 45th anniversary of Vietnam-Singapore diplomatic relations, and five years of their strategic partnership.

At the conference, Vietnamese firms said they want to bolster links with Singaporean sides so that they can join the regional and global supply chains in the context of digital economy and the Fourth Industrial Revolution.

Getting updated on Vietnam’s investment policies and economic strategies, Singaporean companies spoke highly of Vietnam’s economic prospects, and expressed their interest in expanding business operations in the country. They wished that the Vietnamese business climate will be further improved to welcome a new foreign investment wave as a wide range of free trade deals will soon take effect.

VSFA Chairman Vu Viet Ngoan lauded the friendship and comprehensive cooperation between Vietnam and Singapore in all sectors. Since the nations upgraded the ties to a strategic partnership in 2013, two-way trade has increased year after year. Singapore is currently the 3rd largest trade partner of Vietnam in ASEAN while the latter is the 5th trade largest of Singapore in the bloc.

As both sides are engaged in a number of free trade agreements, especially the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) and the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), they will further boost bilateral relations and engage more deeply in the global value chain, he added.

On the occasion, the VSFA joined hands with the US-ASEAN Business Council (USABC) to organise a talk connecting US groups operating in Singapore and ASEAN and Vietnamese enterprises in the fields of finance, banking and innovation.

Participants discussed opportunities for US firms to increase their investment in Vietnam and pour more cash into local commercial banks, as well as those for Vietnamese firms to join regional and global supply chains.

Earlier on November 26, an exhibition displaying more than 30 paintings that feature the culture, land and people of Vietnam and Singapore was opened, drawing the participation of more than 200 visitors who are Singaporean officials, representatives from diplomatic organisations and local people.

Source: VNA

 

219/ Germany gives EUR 150,000 to help developing countries access agricultural export markets

Germany is donating EUR 150,000 (CHF 170,000) to the Standards and Trade Development Facility (STDF) to help poorer economies comply with international food safety, animal and plant health standards and to achieve greater access to agricultural export markets. The contribution was confirmed at a signing ceremony with the Director of the WTO’s Administration and General Services Division, Nthisana Phillips, and Germany’s WTO Ambassador, Walter Werner, on 20 November 2018.

The Standards and Trade Development Facility (STDF) is a global partnership financed by voluntary contributions. The WTO houses the Secretariat and manages the STDF trust fund.

Ms Phillips said: “Germany’s new donation will be important to help developing and least-developed countries improve their sanitary and phytosanitary standards, thereby accessing agricultural markets more easily. I welcome Germany’s continued generosity, which will help to bring the benefits of trade to these countries.”

Ambassador Werner said: “We are happy to support developing economies in their efforts to expand their production and export skills so that they can better participate in agricultural markets. Our contribution to the STDF assists developing countries in implementing high standards which prevent the spread of animal and plant diseases and which support these countries in trading with their export partners. These are essential elements to guarantee food security and to fight poverty.”

Overall, Germany has donated approximately EUR 25 million (CHF 28 million) to WTO trust funds in over 15 years.

Source: wto.org

 

220/ Ireland provides EUR 350,000 to two WTO programmes for developing countries

Ireland has provided EUR 350,000 (about CHF 400,000) to the French Irish Internship Programme for Selected Members’ Missions in Geneva and the Standards and Trade Development Facility (STDF) to assist developing countries’ participation in world trade. With this new contribution, Ireland’s overall contribution to WTO trust funds has now reached CHF 12.6 million.

Ireland’s donation will assist in building the trade capacity of developing and least developed countries and will help them implement WTO agreements and comply with international standards. These are areas that are key to protecting the trade interests and development needs of the world’s poorest countries.

EUR 200,000 (about CHF 230,000) is being provided to the French Irish Internship Programme for Selected Members’ Missions in Geneva. This programme provides funding for interns from developing countries so that they can gain valuable experience with the multilateral trading system by working in the Geneva mission of their own country.

EUR 150,000 (approximately CHF 170,000) is being provided to the Standards and Trade Development Facility (STDF) for 2018. This programme was set up to help developing countries improve their expertise and their capacity to analyze and implement international standards on food safety and animal and plant health and to access agricultural export markets. The STDF is a joint initiative of the World Trade Organization, the World Health Organization, the World Bank, the World Organization for Animal Health and the UN Food and Agriculture Organization.

WTO Director-General Roberto Azevêdo said: “We welcome Ireland’s continued generosity. These donations will help developing and least-developed countries to benefit fully from the multilateral trading system. This support will also help these countries comply with international sanitary and phytosanitary standards, helping them to find markets for agricultural goods for example, with all the benefits that brings for growth and development.”

Irish Ambassador to the WTO Michael Gaffey said: “Support for trade and investment is integral to the implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Through these grants, Ireland is working to support the potential of trade to promote employment, decent work and women’s economic empowerment, reduce inequality and contribute to the realization of the Sustainable Development Goals.”

Source: wto.org

 

221/ Members mark 10th year of WTO monitoring of cotton development assistance, trade trends

At the WTO’s cotton days on 28-29 November, the major milestones achieved in the past ten years in monitoring cotton development assistance were welcomed by members and the Cotton 4 — Benin, Burkina Faso, Chad and Mali. Members also took stock of progress over ten rounds of dedicated discussions on cotton trade. Deputy Director-General Alan Wolff underscored the dynamic and project-focused approach that underpins WTO work on cotton development assistance. Ambassador Ford of Guyana recalled trade achievements which “demonstrate members’ determination and ability to deliver results on cotton”.

Cote d’Ivoire attended the cotton days for the first time as a Cotton 4 (C4) observer country following its application for observer status at the C4 ministerial meeting in N’Djamena, Chad.

At the two-day meeting, known as the WTO “cotton days”, WTO members discussed both the latest developments in cotton trade and the assistance provided to developing countries. At the end of the two days, WTO members endorsed the joint initiative of the WTO, the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) and the International Trade Centre (ITC) to enhance the economic potential of cotton by-products.

Development assistance

DG Evolving Table and project presentations

According to the latest version of the Director-General’s Evolving Table on Cotton Development Assistance (WT/CFMC/6/Rev.25, 15 November 2018) prepared by the WTO Secretariat to keep record of all cotton-related development assistance projects, 29 active cotton-specific projects have been recorded, benefiting 32 countries. This reflects an increase in development assistance in this area. Three new projects were recorded from GIZ-Germany and Switzerland. This is the 10th year that the evolving table exists in its current form (see flyer).

Members examined the Cotton 4’s “Cotton Roadmap Project” (WT/CFMC/W/73 and presentation by Amb. Laourou), including two country-specific projects from Mali and one from Benin. The Cotton 4 selected Mali to carry out two new pilot projects to address high soil acidity and improve yields. If successful, the model will be replicated in other countries. Benin proposed a project looking at the possibility of improving organic matter in soils by introducing more diversified crops. The estimated cost will be evaluated on a country-by-country basis.

The Brazilian Cooperation Agency presented its activities on cotton. Since 2015, Brazil has started a new trend of working with international organizations, such as the UN Food and Agriculture Organization and the World Health Organization to assist African countries in the development of the cotton sector. Thirty-six projects have been implemented, mostly in Africa and Latin America, and various new technical missions will start in December 2018.

Business sheds lights on how to tap into the cotton markets

Since the Cotton Day meeting of June 2018, the Consultative Mechanism has taken a pragmatic approach by bringing the private sector into the discussion. This time Mr Ryota Karube, President of the Japanese trading company Toyoshima Inc., introduced its business model and its role in linking African cotton producers to the international market. Toyoshima called for African farmers to build relations with trading companies and stressed the importance of developing strategies to exploit the increasing consumer-driven opportunities offered by cotton such as the Better Cotton Initiative and Cotton made in Africa.

Emphasizing the ministerial mandate on cotton development assistance, DDG Wolff, Chair of the Consultative Mechanism on behalf of Director-General Roberto Azevêdo, underlined the importance of “effective assistance” and invited beneficiaries to “continue identifying their needs linked to cotton or related sectors, including on a regional basis”.

DDG Wolff video

Discussions on cotton policies and negotiation prospects

WTO members noted that the WTO cotton initiative, launched in 2003, has seen many historic moments over the past ten years, including:

• the 2013 Bali Ministerial Decision on Cotton, which introduced “dedicated discussions” twice a year for WTO members to address the trade-related developments that underpin cotton negotiations
• the 2015 Nairobi Ministerial Decision on Cotton, which committed members to abolish agricultural export subsidies for cotton as of 1 January 2017, with developed members and developing members with the capacity to do so agreeing to grant duty-free and quota-free market access for exports of cotton and cotton-related products from least-developed countries
• the launch of a joint WTO/ITC cotton portal at the 2017 Buenos Aires Ministerial Conference, with the aim of helping cotton producers, traders and policymakers better harness market opportunities in the cotton sector.

Recalling the vital importance of cotton for developing countries and least developed countries (LDCs), in particular for more than 30 African countries that produce and trade cotton, Ambassador Ford, Chair of the Dedicated Discussion, noted that “the 12th Ministerial Conference would be a perfect opportunity to fulfil the mandate of delivering ambitiously, expeditiously and specifically on cotton”.

Amb. Ford video

The WTO Secretariat introduced the updates to the 9th revision of the background paper (TN/AG/GEN/34/Rev.9-TN/AG/SCC/GEN/13/Rev.9 and two addendums), which captures information on the three pillars of agriculture policies, namely market access, domestic support and export subsidies provided by members. Members expressed their appreciation for the background paper as an important and useful tool.

The C4 and several African countries called for members’ engagement in cotton negotiations. The C4 reported on the C4 Ministerial Conference held in N’Djamena on 15 and 16 November where ministers expressed strong concern regarding the lack of results on cotton domestic support despite the strong mandate given by several WTO ministerial decisions, and urged WTO members to notify updated data to support that process.

In his update on the state of play of the negotiations on cotton, the Chair of the Committee on Agriculture in Special Session and Cotton sub-committee, Ambassador Deep Ford, acknowledged the call made by the C-4. He noted that “while there remained stark differences in the approaches to that end, some members have suggested looking into possible incremental options, including possibly a stand-alone outcome”.

In conclusion, he said: “I am confident that if members continue to work together towards a common goal and if we step up our efforts, we can and will secure further achievements on cotton, including on the outstanding issue of trade-distorting domestic support.” Ambassador Ford asked members to take advantage of the upcoming meeting of the Committee on Agriculture on 6-7 December and subsequent discussions to continue exploring possible options and ways to bridge the gaps.

US submission on cotton

The United States presented its first-ever paper on cotton (JOB/AG/144,25 September), an integral part of its work to “identify the challenges farmers face today that limit their ability to thrive and opportunities for trade liberalization to address these challenges”. The new submission contains data on domestic support, market access and export subsidies for cotton for 23 WTO members involved in cotton production and trade.

In its paper, the US looks at the level of “water”(tariff overhang) between the average bound rate and the average applied tariff rate for cotton. The US also looks at the evolution of cotton-specific domestic support based on members’ notifications as well as other sources (OECD and the International Cotton Advisory Committee) using different calculation methodologies. The US flagged the transparency issue surrounding members’ notifications to the WTO, which made the notifications-based calculations less robust, and reiterated the importance of up-to-date data for well-informed negotiations.

The Cotton 4 and other WTO members welcomed the US submission and shared the US concerns on transparency. The Cotton 4 invited members to reply to the questionnaire circulated before the summer break as a complementary way to update the data.

First technical sessions on the Cotton Portal and ePing

At the request of the Cotton 4 countries, a first hands-on session on the new Cotton Portal was delivered by ITC. ITC agreed with the Cotton 4′s suggestion to provide more online training sessions for officials in their capitals. The WTO Secretariat also introduced the cotton-related functions of the e-ping alert system, an online service for updates on product requirements in foreign markets.

The Cotton Portal, developed jointly by the WTO and ITC, was launched in Buenos Aires on 11 December 2017. It is a single-window portal for officials, farmers and traders and includes practical information, such as an export potential map and contact details of buyers in destination countries.

The WTO Secretariat made a presentation on ePing. ePing is an alert system on sanitary and phytosanitary measures and technical barriers to trade measures notified to the WTO. It assists producers, stakeholders and government officials in keeping track of product requirements in foreign markets, including for cotton.

Cotton trade trends and the issue of increasing African cotton yields

Mr Kai Hughes, the Executive Director of the ICAC, gave two presentations on the major trends in cotton trade and on the issue of increasing yields in Africa. According to ICAC, although global production will decrease slightly in 2019, African countries’ production is expected to continue to grow. On the consumption side, China remains the largest consumer and should surpass Bangladesh and Viet Nam to become once again the top cotton lint importer. Despite the negative correlation between subsidies and the price of cotton, the share of cotton receiving subsidies is expected to increase in 2018-2019.

ICAC showed confidence in the potential of the African cotton sector, which represents 12-14% of the global cotton area and comprises 3.5 million people. However, the average yield of lint cotton in African countries is below 200 kilogrammes per hectare, only 10% of Australia’s level. Various possible explanations were debated, such as the high ratio of rainfed cotton in Africa, pesticide problems, climate change, and shortage of technologies.

Visibility campaign on the WTO work on cotton

The WTO Secretariat has strengthened communication and outreach work through a new visibility campaign on cotton. This includes a social media campaign on Youtube and the WTO’s social media accounts, while various communication tools and platforms have been introduced to the public, including a new cotton logo, a new dedicated cotton webpage for cotton days, flyers and a video campaign entitled “share your views on cotton!”.

Next meeting

The next “cotton days” are tentatively scheduled for early June 2019.

Source: wto.org

222/ Industry 4.0 to boost Vietnam’s GDP to 16 percent

The Fourth Industrial Revolution, also known as the Industry 4.0, has the potential to bolster Vietnam’s economic output by a further 28.5-62.1 billion USD, equivalent to the GDP growth of 7-16 percent by 2030, according to a report by the Central Institute for Economic Management (CIEM).

The per capita income is expected to rise by an additional 315-640 USD thanks to improvements in labour productivity and the increase in job creation, the report said.

Addressing a forum held in Hanoi on November 27, CIEM Director Nguyen Dinh Cung said that as a lower middle-income nation, Vietnam is focusing its efforts on shifting its growth model and accelerating the digital industrialisation process.

Rational policies should be put in place so that Vietnam can soon get involved with Industry 4.0 as science and technology are deemed as the leading drivers for economic growth, he noted.

Meanwhile, deputy head of the CIEM’s Department of Business Environment and Competitiveness Dang Quang Vinh said that besides serving as a primary motive for economic expansion, new industries will support other sectors in enhancing their competitive edge, increasing revenue, and developing new services.

Manufacturing, processing, trade, retail sale, agriculture, finance, banking, and insurance will be among the Industry 4.0 beneficiaries, he underlined.

Despite recent improvements in the business climate, Vietnam’s market economy institution has not been able to provide a sufficient legal corridor for innovation, while business regulations still lag behind technology and market trends, Vinh pointed out.

Also, most enterprises have not paid due attention to high-tech application in their production lines, he said, adding that the shortage of capital for technological investment means that companies have failed to connect supply and demand.

The Government should change its business management mechanism, create space for technology development, supplement institutions for new industries, and exercise regulations on intellectual property to encourage innovation, Vinh recommended.

As part of efforts to improve the capacity of gaining access to Industry 4.0, Dinh Quang Trung, deputy head of the Ministry of Information and Communications’ Department of Science and Technology, suggested branching out strategic IT and electronics-telecommunication products, and extended studies to ensure information safety in sectors with emerging challenges.

Meanwhile, veteran economist Le Dang Doanh described the facilitation of business conditions as the most important factor that should be included in the national strategy on Industry 4.0.

Source: VNA

 

223/ Mobilizing the green dollar: a new expert committee to help

Moving to a sustainable world requires money, and lots of it. Trillions, not billions, according to the World Bank. A new international ISO committee has just been formed to take sustainable finance to another level.

Adapting to climate change and building a more equitable, sustainable world will require significant investment – around USD 90 trillion worth by 2030¹⁾ for infrastructure alone. While much investment in green projects and “sustainable” solutions is already taking place, there needs to be more. Consistency in what sustainable finance really is and how it is put in place will drive confidence and uptake in the market, as well as encourage new initiatives and actions.

A new ISO technical committee, ISO/TC 322, Sustainable finance, aims to foster a sustainable investment market through the development of new International Standards. The first project for the committee will be to develop a framework for sustainable finance, which will consolidate concepts that exist and agree common terminology.

Mike Henigan, Secretary of the new committee, said there are already standards for governance, finance and sustainable development as well as on related topics like green bonds, but there is nothing holistically covering sustainable finance.

“Our aim is to mainstream sustainable finance, to make it more accessible and more effective for the industry and investors everywhere, thus enabling the alignment of the global financial system with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals,” he said.

“This will involve bringing together the expertise on existing standards, harmonizing and clarifying what sustainable finance really is, and providing common terminology and international best practice and guidelines on putting processes in place.

“The initial framework will provide a platform from which organizations involved in sustainable investment can develop their products further and enable more and more players to enter the market,” he concluded.

Future work by the committee will consider the integration of sustainability into financial decision making, services and products; investment decisions that achieve good social outcomes in addition to financial returns; green finance, which combines “climate finance”, in support of concepts such as clean energy, with broader environmental and conservation finance; and investment around specific types of projects such as energy efficiency programmes and sustainable cities.

The secretariat of ISO/TC 322, Sustainable finance, is held by BSI, ISO’s member for the United Kingdom.

Source: iso.org

 

Ngày 29/11

224/ WTO members endorse joint initiative to enhance economic potential of cotton by-products

WTO members meeting under the Director-General’s Consultative Mechanism on Cotton endorsed on 29 November a new WTO-UNCTAD-ITC initiative to develop the economic potential of cotton by-products, in response to a request of the Cotton-4 countries — Benin, Burkina Faso, Chad and Mali. Deputy Director-General Alan Wolff, chairing the meeting on behalf of the Director-General, stressed that the main aim is to assist cotton-producing countries in creating new income streams for farmers and processors and to enhance access to new markets.

The economic and social benefits of cotton by-products – such as cotton cakes/meals, husks, linters, stalks and other by-products resulting from the cotton ginning process used in the food and pharmaceutical sectors – have long been recognized by the cotton community. During the meeting, the pressing need for technical assistance in this area was flagged by members, leading to the mandate for this new inter-agency initiative.

The WTO, the International Trade Centre (ITC) and the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) all stressed the importance of the initiative. The WTO made reference to the various cotton-related products listed in the Annex of the Nairobi Ministerial Decision on Cotton. Both ITC and UNCTAD experts introduced their pilot projects, in particular the programme carried out in Zambia by UNCTAD to help local farmers develop by-product strategies. The International Cotton Advisory Committee (ICAC) highlighted the link between increased cotton yields and the development of cotton by-products. The presentations are available here.

The Cotton-4 welcomed the approval of this joint initiative and called for stronger cooperation between the donor community and African countries. The European Union expressed its full support and highlighted its assistance for national reforms through country-specific support based on value chain analysis. The EU presentation is available here.

DDG Wolff and the Ambassador of Benin, speaking on behalf of the Cotton-4 and the other cotton-producing least-developed  countries (LDCs), welcomed the impact this initiative could have on poverty reduction while “increasing the standard of living of women and other most vulnerable and marginalized groups in the cotton by-product value chains”.

Private sector representatives from Brazil and Turkey emphasized the importance of the by-product sectors, which are expanding in their respective markets and at the global level (see the presentations by Brazil and Turkey).

The next step will be a one-day thematic workshop organized by the three agencies back to back with the June 2019 WTO cotton days. It will have three main objectives: 1) present to members a draft joint work programme proposal; 2) present the key elements of a pilot project, in order to prepare a consolidated pilot project proposal by the end of 2019; 3) take note of support pledges by the development community.

DDG Wolff concluded by encouraging members and participants to continue using the Consultative Mechanism as an open forum for project-focused discussions.

All presentations can be found on the new dedicated page for the “Cotton Days”.

Source: wto.org

 

225/ Vietnam improves on sustainable trade

Vietnam ranked ninth out of 20 economies in the Sustainable Trade Index 2018 released by the Hinrich Foundation last week.

The index seeks to measure the capacity of 20 economies – 19 in Asia along with the US – to participate in the international trading system in a manner that supports the long-term domestic and global goals of economic growth, environmental protection, and strengthened social capital.

The index includes 24 indicators, grouped in economic, social and environmental pillars, that together measure whether a country is engaged in sustainable trade.

According to the report, Vietnam’s sustainable trade index ranks ninth in the list of 19 Asian economies plus the US, up two points in comparison with 2016’s result and up six points in index performance relative to the gross domestic product (GDP) per head, which is currently ranked 15th.

For the economic pillar, the Vietnam’s index has improved, especially on reducing non-tariff barriers and attracting foreign investment. In addition, Vietnam has achieved a high level of market openness, reflecting the openness of trade and cross-border trade.

Stephen Olson, research fellow from the Hinrich Foundation, said that Vietnam was a country with a solid track record of moving towards sustainable trade. In the economic sphere, along with impressive GDP growth, Vietnam was also very open to trade. The signing of the CPTPP was a demonstration of Vietnam’s commitment to trade liberalisation, he stated.

In terms of the social pillar, Vietnam has risen to eighth, higher than middle income countries such as China, Thailand and Malaysia, thanks to efforts curbing inequality and improving labour standards.

However, on the environment pillar, Vietnam has decreased by 10.4 points and 5 places compared to 2016, due to high rates of deforestation.

The Hinrich Foundation suggested that Vietnam needed to overcome basic weaknesses such as reducing trade costs related to infrastructure, logistics and other costs from the legal and management system; reduce the risks of trade payments, and reduce the rate of deforestation and pollution of water resources due to commercial production and corruption.

The report was developed by the non-profit foundation Hinrich Foundation and British research and analysis firm The Economist Intelligence Unit in cooperation with the Vietnam Chamber of Commerce and Industry (VCCI).

It was first published in 2016 and this year marks the second edition.

Source: VNS

 

Ngày 30/11

226/ Advanced Trade Policy Course concludes at the WTO

Thirty participants from around the world attended the two-month Advanced Trade Policy Course (ATPC) from 8 October to 30 November 2018 at the WTO headquarters in Geneva. The course, which represents the highest level of training (level 3) in the WTO’s progressive learning framework, was closed by Mr Raymundo Valdes, Chief of the Course Design and Training Section of the WTO’s Institute for Training and Technical Cooperation (ITTC).

The ATPC focused on developing and applying practical skills on trade-related issues including trade policy analysis, formulation and implementation; trade negotiations; dispute settlement and trade monitoring.  Both legal and economic aspects of WTO rules and disciplines were examined in a series of interactive sessions including case studies, simulations and exercises. Roundtable discussions provided a platform for practical exchanges, sharing of experiences and best practices as well as debating present-day trade-related topics.  Finally, participants also prepared and delivered a presentation relating to a trade policy topic.

Details of the ATPC are provided in the Course Booklet and the Final Programme.

List of participants:

Source: wto.org

227/ Plastic waste, ‘blue economy’ among issues taken up at trade and environment committee

At the 30 November meeting of the Committee on Trade and Environment, WTO members heard discussions on managing plastic waste and attaining a circular economy where resources are recovered and recycled for maximum use. Members were also briefed on ‘blue economy’ initiatives for the sustainable use of ocean resources.

Recycling 1 million tonnes of plastic is equivalent to taking 1 million cars off the road in terms of carbon emissions, the European Union said in presenting the plastics strategy adopted by the European Commission on 16 January 2018. In addition to climate change impacts, there were also the problems of marine litter and microplastics pollution, the EU noted. While the initiative was not against plastics, the EU said it was important to tackle the material’s unsustainable use.

The EU strategy rests on four pillars, which are improving the economics and quality of plastics recycling, curbing plastic waste and littering, driving investments and innovation towards circular solutions, and harnessing global action, the delegate said. It includes a list of 39 EU actions, such as developing standards for recycled plastics and new guidelines for sorting waste.

Following the EU’s intervention, several members agreed that plastics pollution was a serious problem with transboundary implications. The need for transparency, experience sharing and multi-pronged strategies was noted. Some members shared other domestic and international initiatives relating to the issue. A representative from the Secretariat of the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm (BRS) conventions further reported on preparations to amend certain annexes of the BRS conventions to allow for improved management of plastic waste.

Beyond the management of plastic waste, WTO members also heard about the broader concept of the circular economy.  Trade has a role to play in the transition to resource-efficient economies, a representative from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development  (OECD) said in a separate presentation. Trade can help create better value chains of recycling by expanding these across borders. Trade also allows for the exchange of environmental goods and services, the OECD representative said. Governments will have to ensure that circular economy policies and trade policies reinforce each other, he said.

Blue economy

The committee took up presentations about the sustainable use of marine resources. Norway briefed members on efforts to address the over-exploitation of the world’s oceans. It introduced the Norwegian Ocean Strategy and reported on the Sustainable Blue Economy Conference held in Nairobi in November. Norway emphasized the importance of international cooperation for such efforts.

A representative from the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) underlined the economic importance of ocean resources, particularly fish and fish products, as well as the necessity for their sustainable harvest. Fisheries provide protein for the world’s population, many in the poorest countries, the FAO representative said. It is also an important source of employment. However, the percentage of fish stocks exploited within biologically sustainable levels has fallen to 66.9% in 2015 from 90% in 1974 according to the 2018 FAO report “The State of the World Fisheries and Aquaculture”.

Several members affirmed their support for the sustainable use of oceans and the integration of “blue economy” initiatives into national development strategies. The WTO can make a contribution through the negotiation of an agreement to discipline fisheries subsidies, they said.

Other topics

New Zealand and Switzerland on behalf of the Friends of Fossil Fuel Subsidy Reform updated members on their efforts to rationalize and phase out fossil fuel subsidies that encourage wasteful consumption, reiterating that the WTO had a role to play as a forum for advancing negotiations on subsidy disciplines. In response, some delegations said they supported discussing the issue in the committee while several others highlighted that fossil fuel subsidy reforms had no linkage to the WTO and were of the view that the WTO was not the appropriate venue to discuss such matters.

The WTO Secretariat introduced the new online Environmental Database, which contains all environment-related notifications submitted by WTO members as well as environmental measures and policies mentioned in their Trade Policy Reviews.

Australia briefed members on the negotiations for the Environmental Goods Agreement (EGA), noting that two years have lapsed since a EGA Ministerial Conference ended in 2016 without forging a deal to eliminate tariffs on certain environmental products. Several participants to the EGA negotiations said they remained fully committed and ready to engage when conditions are appropriate.

The committee also heard reports on New Zealand’s Trade for All Agenda, the WTO-UN Environment high level leadership dialogue held during the WTO Public Forum in October 2018,  the WTO-UN Environment publication on “Making Trade Work for the Environment, Prosperity and Resilience” and updates from observer organizations.

Hong Kong, China Permanent Representative Irene Young presided over the meeting as the committee’s interim chairperson following the departure of former committee chairperson Ambassador Sondang Anggraini (Indonesia).

Next meeting

The next committee meeting will be held in May 2019.

Source: wto.org

 

228/ Making our world accessible with ISO standards

Over a billion people around the world have some form of disability.¹ Empowerment and inclusiveness of this large section of the population are therefore essential for a sustainable society, and make up the theme of this year’s International Day of Persons with Disabilities. The Day also contributes to the goals outlined in the United Nations 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, which pledges to “leave no one behind”. Many of ISO’s International Standards are key tools to achieving these goals, and there are many more in the pipeline.

From signage in the street to the construction of buildings, ISO standards help manufacturers, service providers, designers and policy makers create products and services that meet the accessibility needs of every person. These include standards for assistive technology, mobility devices, inclusivity for aged persons and much more. In fact, the subject is so vast, we even have guidelines for standards developers to ensure they take accessibility issues into account when writing new standards.

Developed by ISO in collaboration with the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) and the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), ISO/IEC Guide 71, Guide for addressing accessibility in standards, aims to help standards makers consider accessibility issues when developing or revising standards, especially if they have not been addressed before.

The International Day of Persons with Disabilities is dedicated to building the peaceful and prosperous world outlined in the 2030 Agenda and its corresponding 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) – much like hundreds of ISO standards. Examples include ISO 17049 on the use of braille in accessible design, ISO 23599 on assistive products for blind and vision-impaired persons and the upcoming ISO 21902 on accessible tourism, which all contribute directly to SDG 3: Good health and well-being.

In addition, standards such as ISO 37101, Sustainable development in communities – Management system for sustainable development – Requirements with guidance for use, are invaluable for achieving SDG 11 (Sustainable cities and communities), which helps to make cities inclusive, safe and resilient.

Learn more about ISO standards for accessibility on our dedicated Web page or see our online mapping tool that shows how hundreds of ISO standards contribute to the 2030 Agenda’s sustainable development goals.

Source: iso.org

 

Ngày 01/12

229/ Azevêdo welcomes G20 leaders’ commitment to improve the functioning of the WTO

Director-General Roberto Azevêdo strongly welcomed the communiqué agreed by G20 leaders at the summit in Buenos Aires, Argentina, on 1 December and said he would work with all WTO members to improve and strengthen the trading system. The Director-General also called on the leaders to act urgently to address the blockage in the WTO dispute settlement system.

Speaking in Buenos Aires at the close of the summit, the Director-General said:

“This has been a very productive G20 summit. I have heard firm support for trade and the WTO throughout my meetings with leaders in Buenos Aires and heard a range of ideas about strengthening our work. This is reflected in the leaders’ declaration, which I strongly welcome. The declaration represents a very important moment in tackling the current challenges in global trade. With this statement, the leaders underline the vital importance of trade and of the multilateral trading system in supporting growth, productivity, innovation, job creation and development. They call for improvements and “necessary reforms” to the functioning of the WTO to ensure that it can continue playing this essential role. I will work with WTO members to take this forward in the interests of all.”

The declaration agreed by the G20 leaders is available here. The key paragraph on trade issues is as follows:

“International trade and investment are important engines of growth, productivity, innovation, job creation and development. We recognize the contribution that the multilateral trading system has made to that end. The system is currently falling short of its objectives and there is room for improvement. We therefore support the necessary reform of the WTO to improve its functioning. We will review progress at our next Summit.”

Source: wto.org

 

Ngày 03/12

230/ Denmark gives DKK 4 million to help developing countries meet standards for farm trade

Denmark is contributing DKK 4 million (over CHF 600,000) in 2018 to help developing and least-developed countries participate more actively in global agricultural trade. This donation to the Standards and Trade Development Facility (STDF) aims to help developing countries comply with international food safety, animal and plant health standards and increase their access to world markets.

WTO Director-General Roberto Azevêdo said: “I want to thank Denmark for committing to support developing countries and LDCs in improving their trade capacity so that they can deepen their integration into the world economy. Denmark’s generous donation is very welcome.”

Denmark’s WTO Ambassador, Morten Jespersen, said: “We consider the STDF to be an important tool in helping developing countries improve their access to global value chains, thereby easing their integration into international trade. We are very pleased to be renewing our contribution to the STDF, which we have increased this year.”

Denmark has donated approximately CHF 18 million (approximately DKK 120 million) to WTO trust funds over the past 18 years.

The STDF is a global coordination platform that brings together leading trade, health and agriculture experts worldwide to share knowledge, tools and good practice and strengthen the effectiveness of technical assistance provided to developing countries. The STDF also provides support and funding for the development and implementation of innovative projects that promote compliance with international sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) requirements. The STDF is housed and managed by the WTO.

Source: wto.org

 

231/ United Kingdom submits draft post-Brexit services commitments to WTO

WTO members received today, 3 December 2018, the United Kingdom’s draft schedule outlining its WTO commitments for services once the UK leaves the European Union. Members now have 45 days to review the schedule before certification.

The United Kingdom considers this notification to be a rectification of its concessions and commitments under the WTO, on the grounds that the schedule replicates, as far as possible, the UK’s WTO concessions and commitments as an EU member. WTO members now have 45 days to review the schedule, as outlined in the “Procedures for the certification of rectifications or improvements to schedules of specific commitments“. If no objections are made by the end of this period, the UK’s services schedule will be considered to be certified. The UK will continue to trade on current EU terms while the separate EU withdrawal negotiating process between the UK and the EU is ongoing.

Source: wto.org

 

232/ VN needs to simplify property laws for foreigners

Viet Nam’s real estate market must solve many difficulties to increase the number of foreigners buying property in Viet Nam, experts said.

“To promote foreigners’ trading of real estate products on the local market, Viet Nam should increase the portion of property products available for foreigners in each project,” Nguyen Hoai An, director of CBRE Viet Nam’s Ha Noi, branch told Viet Nam News.

“It is necessary to complete legal documents, circulars, procedures and support for foreigners in buying property products in Viet Nam,” she said. “The nation needs to complete the process of issuing pink books and certificates of ownership for property belonging to foreigners.”

“Meanwhile, banks need to increase support for foreigners in property transactions,” she said.

Existing projects that want to attract more foreign customers should develop professional customer care processes for foreigners, she said.

Foreign buyers have often faced barriers to buying real estate in Viet Nam, including the limitation of the law on the foreign ownership portion of each property project, An said.

“For apartment projects, foreigners can only own up to 30 per cent of the apartment volume, while for townhouse projects the portion is not to exceed 10 per cent or 250 units,” An said.

According to Nguyen Manh Ha, former head of the construction ministry’s Housing and Market Management Department and deputy chairman of the Viet Nam Real Estate Association, Viet Nam has many laws, decrees and circulars related to property trading. Foreign buyers often do not know all of the country’s laws.

The State should have a handbook for buyers to provide guidance on all steps and the state agencies implementing those steps, Ha said. That would make it easier for foreign buyers to navigate the property purchasing process.

“Viet Nam has a legal framework allowing foreigners to buy and own property in the country,” An said. “However, the process has obstacles in the form of the language and laws for implementing legal documents.”

“In addition, foreign buyers have also had trouble getting support with money transfers from banks,” she said.

“Most projects of local investors have not had customer support teams to help foreign buyers during property transactions, making it hard for foreigners to buy from those projects.”

“Moreover, many foreign customers receiving houses or apartments have had problems getting certificates of ownership,” she said.

Stephen Wyatt, Country Head of JLL Vietnam, agreed and added that some projects in HCM City reported foreign buyers were interested in their projects but there were no available units for foreigner buyers due to the legal limits.

“The number of foreign buyers has totalled thousands of units, versus a few hundred recorded before the new law was introduced,” Wyatt told Viet Nam News. “However, the issuance of pink books continued to be a challenge for foreign buyers.”

Since the law that allows foreigners to purchase property in Viet Nam came into effect in 2015, the number of enquiries and transactions from foreign buyers increased significantly, Wyatt said.

JLL recently carried out an international marketing campaign for residential projects in Viet Nam and received a considerable amount of interest and feedback from foreign investors from Singapore, Hong Kong, mainland China, South Korea and Japan, Wyatt said.

“Viet Nam has many opportunities for real estate market development,” he said. “Some positive changes have taken place to the legal structure surrounding residential transaction activity, which will lure more foreign developers and investors into the local market, and to Viet Nam’s law allowing foreign buyers to purchase and own residential property.”

The rights of foreigners over the property are the same as the rights of the locals – the property can be leased out, sold, inherited and used as collateral. In addition, tenure shall be for 50 years and can be renewed for another 50 years.

A safe and stable political situation and economic growth rate are also advantages for the market. Therefore, foreign real estate investors should be aware of Viet Nam as a new market for investment, he said.

Foreign direct investment (FDI) is increasing, contributing to surge in number of foreigners living and working in Viet Nam. Attention to investment in property from foreign buyers will continue to increase, according to An.

On the market, the supply and quality of products are continuing to increase, bringing more options for buyers, including those buying for investment purposes.

In the near future, foreign buyers will continue to play a role in the market because they are able to buy property at a lower price than in their home countries.

According to CBRE, at projects that were offered by CBRE on the market, the number of foreign buyers in the 2017-18 period more than doubled in comparison with the number of transactions in the 2016-17 period. Many of the projects had sold their full quota of units for foreigners during their first market offering.

The Housing and Market Management Department reported that by 2017 there were 800 foreigners with certificates of ownership for property in Viet Nam.

Meanwhile, there are 400,000 foreigners living and working in Viet Nam. This number will increase in the future as Viet Nam integrates further in the global economy, meaning foreigners’ demand for Vietnamese property will continue to rise.

Source: VNS

 

233/ G20 has responsibility to advance globalization

The world is at a crossroads and the Group of 20 shoulders the responsibility to help the world move forward in the right direction of globalization, said Stephen Perry, chairman of Britain’s 48 Group Club.

“The world is at a bit of crossroads in terms of continuing with globalisation, putting right the mistakes or moving towards a more protectionist approach,” Perry told Xinhua in a recent interview.

“There are lots of responsibilities that now lie on the shoulders of the G20 to find solutions and ways forward,” he said. Faced with grave uncertainties, the G20 has to take the steps to create the resolutions that lead to more employment and more growth, said Perry.

This year’s G20 summit, to be held from November 30 to December 1 in Argentina, marks the 10th anniversary since the first leaders’ meeting took place in 2008 in response to the global financial crisis.

“The crisis in 2008 led to the creation of the G20 because the world couldn’t find a forum for the important countries to show leadership for the world,” said Perry.

“Now is the time in history when the G20 can show itself. They need to be a bit braver, bolder than they have been in the past.”

“When you look at history, it’s quite clear if you move towards protectionism, it doesn’t solve anything and sometimes end in wars. So the question is how does the G20 solve the contradiction that is out there in the world,” he said.

In order for the world to move in the right direction, globalisation needs to be more inclusive so that more countries, including the developing ones, can benefit, he said.

“The sharing of the benefit of globalisation hasn’t been fair,” Perry said, adding that unless the countries of Africa, Asia and South America benefit from globalisation, there will be problems in those countries and the advanced economies will not benefit.

The G20 meeting themed “Building Consensus for Fair and Sustainable Development,” will focus on issues like global economy, trade and investment, sustainable development, infrastructure and climate change.

“Three to five years ago, British newspapers were criticising China for investing in infrastructure. Now most economists recognise you cannot have long-term, even medium-term growth without investment in infrastructure,” Perry said.

China’s Belt and Road Initiative is one of the most “transformational” platforms ever put into the world markets, said Perry, noting that China, after 40 years of reform and opening up, has the finance, skills and experience to push forward the initiative.

“The Belt and Road Initiative is transformational because it’s transnational, so infrastructure development under the framework can become more inclusive in development,” he said.

Source: Xinhua

 

Ngày 04/12

234/ Deputy PM welcomes APEC Vision Group leader

Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Pham Binh Minh hosted a reception in Hanoi on November for Chair of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Vision Group and former Foreign Minister of Peru Allan Wagner, who is in Hanoi to attend a conference on Vietnam’s 20-year APEC membership.

Minh said he is glad to see great progress in Vietnam-Peru relations over the past few years and affirmed Vietnam’s recognition of great importance to expanding its comprehensive cooperation with Peru on economics, trade, and investment in particular.

Minh highly appreciated the role of Peru and Allan Wagner as the APEC Vision Group’s Chair and suggested both sides continue their closer coordination in outlining new orientations for post 2020 APEC cooperation.

Wagner, in turn, lauded Vietnam’s achievements in Doi Moi (Renewal) and international integration processes as well as its role in and contributions to the forum over the past two decades, particularly the success of the APEC Year 2017.

He consented to continue forging the two countries’ relations and maintaining their coordination at multilateral forums, especially the United Nations and the APEC, as well as carrying out the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP).

Wagner also pledged to augment collaboration between Vietnam and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) with Latin American nations, while extolling Vietnam’s role in initiating the establishment of the APEC Vision Group at the 2017 APEC Economic Leaders’ Meeting, as well as its contributions as the group’s Vice Chair.

The two sides agreed on close coordination to build a new APEC vision to enhance free and open trade and investment, regional economic links, and maintain the role of the Asia-Pacific region as the driving force for global economic growth and connectivity.

Source: VNA

235/ Panels established to review India, Swiss complaints against US tariffs

At its meeting on 4 December, the WTO’s Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) agreed to requests from India and Switzerland for the establishment of panels to examine tariffs imposed by the United States on steel and aluminium imports. The DSB also considered a request from the United States for a panel to review increased duties imposed by the Russian Federation on certain US imports as well as requests from Qatar and Mexico to rule on measures adopted by Saudi Arabia and Costa Rica respectively.

DS547: United States — Certain Measures on Steel and Aluminium Products

DS556: United States — Certain Measures on Steel and Aluminium Products

India and Switzerland submitted their second requests for panels to rule on the US steel and aluminium tariffs. Their first requests were blocked by the US at the last DSB meeting on 21 November.

India said the fact that seven members have already secured panels to rule on the tariffs reflects the serious concerns the WTO membership has with the US actions as well as their confidence in the WTO as a forum for resolving disputes.

Switzerland said it firmly challenges the US argument that, by merely invoking Article XXI of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) 1994, a panel is precluded from reviewing the claims against the US tariffs; without the possibility of reviewing such a claim, any WTO member could, by simply invoking Article XXI, exempt measures of a commercial nature from the scope of WTO dispute settlement.

India and Switzerland requested the establishment of a single panel, in combination with the other seven panels already established, to review the claims against the US.

The United States said that because it has invoked Article XXI, there is no basis for a panel to review the Indian and Swiss claims, and there is no finding a panel could make other than to note that the US has invoked Article XXI. If the WTO were to review an invocation of Article XXI, this would undermine the legitimacy of the WTO’s dispute settlement system and even the viability of the WTO itself. The text of Article XXI is clear; each WTO member has the right to determine for itself what it considers to be in its own essential security interests. This has been the understanding of the US for over 70 years since the negotiation of the GATT, and this understanding has been shared by every WTO member whose national security action was the subject of complaint.

The US said it does not agree to the establishment of a single panel, which requires consensus from the DSB; because the measures were taken for reasons of national security, the US sees no basis for this dispute and does not agree to the creation of a single panel.

The European Union said it looked forward to these disputes being adjudicated positively in the WTO’s dispute settlement system, including the claims with regards to Article XXI.  Since the US has refused to agree to the establishment of a single panel, the EU said Article 9.3 of the WTO’s Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU) concerning procedures for multiple complaints automatically applies.

The DSB agreed to the establishment of the two panels requested by India and Switzerland. More than two dozen WTO members reserved their third-party rights to participate in each of the respective proceedings.

DS566: Russian Federation — Additional Duties on Certain Products from the United States

The United States requested a panel regarding Russia’s imposition of additional duties on certain US products. Several WTO members, including Russia, are unilaterally retaliating against the US for actions fully justified under Article XXI of the GATT 1994, the United States said. These members are pretending that the US actions are safeguards and that their unilateral, retaliatory duties constitute suspension of substantially equivalent concessions under the WTO’s Safeguards Agreement. Just as these members appear ready to undermine the dispute settlement system by throwing out the plain meaning of Article XXI and 70 years of practice, so too are they ready to undermine the WTO by pretending to follow WTO rules while taking measures blatantly against those rules.

The United States said it has not utilized its domestic law on safeguards to take the actions, and WTO rules on safeguards are not relevant to the US actions. Russia’s duties are nothing more than duties in excess of its WTO commitments and are applied only to the US, contrary to Russia’s most favoured nation (MFN) obligation, the US said.

The Russian Federation said it was disappointed with the US decision to request a panel with respect to the measures taken by Russia last July in response to the US steel and aluminium tariffs. The US duties are in essence safeguard measures, irrespective of the way the US characterizes them. Russia believes its measures are fully justified and applied in accordance with WTO law. Therefore, Russia is not able to agree to the establishment of a panel.

The European Union noted the US request is similar to those the US made with regards to four other WTO members and which were approved at the last DSB meeting; it welcomed the fact that Russia, like quite a number of other WTO members, resorted to its right to suspend equivalent obligations vis-à-vis the United States and looks forward to defending its right, and the rights of other WTO members, to take such action.

The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to revert to the matter.

DS567: Saudi Arabia — Measures concerning the Protection of Intellectual Property Rights

Qatar submitted a request for a WTO panel to rule on its claims that Saudi Arabia has failed to provide adequate protection of intellectual property (IP) rights in line with the WTO’s Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS), in particular with respect to IP rights held, or applied for, by Qatari-based entities.

Qatar said it has sought to resolve the matter through dialogue and negotiation but regrettably Saudi Arabia has refused to engage in consultations, which violates the conduct prescribed under the Dispute Settlement Understanding.

Qatar said that for more than a year, Saudi Arabia has failed to protect IP rights and has allowed commercial-scale broadcasting piracy; in fact, the Saudi government has actively promoted and encouraged such piracy. Qatari-based beIN Media Group holds the rights to broadcast various sports and entertainment content; however, since Saudi Arabia severed diplomatic relations with Qatar, a Saudi-based piracy outlet called “beoutQ” has begun operating, broadcasting beIN’s signal without authorization in Saudi Arabia and beyond, and allowing access to hundreds of beIN proprietary channels and programmes via the Internet and satellite broadcasting. The scale of the operation and the financial and technical support received indicate that it enjoys the support of Saudi Arabia. Relief has been sought through the Saudi legal system and appeals have been made to the Saudi government for help, all to no avail.  The actions of Saudi Arabia are a concern not only to Qatar but for other WTO members whose rights holders license content to beIN and constitute a gross violation of the TRIPS Agreement, Qatar said.

Saudi Arabia said it regretted the request for a panel and said it fully respects all obligations that apply under the WTO agreements, including the TRIPS Agreement, and diligently protects the legitimate rights of all IP owners properly registered in Saudi Arabia.  It noted that establishing and maintaining diplomatic relations between nation states is a fundamental exercise of state sovereignty and that it severed diplomatic relations with the complaining party in June 2017 in order to protect its essential security interests.

Saudi Arabia said that the severance of diplomatic relations renders impossible the conduct of any dispute settlement in this matter and that, consistent with Article 73 of the TRIPS Agreement, nothing can require any government to engage in dispute settlement procedures in such circumstances of national security.  A panel has no power to make a finding in this matter, and the WTO is not, and cannot be turned into, a venue to resolve national security disputes, Saudi Arabia said.

Several members intervened on the matter. Bahrain said it regretted this matter has been raised to the DSB and that it does not believe that issues related to national security can be resolved within the WTO; since Saudi Arabia has invoked Article 73 of TRIPS, there is no basis for the panel to review the complainant’s claims.

The United States said that each member judges itself what is necessary to protect its national security interests and that it would undermine the legitimacy of the WTO if a panel were to undertake a review under Article 73 of TRIPS of a member’s assessment of its own national security interests; the parties should try to resolve the dispute outside the context of the WTO’s dispute settlement system.

Egypt cited the indisputable right of all WTO members to take measures deemed necessary for national security in line with Article XXI of GATT 1994 and Article 73 of TRIPS and said nothing in the WTO agreements obliges a member to provide information on measures taken for national security reasons; the issue cannot be subject to dispute settlement.

Turkey said WTO members’ actions should always be consistent with WTO law and that the national security provisions are exceptions from WTO rules that should not be applied in a way which puts added pressure on the WTO system; these provisions are reserved for exceptional circumstances such as war or armed conflict, and a WTO panel has jurisdiction to consider the invocation of such exceptions.

The European Union said that issues of the panel’s jurisdiction or authority over certain issues that may or may not be raised can be brought before the panel for it to decide.

The DSB took note of the statements made and agreed to revert to the matter.

DS524: Costa Rica — Measures concerning the Importation of Fresh Avocados from Mexico

Mexico noted that it held consultations with Costa Rica on 26-27 April 2017 in order to seek a solution to their differences regarding measures imposed by Costa Rica that prohibit or restrict the importation of fresh avocados from Mexico. These include certain procedures related to the control, inspection and approval of the imports as well as Costa Rica’s failure to implement or recognize various obligations under the WTO’s Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures in its domestic legal instruments, such as the recognition of areas free from pests or disease, and the establishment of procedures and practices granting the opportunity to receive affirmation of such zones and make operational the concept of regionalization. Unfortunately, these consultations did not lead to a resolution of the differences, prompting Mexico to request the establishment of a panel.

Costa Rica said it was disappointed with Mexico’s request for a panel and said that the consultations in April 2017 were productive and allowed the two sides to exchange views on the measures in question. Costa Rica remains open to dialogue on the matter in order to reach a mutually acceptable solution; for this reason, it is not in a position to agree to the establishment of a panel.

The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to revert to the matter.

Next meeting

The next meeting of the DSB will take place on 18 December.

Source: wto.org

 

236/ New WTO publication reviews evolution of tariff negotiations and renegotiations

On 4 December, the WTO launched a new edition of “Tariff Negotiations and Renegotiations under the GATT and the WTO”. The publication reviews how the procedures and practices regarding tariff negotiations have evolved since the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) was established over seven decades ago and highlights some of the major developments since the first edition of this book was published in 2001.

This second edition reviews progress in all areas of tariff negotiations and renegotiations since the establishment of the GATT in 1947. Since then, international trade in goods has increased dramatically, largely due to efforts by the world’s leading traders to reduce and eliminate tariffs multilaterally.

New developments highlighted in this edition include the successful conclusion of negotiations to expand the duty-free coverage of the Information Technology Agreement (ITA), tariff negotiations in agriculture and non-agricultural market access under the Doha Development Agenda, and the tariff renegotiations regarding successive enlargements of the European Union. The publication also covers tariff negotiations for the accession of new members to the WTO, such as China and the Russian Federation, technical rectifications, and the implementation of changes in the WTO members’ schedules of commitments due to the periodic revision of the Harmonized System (HS) used to classify traded goods on a common basis.

The publication reviews the current legal framework of tariff negotiations and renegotiations, the tariff negotiations held in the context of multilateral trade negotiations, and the bilateral and plurilateral negotiations under GATT 1947 and the WTO, including those that have taken place outside the context of tariff conferences and rounds of multilateral trade negotiations. It also explores the renegotiations that have been carried out under various GATT provisions.

Co-published with Cambridge University Press, this edition of “Tariff Negotiations and Renegotiations under the GATT and the WTO” also includes a series of conclusions and recommendations on ways of achieving further tariff liberalization and on updating tariff-related procedures. The book concludes with a selection of important documents, such as key provisions in GATT 1994 and decisions on procedures for tariff renegotiations.

Written by Anwarul Hoda, Chair Professor of the Trade Policy and WTO Research Programme at the Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations (ICRIER) and former WTO Deputy Director-General, the publication will be of particular interest to negotiators, members of government, trade ministries, economists and academics specialized in trade policy and tariff negotiations.

Source: wto.org

 

237/ Djibouti hosts Second Regional Dialogue on WTO Accessions for the Greater Horn of Africa

The Government of the Republic of Djibouti is hosting the Second Regional Dialogue on WTO Accessions for the Greater Horn of Africa under the theme “Trade for Peace through WTO Accessions”. The dialogue mainly focuses on how accession to the WTO can foster and sustain peace in fragile and conflict-afflicted countries and offers a platform for acceding governments to engage in experience sharing. The dialogue will run from 3 to 6 December and is co-organized with the International Trade Centre (ITC).

The Regional Dialogue takes place at a time of positive developments on the African continent and within the Horn of Africa region specifically. The continent made history with the official signing of the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) at the 10th Extraordinary Summit of the African Union Assembly of Heads of State and Government held on 21 March 2018, in Kigali, Republic of Rwanda. Forty-four out of 55 African Union member states, including all nine African acceding states, signed the AfCFTA consolidated text.

Additionally, the Horn of Africa has witnessed the cessation of decades-long hostilities and the restoration of severed diplomatic ties amongst states in the region – notably between Eritrea and Ethiopia as well as between Eritrea and Djibouti. The prospects for peace are also a reality for South Sudan, following the signing of a historic peace agreement between the government and the main rebel factions in September. Finally, economic sanctions that had been imposed on Eritrea by the UN Security Council nearly a decade ago were lifted.

The Regional Dialogue was opened by Djibouti’s Prime Minister Abdoulkader Kamil Mohamed, WTO Deputy Director-General Ambassador Alan Wm. Wolff, Director of the WTO Accessions Division Ms Maika Oshikawa and ITC’s Chief for Trade Facilitation and Policy for Business, Mr Rajesh Aggarwal. The programme of the event is available here.

In his opening remarks, the Djiboutian Prime Minister said that the “Trade for Peace” initiative will provide a platform for rich discussions and “allow our respective countries to have the necessary basis to promote economic development based on long-term stability, regional integration and market expansion.” Full speech here (in French).

DDG Wolff noted: “Recently acceded LDCs, such as Afghanistan, Liberia and Yemen, have used the rigorous accession process to establish credible economic and legal systems to promote transparency, the rule of law and good governance.  The current set of acceding governments, many of which faced specific challenges associated with fragility and conflict, can heavily benefit from their experiences. It is for this reason that platforms such as this Regional Dialogue remain invaluable. By launching a platform for interaction among accession negotiators, it seeks to create an enabling environment that sparks conversations, enriches debates, and encourages the exchange of useful information.” Full speech here.

Ms Oshikawa added that “the Regional Dialogue provides a platform to discuss wide ranging accession-related issues and is indeed an opportunity for acceding governments in the region to come together once a year and partake in experience sharing. This event is the outcome of the first Regional Dialogue which was initiated and hosted by the Government of Kenya in August 2017.”

Over 80 participants are taking part in the Regional Dialogue. This includes ministers from African acceding governments, representatives of the Djiboutian Government, chairs of accession working parties, representatives from WTO Article XII members and private sector participants from the respective acceding governments.

Several development partners have also joined the event, including representatives of the Intergovernmental Authority for Development (IGAD), the International Monetary Fund (IMF), TradeMark East Africa (TMEA), the Trade Policy Training Centre in Africa (TRAPCA), the United Nations Economic Commission for Africa (UNECA), the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and the World Bank Group (WBG). The Regional Dialogue will be followed by a one-day Specialized Training on ‘Launching a National Brand’ organized by ITC.

Source: wto.org

 

238/ ISO forms partnership with World Bank Group to help countries facilitate trade

ISO has partnered with the World Bank Group (WBG) to support ISO member national standards bodies in developing countries, based on their needs, with the implementation of the World Trade Organization (WTO) Trade Facilitation Agreement (TFA). This will cover areas such as applying good practices for technical barriers to trade and, in particular, implementing conformity assessment procedures.

The partnership arrangement was made at a border agency cooperation workshop that took place from 14 to 16 November 2018 in Cape Town, South Africa, where ISO was invited to present on “Standards and trade facilitation”.

The event brought together senior officials from 12 African countries involved in the implementation of the TFA to share experiences and learn from each other. It was organized by the WBG, the WTO Secretariat, the International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC) Secretariat, the World Organization for Animal Health (OIE), the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and the World Customs Organization (WCO).

The WBG’s Trade Facilitation Support Program actively supports developing countries to align their trade facilitation laws, procedures and processes to enable implementation of the TFA.

In most developing countries, the ISO member, or national standards body (NSB), is the national enquiry point as required by the WTO Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade, and may also be a provider of conformity assessment services.

At the event, ISO also committed to provide the WBG with inputs on its TFA-related tools that apply to the activities of NSBs.

Source: iso.org

 

Ngày 05/12

240/ Argentina initiates WTO dispute complaint against Peruvian measures on biodiesel imports

Argentina has requested WTO dispute consultations with Peru concerning anti-dumping and countervailing measures imposed by Peru on biodiesel imports from Argentina. Argentina’s request was circulated to WTO members on 5 December.

Argentina claims the measures are inconsistent with various provisions of the WTO’s Anti-Dumping Agreement, the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures, the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) 1994 and the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the WTO.

Further information is available in document WT/DS572/1

What is a request for consultations?

The request for consultations formally initiates a dispute in the WTO. Consultations give the parties an opportunity to discuss the matter and to find a satisfactory solution without proceeding further with litigation. After 60 days, if consultations have failed to resolve the dispute, the complainant may request adjudication by a panel.

• More on consultations
• Current status of disputes

Source: wto.org

 

241/ Germany gives EUR 1 million to enhance developing countries’ participation in world trade

Germany is donating EUR 1 million (CHF 1,100,000) to the WTO’s Doha Development Agenda Global Trust Fund (DDAGTF) to help developing countries implement WTO agreements and to enhance their trade negotiating skills. The contribution was confirmed at a signing ceremony with WTO Deputy Director-General Yonov Frederick Agah and Germany’s WTO Ambassador, Walter Werner, on 5 December 2018.

Germany’s donation to the DDAGTF will finance training workshops for officials from developing countries and least-developed countries (LDCs). Since the creation of the fund in 2001, over 2,600 workshops have been organized.

DDG Agah said: “This new donation from Germany is very welcome support for developing countries and LDCs and will help them build their trade capacity so that they can participate more fully in global trade. Sustaining the active engagement of developing economies will promote inclusiveness and strengthen the multilateral trading system. I welcome Germany’s continued generosity.”

Germany’s WTO Ambassador, Walter Werner, said: “Germany is pleased to be contributing to developing know-how and institutional capacity in poorer nations under the WTO’s framework of technical assistance. Through our donation to the Doha Fund, we are expressing our solidarity with developing countries, in particular LDCs, which we see as essential partners in the WTO in our joint attempt to further strengthen the multilateral trading system for the benefit of all our citizens.”

Overall, Germany has donated approximately EUR 25 million (CHF 28 million) to WTO trust funds in over 15 years.

Source: wto.org

 

242/ DG Azevêdo in US: This is a “once-in-a-generation opportunity” to renew trading system

Speaking in Washington DC on 5 December, Director-General Roberto Azevêdo said that WTO members have “a once-in-a-generation opportunity to renew the trading system”. He argued that in responding to the range of challenges in the global trading system today, momentum was building towards strengthening and improving the work of the WTO. The Director-General was speaking at the National Foreign Trade Council’s annual World Trade Dinner. During his time in Washington, the Director-General held a series of meetings, including with USTR Bob Lighthizer, Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin and representatives from Congress and the private sector.

The Director-General’s full speech at the World Trade Dinner is as below.

Ladies and gentlemen,

Good evening. It’s a great pleasure to be here. I’d like to thank the NFTC for the invitation to address you this evening.

At the outset, I also want to take this opportunity to pay tribute to President George H.W. Bush.

The late President’s leadership in foreign policy has been well noted in recent days – and of course this leadership also extended to trade issues. He played a huge role in advancing the Uruguay Round of negotiations, which transformed the global trading system and led to the creation of the World Trade Organization.

In seeking to strengthen the WTO today, we are continuing that work. And so I hope that President Bush’s truly remarkable life and exemplary character will inspire us in this task.

Ladies and gentlemen, there is no question that this is a momentous period in global trade.

We face a wide range of challenges. But I believe that this is a once-in-a-generation opportunity to renew the trading system. And I think we have some positive news.

I arrived here in Washington direct from Buenos Aires, where I was taking part in the G20 Leaders’ summit. It was a highly productive meeting, resulting in a very significant declaration from all the leaders of the G20 including the United States. This could potentially represent a very important moment in tackling the current challenges in global trade. And so I strongly welcome the declaration.

It contains a commitment to trade as an engine of growth, productivity, innovation, job creation and development. And it recognizes the contribution that the multilateral trading system has made to that end.

The declaration also states that the trading system can perform better. And therefore the Leaders support a process of modernisation and strengthening of the system, which they describe as a “necessary reform”.

I will be working with the full WTO membership to take this discussion forward in the interests of all.

I certainly agree that the system can be better. I have been fighting to improve and strengthen it since I took office in 2013. And I must say that we have made some significant progress.

In the last five years members have struck a range of deals, such as the abolition of agricultural export subsidies, the expansion of the Information Technology Agreement and, of course, the Trade Facilitation Agreement. Together, these measures represent the biggest trade reforms in the WTO’s history. And I should note the role that the NFTC played to help galvanize the support for these deals.

And of course we don’t want to stop there – we can do much more and we want to keep delivering. At present members are working hard to meet a 2019 deadline for an agreement on fisheries subsidies, and the US has been an active participant. This is a very important piece of work that would deliver on a key element of the Sustainable Development Goals. We are also striving to advance other important and longstanding issues, such as agriculture, services and development.

And we are also seeing members exploring new, creative ways to move forward. Groups of WTO members have launched a number of new ‘joint initiatives’ to discuss a range of areas of emerging economic interest. These areas include e-commerce – where, again, the US has been very active. They also include investment facilitation, support for small businesses to trade, and the economic empowerment of women.

Time will tell exactly how these initiatives develop. Although they are not supported by all members, the proponents are building real momentum.

Of course members themselves will decide exactly what they want to discuss and how they want to do it – and I will come back to this point. But what is vital is that trade and the trading system continue to play a positive economic role – as outlined in the G20 declaration.

The economy is growing healthily for the first time since the financial crisis. We have to do everything we can to ensure it continues on that path. The WTO has pointed out that there are risks and that trade restrictions could precipitate a slowing of the global economy. The IMF and World Bank make the same points.

WTO studies highlight that the last six months have seen a dramatic spike in trade restrictions. Export orders are already down significantly. Our economists have been assessing a variety of possible scenarios to develop this picture, including the impact of a full, global trade war. The numbers vary, depending on the parameters of each scenario. But one common outcome in all simulations is that trade and economic growth will slow down and that all countries, without exceptions, will lose out in a global trade war.

Clearly, we can’t afford to go down this road. We must find ways to reverse gears. The best way to address this is through a cooperative effort – and this can follow a number of different, complementary tracks.

Again, there has been some positive progress in recent days. This includes the signing of the new USMCA. It could inspire progress on other fronts, complementing what we do at the WTO. In addition, we have had the bilateral meeting between the US and China in Buenos Aires, which has underlined the vital importance of dialogue and engagement at this level. I hope it has established a path to resolving the differences between the two sides.

Such bilateral and regional steps are vital. But so too is pursuing resolution at the global level, through the WTO. The G20 leaders made this clear. They see resolving issues at the WTO as a key element in forging a positive way forward.

Some argue that the current trade frictions exist mostly because WTO rules are not fully capturing the various challenges that we see on the ground today. Some are also saying that it is becoming more and more difficult to get things done in the WTO – and that we need to find ways of making deals and doing business in a more expeditious way.

So let me say a few words now about the reform debate at the WTO.

A variety of ideas have been put forward to respond to the various concerns raised. While there is real momentum behind the debate, it is still in its early stages. So at present it is not clear the precise direction it will take. Nonetheless, we see a number of issues emerging.

One issue is improving notifications and transparency. The US is working together with the EU and Japan here with a specific proposal on the table.

Another key area is the dispute settlement system and the impasse in appointments to the Appellate Body. This could eventually threaten the functioning of the whole dispute settlement system as we know it – and the time we have to resolve the problem is limited. By the end of next year we may not have the minimum number of Appellate Body members needed to hear an appeal. US concerns here have been clearly enunciated and there are some signs of a more serious engagement on all sides, with proposals being brought forward.

Another area which members are focusing on is rule making. This is about how we can deliver more and deliver it faster. Members have been exploring what kind of modalities would allow for faster results both multilaterally and plurilaterally. There are many conversations underway on both tracks.

One good example of constructive work on the multilateral track is the negotiations on fisheries subsidies. And discussions continue in a number of other areas as well.

On the plurilateral front, we have the various ‘joint initiatives’ that I mentioned earlier, which are being pursued by groups of members.

Fostering greater flexibility in how we work may seem like a technical or procedural point – and indeed the WTO already allows a wide variety of different approaches. But to the extent that these approaches can allow members to pursue their priorities more easily, they could be quite transformational.

This is just a snapshot of some of the issues which members are raising under this broad debate. And of course, as this reform conversation evolves, I’m sure that a range of other issues will arise. No doubt some of those will probably be more appealing for you. And no doubt some issues will be more appealing for others, but not for you. But that’s the nature of negotiations on trade.

What is important is that we try to advance these negotiations in a pragmatic fashion.

We are not talking about launching a new round here – nothing of the kind. We are talking about making practical, pragmatic changes in order to fix this invaluable system so that it works better for everyone.

All of this can be quite auspicious, in the sense that we are opening a new era for conversations in the WTO. But we shouldn’t fool ourselves. Anything that changes things in a meaningful and concrete way is bound to be difficult and complex. Therefore it is critical to have political support and determination to carry it through. And this doesn’t just come from the government, it comes from those on the ground. And that means you.

I urge you to be closely involved in these efforts to improve the trading system. I urge you to make your views heard – both in Washington and Geneva. And – even more fundamentally – I urge you to keep raising your voices in defense of trade as a force for good.

In making the case for trade, the context here is crucially important.

First, in some senses we are still in the long tail of the crisis of 2008. Even as economic growth picks up, many are still dealing with its after-effects.

And second, we are experiencing a new era in the form of the 4th industrial revolution, as new technologies reshape many aspects of our lives and the economy – including the workplace.

These historic events have combined to foster a sense of fear and uncertainty about the future, creating an upsurge in anti-trade and even anti-foreign sentiment.

One important element here is the perception that trade is taking people’s jobs and sending them overseas. In reality the key driving force behind job losses is innovation and higher productivity enabled by technology. 80% of jobs lost are because of these forces – not because of trade.

Regardless of the causes, it’s clear that people feel left behind by economic change. This change is happening. And it will continue to happen at record pace. This requires real action in domestic policy to help workers adapt. All governments – and companies themselves – are seeking to respond to this in their own way.

But no one is going to be helped by choking off trade. Quite the opposite.

Trade is part of the solution.

It has helped to build a more prosperous world and we must ensure that it continues to do so – in an ever more inclusive way.

We know what trade can do. The basic facts remain that with the right accompanying policies, trade helps to lower prices on the shelves, and brings greater choice. It helps to create jobs – and these jobs tend to be better paid as well. It opens opportunities to sell goods and services abroad. It helps to underpin stronger and more stable economic growth.

And this is only part of the picture. Trade also connects us with the world – to other people and other cultures. And it’s because of the closer and more stable relationships that trade fosters, that we can enjoy more peaceful relations with other nations.

Polling suggests that Americans agree with the broad argument. 74% view trade as a good thing for the country. But according to the same poll, they doubt some of the specifics. For example, only a third of Americans believe that trade lowers prices. We see the same pattern of opinion in many advanced economies. People still have an instinctive support for trade, but they are not connecting it with the real, day-to-day benefits that it brings.

So we have to redouble our efforts to remake these connections – and reconnect the benefits of trade to people’s lives.

And we have to get away from the idea that trade is a zero-sum proposition. It is not. Everyone can benefit.

And we also need to ensure that all trading partners feel that the conditions are set for a relationship that is balanced and mutually beneficial. This is precisely what the multilateral trade rules try to achieve. But clearly we are not quite there yet.

Rebalancing the trade debate is a job for all of us. I know that the NFTC is working hard to do just this.

So let me conclude on this point.

The NFTC has long been a vital and vocal supporter of trade and of the global trading system. I want to thank you once again for this support.

Indeed, it is a great pleasure for me to address the famous annual World Trade Dinner. This event has quite a reputation. What I didn’t realize however was that the first World Trade Dinner was held in 1914, when the NFTC was founded.

These dinner discussions have therefore seen the full sweep of history – the devastating lows and also the precious highs. They have chronicled the painstaking work from governments around the world to build the trading system that we have today. What a transformation they have seen.

For me, taking this long view offers a few lessons.

First, we should keep a proper perspective on the problems that we face today. We can meet these challenges – and, together, we will do so.

Second, we are not the owners of the trading system – but merely the custodians. It is our responsibility to pass it on to the next generation stronger than we found it.

And third, trade is written deep in the DNA of this country. America has always been at the forefront of the world’s modern trading nations. And I have no doubt that there it will remain.

Thank you for listening.

Source: wto.org

 

243/ New standard for excise duty stamps helps keep illegal products off the market

They are a seal of approval that producers of consumer goods have paid their dues – and that the products are the real McCoy. Excise stamps not only ensure government revenues, they also help detect the illegal and counterfeit products that abound. A new standard for the security of tax stamps has just been published to make them more effective and protect the goods on which they are applied.

Alcohol and cigarettes are the most common items on which tax is levied, as governments aim to both raise revenues and deter the consumption of health-endangering products. But the range of taxes is on the rise as many countries are introducing new ones, such as the sugar tax on soft drinks, with the same objectives in mind. For this system to work effectively, tax stamps are required to demonstrate that the duty has been paid and that the product is legitimately available in the intended market.

However, where there is tax, there are always attempts at tax avoidance, breeding criminal activity that puts illicit and counterfeit products on the market, many of which may be harmful to the health of consumers. A foolproof tax stamp, however, is an effective way of literally stamping down on the problem.

ISO 22382, Security and resilience – Authenticity, integrity and trust for products and documents – Guidelines for the content, security, issuance and examination of excise tax stamps, is designed to help tax authorities improve compliance with regulations and establish an effective and efficient excise tax collection regime.

Ian Lancaster, Project Leader of the ISO technical committee that developed the standard, said tax stamps have the potential to make a very significant contribution to public health and government revenues, and thus it is essential they work as they should.

“We know that counterfeit and other illicit excisable goods not only deprive governments of tax revenues but can kill or cause serious health problems to consumers,” he said.

“A secure tax stamp makes it much more difficult for the criminals who target taxed products.

“Our aim in creating this standard is to help tax authorities to achieve the best in their tax stamps – to make them secure and well-protected so they, in turn, protect the goods on which they are applied and the public buying them.”

ISO 22382 was developed by ISO technical committee ISO/TC 292, Security and resilience, whose secretariat is held by SIS, ISO’s member for Sweden. It is available from your national ISO member or through the ISO Store.

Source: iso.org

 

245/ Vietnam, China deepen agricultural cooperation

Vietnam and China have reached consensus on further bolstering agricultural cooperation.

Vietnamese Deputy Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development Tran Thanh Nam on December 3 had a meeting with Chinese Deputy Minister of Agriculture and Rural Affairs Qu Dongyu, during which they expressed their delight at the sound collaboration between the two ministries across the fields of plantation, husbandry and aquaculture.

Discussing measures to develop agriculture and rural areas in both nations, they agreed to set up a ministerial dialogue mechanism every six months besides the annual meeting of the Vietnam-China joint committee on agricultural cooperation.

The same day, Nam had a working session with the General Administration of Customs of China (GACC) which is responsible for supervising animal and plant quarantine and food safety.

During his talks with Deputy Customs Commissioner-General Zhang Jiwen, Nam hailed efforts made by both sides in opening the Vietnamese agricultural market, and affirmed that the Southeast Asian country always focuses on accelerating agro-forestry-fishery trade with China.

Vietnam is working to develop brand names for its agricultural products to ensure that more quality goods will be consumed in the Chinese market, he said, hoping that the GACC will create favourable conditions for more Vietnamese farm produce to enter the market.

The two sides reviewed the implementation of agreements on animal and plant quarantine, and seek measures to boost trade via border gates, ensuring mutual benefits of the Vietnamese and Chinese people.

They agreed to build a regular cooperative mechanism as well as support training and information exchanges between units of the Vietnamese Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development and the GACC.

Source: VNA

 

246/ Japanese consumer goods producers explore Vietnamese market

“Good Goods Japan 2018”, a business networking event for Japanese high-quality household commodities and consumer goods, was held in Ho Chi Minh City on December 4, drawing the participation of nearly 50 Japanese firms who want to boost exports to Vietnam, and some 100 domestic businesses.

Organised by the Japan External Trade Organisation (JETRO), the event featured a wide range of top-quality and unique products, from child care, kitchenware to cosmetics and stationery.

The Japanese enterprises met with Vietnamese importers and distributors to introduce the convenience and quality of their products.

According to Chief Representative of JETRO Ho Chi Minh City Koji Takimoto, as this was the second edition of Good Goods Japan in Vietnam following the first in 2015, the event received special attention from Japanese suppliers and positive response from the Vietnamese business community.

Besides connecting Japanese and Vietnamese businesses, the event provided full information about how a product is produced, used and preserved as well as its origin, he said.

The quality is a competitive advantage of Japanese products, however, they are always sold at higher prices than the same kinds made in other countries, he said.

Japanese businesses prefer manufacturing products in Vietnam to reduce costs, he noted, saying that the firms hope to receive further support from the Vietnamese Government in terms of taxes and human resources.

For Japanese suppliers, they expected to get feedback on their products’ quality and designs from Vietnamese distributors. Market survey to grasp Vietnamese consumers’ taste was one of their goals to improve products before breaking into the Vietnamese market in the coming time.

Source: VNA

 

247/ Foreign-invested firms interested in cyber security, IP rights

Legal frameworks, policies on intellectual property rights and cyber security were topics of interest for enterprises, especially foreign-invested companies, at the Vietnam Business Forum (VBF) 2018.

The event was jointly organised by the Ministry of Planning and Investment, the World Bank (WB), the International Finance Corporation (IFC) and the VBF Consortium’s Management Board in Hanoi on December 4.

Participants heard that all nations, including Vietnam, are facing the pressing need for a balance between national security and social order and security; privacy of data and personal information; and socio-economic development through digital platforms.

The digital-based socio-economic development is driven by cross-border data transmission ability and widespread availability of the Internet.

In fact, many foreign businesses operating in Vietnam are utilizing the most advanced information technology in business and cross-border trade. Many companies are using cloud computing, social networking, online payment, and smart technologies to run their business activities.

As these technologies are provided by foreign suppliers, most of which have no establishments or branches in Vietnam, so these businesses need to be able to transmit data across countries.

According to economic experts and representatives from foreign business associations, the Law on Cyber Security, promulgated in June 2018, has certain impacts on Vietnam’s future attractiveness and competitiveness in attracting foreign investment towards high technology and innovation.

Co-Chairman of the European Chamber of Commerce (EuroCham) in Vietnam Denis Brunetti highlighted the important role of information technology and technological innovation in Vietnam’s socio-economic development over the last 25 years, saying that access to mobile services and the Internet via mobile broadband nationwide has contributed to the country’s comprehensive growth.

According to EuroCham, online copyright violations should be addressed rigorously by amending the Law on Intellectual Property and increasing administrative fines in order to turn Vietnam into a more attractive investment and business environment.

The Government of Vietnam should make wider assessments of the impacts of the Law on Cyber Security on foreign direct investment and the national economy, said Nicolas Audier who is also Co-chairman of Eurocham.

Michael Kelly, Chairman of the American Chamber of Commerce (Amcham) in Vietnam, expressed his wish to work with the Vietnamese Government in developing effective preventive policies and enhance cyber security, towards creating an open, innovative, and secure online environment, which can promote trade.

Source: VNA

 

Ngày 06/12

248/ Annual session of Parliamentary Conference on the WTO gets under way

The annual session of the Parliamentary Conference on the WTO, a joint undertaking of the Inter-Parliamentary Union and the European Parliament, is taking place on 6 and 7 December 2018 at the headquarters of the WTO.

Under the theme of “WTO: The way forward”, the 2018 session is addressing the challenges and opportunities facing the WTO and what parliamentarians can do to support sustainable and more inclusive trade. The session follows up on the theme of the WTO’s 2018 Public Forum – “Trade 2030″ – which was attended by many parliamentarians.

Due to their constitutional role, parliamentarians play an important part in the multilateral trading system and the WTO. Any deal resulting from intergovernmental negotiations at the WTO will, in most cases, need approval from legislators. The aim of the Parliamentary Conference on the WTO is to bring legislators’ perspectives on international trade and the WTO to the attention of negotiators and other stakeholders.

The Conference provides legislators with the opportunity to examine developments in the WTO, obtain first-hand information on the state of multilateral trade negotiations and consider a possible parliamentary contribution to these multilateral processes.

Source: wto.org

 

249/ DG Azevêdo and UNSG Guterres discuss ongoing cooperation to deliver SDGs

WTO Director-General Roberto Azevêdo met with United Nations Secretary General António Guterres at the UN headquarters in New York on 6 December to discuss the ongoing cooperation between the two organisations on a range of issues, particularly regarding the delivery of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the challenges facing multilateral cooperation. This meeting was part of their continued efforts to strengthen and build on the dialogue that exists between the WTO and the UN.

DG Azevêdo briefed the UNSG on the WTO’s contribution to work on the SDGs. This included the ongoing negotiations at the WTO to eliminate harmful fisheries subsidies, which would deliver on a key target of SDG 14 on the sustainable use of our oceans. DG Azevêdo also briefed Mr Guterres on the forthcoming Global Review of Aid for Trade that will take place at the WTO on 3-5 July 2019 which will help developing countries to build their trade capacity and infrastructure.

The two heads also exchanged views on last weekend’s important outcomes from the G20 Summit in Buenos Aires, including the commitment of G20 leaders to improve and strengthen the WTO. They agreed to maintain their regular contact on the many issues of common interest between the two organizations.

DG Azevêdo said:

“Cooperation between the WTO and UN is essential in strengthening multilateral efforts to tackle some of the most pressing problems facing the world today. I thank UNSG Guterres for his leadership on this front and for his strong support of our work at the WTO. We will continue building on our cooperation, including towards delivering on the Sustainable Development Goals.

“Trade was essential in delivering the Millennium Development Goal on cutting extreme poverty and I have no doubt that it will prove essential again in delivering the SDGs. WTO members have already delivered on a key target of SDG 2 on Zero Hunger when they abolished agricultural export subsidies in 2015. Now we are working to deliver again on SDG 14 as members discuss how to tackle harmful fisheries subsidies. More broadly, we will continue working to ensure that trade continues to play its full part in driving growth, development and the eradication of poverty around the world.”

Source: wto.org

 

250/ Parliamentary Conference on the WTO addresses major issues facing world trade

The 2018 Parliamentary Conference on the WTO, jointly organized by the Inter-Parliamentary Union and the European Parliament, attracted more than 300 members of parliament representing more than 100 countries to the two-day meeting held at the WTO on 6-7 December 2018. The participants discussed a wide range of issues, such as the reform of the WTO and the impact of technology on trade, and issued an outcome document at the end of the meeting highlighting the pivotal role of the WTO in strengthening multilateralism.

At the Opening Session, MPs were addressed by Junichi Ihara, Chair of the WTO’s General Council, who summarised recent developments, including the ongoing negotiations on fisheries subsidies. On WTO reform, he said it was crucial not to see reform as a package but to examine each issue on its own merit.

The Vice-President of the European Parliament, Fabio Massimo Castaldo, stressed “the key role of the WTO in the achievement of the SDGs and the Paris agreement commitments”. He said: “It’s time for concrete actions in order to facilitate e-commerce and turn digital opportunities, such as blockchain, into trade realities. We have to bridge the digital divide, so that nobody is left behind.”

On WTO reform, Mr Castaldo argued in favour of “strengthening the parliamentary dimension of the WTO”. “As Parliamentarians, we do have a special role to fulfil. We are not here to duplicate what our executives do, but we have a responsibility to bridge the gap of our citizens’ needs, hopes and expectations all around the world. So, let’s work together to really renovate the WTO. Don’t let political interests overcome our citizens’ needs and rights,” he stressed.

WTO Deputy Director-General Xiaozhun Yi expressed the WTO’s pleasure in hosting the conference and reiterated the WTO’s firm commitment to working with parliamentarians as they are “the key transmission belt between international institutions, negotiations and the public in general”.

DDG Yi recognized that trade tensions are not diminishing and that it is more critical than ever for WTO members to find a way forward. He recalled the successes of the WTO and said there are now persistent voices for the need to reform the multilateral trading system, while noting that some members have said there is no need for reform. The multilateral trading system will continue to rely on the support of legislators, he stressed.

A panel of WTO ambassadors from Thailand, Benin and the United States addressed the challenges and opportunities facing the WTO.

“On the second day of the conference, sessions addressed the challenges facing the WTO up to 2030, including those posed by new technologies. The WTO’s Chief Economist, Robert Koopman, highlighted the main findings from the latest World Trade Report, which looks into how digital technologies are transforming global commerce, alongside Ms. Shamika N. Sirimanne, Director of the Division for Technology and Logistics at UNCTAD. Other speakers included MPs from national parliaments and the European Parliament.”

At the end of the meeting, the participants adopted an Outcome document which recognizes the WTO has “a pivotal role in strengthening multilateralism, combating protectionism and unilateralism, establishing an inclusive world order and promoting an open, rules-based and non-discriminatory multilateral trading system”. It calls for discussion on “the ways and means of improving the WTO and to review several aspects of the functioning of the WTO with a view to increasing both its effectiveness, transparency, and authority. These discussions should strive to find a way within the WTO umbrella to address the challenges facing the multilateral system.”

Source: wto.org

 

251/ Vietnam proactively integrates into global economy: Deputy PM

The Government of Vietnam persistently pursues the policy of comprehensive integration, with a focus on international economic integration in a proactive, pragmatic and politic manner, Deputy Prime Minister Vuong Dinh Hue affirmed at a forum held in Hanoi on December 4.

The official further said trade protectionism is now on the rise and seriously threatening the process of trade liberalisation and global economic integration.

The wider and deeper integration into the global economy means Vietnam will face with more impact from regional and global economic development trends, and that is why the country needs a proactive and flexible approach to cope with this issue, he added.

Sudhir Shetty, Chief Economist for the East Asia and Pacific Region of the World Bank, said Vietnam should enhance its macroeconomic response to international financial and trade turbulences while strengthening national competitiveness with trade facilitation policies, improving the business environment, and strengthening the connectivity between foreign investment and domestic suppliers.

Furthermore, Vietnam also needs extensive reform of trade and investment, including the simplification of non-tariff measures that distort trade as well as promote trade in services, deepen regional and global integration, and increase commitments to supporting the reform of the global trading system.

Over the past time, Vietnam has made progress in preparing for the new-generation free trade agreements (FTAs), including the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) which was signed in March and ratified by the National Assembly in November to come into force in January 2019.

Vietnam and the European Union announced the conclusion of the legal revision of the EU-Vietnam Free Trade Agreement (EVFTA) and agreed to keep the Investment Protection Agreement (IPA) separate from the FTA in June in preparation for the signing of the deal.

Vietnam has achieved certain outcomes in international economic integration, contributing to the national socio-economic development. The total import-export turnover in 2018 is estimated at 475 billion USD, of which exports are expected to reach 239 billion USD, a year-on-year rise of 11.2 percent.

The country also sought to increase goods exports to traditional markets and find new ones. Exports to countries having FTAs with Vietnam in 2018 have seen high growth compared to 2017 with preferential rates reaching about 40 percent, a surge from 35 percent in previous years, indicating that Vietnamese firms are increasingly focusing on optimising opportunities from the implementation of free trade deals.

Source: VNA

 

Ngày 07/12

252/ The Netherlands gives EUR 6,400,000 to enhance developing countries’ trading skills

The government of the Netherlands is contributing a total of EUR 6,400,000 (CHF 7,250,000) to WTO trade-related programmes over the period 2018-2022 to help developing and least-developed countries (LDCs) participate in multilateral trade negotiations and enhance their access to agricultural markets.

A donation of over EUR 2,500,000 (CHF 2,875,000) will be allocated to the Standards and Trade Development Facility (STDF), a global partnership aimed at helping developing countries comply with international food safety, animal and plant health standards and better integrate into international agricultural markets.

An additional EUR 4 million (CHF 4,375,000) will go to the Netherlands Trainee Programme aimed at assisting developing countries in improving their knowledge and understanding of areas related to trade policy.

To mark the Netherlands’ donation to the Programme, WTO Deputy Director-General Yonov Frederick Agah met with the Netherlands’ Minister for Trade and Development, Ms Sigrid Kaag, and former interns from the Programme.

DDG Agah said: “This donation from the Netherlands is very welcome. It provides funding to help developing countries and LDCs build their trade capacity in practical terms and regarding trade theory so that they can participate more fully in global trade.”

Minister Kaag said: “Inclusive trade is a key driving force for sustainable development. Through the support to the WTO trade-related programmes, the Netherlands aims to increase the integration of developing countries and LDCs in global value chains and to contribute to meeting the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals worldwide.”

The Netherlands has donated approximately EUR 40 million (approximately CHF 45 million) to the various WTO trust funds over 15 years.

Source: wto.org

 

253/ WTO members debate Chair’s proposed work plan for farm talks and discuss way forward

A proposed work plan submitted by the Chair of the farm trade talks, Ambassador John Deep Ford, was discussed by WTO members at the Agriculture Committee’s Special Session meeting on 7 December. Under the proposal, seven sub-plenary working groups will be launched starting in January 2019 to try out a new model for advancing the negotiations. Members also continued thematic discussions on domestic support and public stockholding for food security purposes.

Encouraged by the positive feedback received on the recent exercise of monthly thematic sessions held from September to December, the Chair proposed a new process for farm trade negotiations in an effort to “intensify and deepen the discussions” and to move the agriculture talks to a “problem-solving” phase.

While the discussions based on members’ submissions and presentations will continue in the Agriculture Committee’s Special Session meeting on a monthly basis, seven working groups will be set up to tackle priority issues regarding agriculture reform, i.e. domestic support, public stockholding (PSH) for food security purposes, cotton, market access, the special safeguard mechanism (SSM), export competition and export restrictions.

These working groups will be open to all members. They will work at a technical level and will seek to make progress on each of the negotiating issues. Two co-coordinators will be selected to lead each working group to reflect divergent views. Alternatively, neutral coordinators with no interest at stake may be appointed. The trial period for the new process is set for January to April 2019 and could be continued or modified in response to members’ views on this initiative following a review at the Special Session meeting of the Agriculture Committee in April.

The Chair outlined the following schedule for the launch of these working groups: in January, the working groups on domestic support and PSH; in February, the working groups on market access and the SSM; and in March, the working group on export competition and export restriction. These working groups will report to the monthly committee meeting. Cotton will be addressed on a separate track.

This suggested way forward was generally welcomed by members. Several delegations showed firm support for the initiative and called on others not to be afraid of trying new formats in order to unlock the negotiations.

However, some members voiced concerns, in particular with the frequency of the meetings. They flagged the difficulties it will pose for smaller delegations and the potential distraction from the existing thematic sessions as well as the preparation time needed to ensure the effectiveness of the meetings. Questions were also raised regarding the reports to be made by working groups to committee meetings.

A new paper by some members of the  Cairns Group (JOB/AG/151) pitching ideas on the way forward was also presented at the meeting.

In response, the Chair emphasized that he has listened carefully to members’ concerns and said this confidence-building process would be fully balanced, inclusive, fair and transparent. He noted he would prepare a new communication on the basic principles and working procedures for this process.

The Chair invited delegations wishing to be designated as a coordinator to communicate their interest to him. He reaffirmed that consideration shall be given to fair representation and diversity in the selection of the co-coordinators. He also confirmed that the working groups will be open to all members and that the frequency of meetings will ultimately depend on the members themselves.

The working groups will complement the open-ended special session meetings of the Agriculture Committee and will make comprehensive informal reports to these meetings, the Chair noted, emphasizing that the two processes are expected to complement each other.

In conclusion, the Chair said: “The biggest risk for the committee is that I do not take risks.”

Thematic discussions

On the first day of the two-day meeting, members examined a new submission by Cairns Group members (a group of agriculture exporting countries) (JOB/AG/150), which delves deeper into the  trade-distorting domestic support pillar by analysing product-specific support under Article 6.3 and 6.4 of the Agreement on Agriculture. Members commended the technical work done but some said the real situation might be different from that described in the paper, which drew on data available from 2001-2010 notifications.

Indonesia, on behalf of the G33 Group (a coalition of developing countries), gave a presentation on the need to address urgently the PSH issue, highlighting concerns about the increasingly severe food security situation and rural development needs. Other members acknowledged the concerns of the G33. However, several members said they failed to see how relaxing domestic support disciplines would help to solve the problem. One member insisted that there is already enough political space under Article 6 of the Agreement on Agriculture and that allowing for more unlimited subsidies in agriculture will create more trade distortion for other members.

Commending the high level of engagement seen in the thematic sessions, the Chair encouraged members to submit more papers for technical analysis. Many members shared this view and strongly supported the continuation of this practice in the coming year. One member said this process should carry on at least in the first half of 2019.

Source: wto.org

 

254/ Members agree to hold meeting on the use of the LDC Services Waiver

At a meeting of the Council for Trade in Services (CTS) on 7 December, WTO members agreed to hold a dedicated meeting in the second or third quarter of 2019 to review how WTO members are making use of the Services Waiver that allows them to grant more favourable treatment to service suppliers in least developed countries (LDCs). The CTS chair, Ambassador Alfredo Suescum of Panama, will hold informal consultations in early 2019 to discuss how the dedicated session might unfold and agree on a specific date.

Recalling the Nairobi Waiver Decision, LDCs invited members to seize this opportunity to engage in an information sharing exercise, including on how to build awareness of how LDCs benefit from the waiver and how to increase access to LDC suppliers of services. LDCs underlined the importance of carrying out an information sharing exercise which will allow them to showcase their experiences as beneficiaries, and stressed that the dedicated discussion will not in any case replace the standing item on the CTS agenda with respect to the LDC Services Waiver.

Many of the WTO members providing preferential treatment to LDC services suppliers stressed the need for the discussion to take a broad approach, extending beyond the preferences permitted under the waiver. They said that the exchange of information should cover the full scope of trade opportunities available to LDC service suppliers. Moreover, they called for the information sharing to be flexible and in no way compulsory, based on a balanced engagement from all members, including the LDCs.

Other matters

The United States reiterated its concerns in relation to existing and proposed cybersecurity measures by China as they would allegedly restrict cross-border transfers of information and require the localization of data in China. According to the US, China’s proposed legal approach to cybersecurity requires a burdensome security assessment for transfers of any data Chinese government officials consider to be “important data”. This would almost imply explicit consent by the owner of the information before any cross-border transfer can take place, said the United States.

The US pointed out the provision in China’s cybersecurity framework that any “important data” or “personal information” that operators of critical information infrastructure collect or generate in China must be stored in China. All these elements combined could disrupt, deter and, in many cases, prohibit cross-border transfers of information in the ordinary course of business, according to the US. Japan, the European Union, New Zealand, Canada and Chinese Taipei echoed these concerns.

China noted that it had already supplied detailed answers in the last CTS meeting in October. However, it took the floor to state that the implementing measures of the Cybersecurity Law are still being drafted while the Chinese authorities receive suggestions from various interested parties with a view to designing their policies on this matter in a more scientific and reasonable manner and creating an orderly market environment for both domestic and foreign enterprises.

After stressing that ensuring cybersecurity was a difficult challenge that all members face, China underlined that enhanced cybersecurity measures are essential for protecting national security, public interest and the rights of citizens, legal persons and other organisations, and that these measures are in line with relevant WTO rules.

The United States and Japan also reiterated their concerns with regard to existing and proposed cybersecurity measures by Viet Nam. They underlined that service suppliers in data-intensive sectors depend on cross-border data flows and often rely on data centres that cannot economically be replicated in every market they serve; as such, they should not be subject to data localization and local presence requirements.  These delegations’ concerns were shared by the European Union, New Zealand, Canada and Chinese Taipei.

The Vietnamese delegate noted that the National Assembly had carefully considered all comments before passing the law at issue, which had been adopted in pursuit of the legitimate policy objective of ensuring cybersecurity and in strict adherence to Viet Nam’s WTO obligations. Relevant implementing regulations were being drafted in an open and transparent manner, and had been already revised in light of the concerns raised, Viet Nam said.

Working Party on Domestic Regulation

The CTS was preceded by a meeting of the Working Party on Domestic Regulation (WPDR) on 5 December 2018, where members discussed a proposal by India to develop regulatory disciplines on measures relating to the temporary entry of natural persons, also known as “mode 4″.

The proposal includes making measures relating to licensing, qualification and technical standards affecting mode 4 trade more transparent and facilitative. To this end, the proposal suggests enhanced publication requirements, streamlined procedures for licensing and qualifications, and adequate procedures to ensure that natural persons who are qualified outside a member’s territory are permitted to supply services to another member.

Many members highlighted the importance of easing access to markets through mode 4 to create meaningful commercial opportunities in services. In particular, developing countries emphasized that reducing trade barriers created by such measures would help them use trade to better meet their development objectives. In addition, they underlined the need for special and differential provisions for developing members. These include, for example, adequate transitional periods, reduced administrative fees and technical assistance for services suppliers from developing countries.

In addition, Korea reported the adoption of non-binding disciplines on domestic regulation at a meeting of APEC ministers in Papua New Guinea held in November 2018. ​

Source: wto.org

 

255/ Vietnamese farm produce holds huge potential in EU market

Vietnam holds great advantages to export agricultural products to European Union (EU) countries, whose soil is not suitable for the cultivation of tropical farm produce, experts said.

In particular, when the EU-Vietnam Free Trade Agreement takes effect, Vietnamese products will gain a competitive edge in the market as tariff lines will fall to 0-5 percent over the next seven to 10 years.

At the Vietnam-EU Trade Forum held by the Ministry of Industry and Trade’s Department of European-American Market in Hanoi on December 6, Deputy Minister Cao Quoc Hung stressed that the EU is a prosperous economic bloc, with a gross domestic product (GDP) accounting for 23 percent of the world’s economy, and an income per capita mounting to 40,890 USD.

With 28 member states, the EU’s total population reaches some 516 million people with high demand for imports, including farm produce. Meanwhile, more than 10 key Vietnamese agricultural products have been present in over 160 countries and territories worldwide, many of which have gained more than 1 billion USD in export revenue like coffee, rice, cashew, vegetables, and fruits, he added.

However, Deputy Head of the Agro Processing Market Development Authority (AgroTrade) Tran Van Cong said that besides robust achievements, shipments of farm produce still face a number of hurdles, like processing ability and undeveloped branding.

Therefore, export turnover is still a far cry from expectation, while earnings have been shared through dozens of intermediary stages.

Trade experts have said that the loose connections between farmers and businesses is the first barrier to agricultural exports to the EU. Some 70 percent of agricultural materials have been purchased directly from farmers, who are not fully provided with appropriate cultivating techniques.

In addition, out-of-date post-harvesting technology is another factor that hinders exports, resulting in a loss of up to 30 percent in farm production.

As the EU sets strict criteria in food safety, antibiotic residues, and product origin, Alexandre Bouchot, Agricultural Counselor of the French Embassy to Vietnam, suggested decentralising management of food policies as well as promoting investment in the sector.

Research and development activities should be paid due attention and the agricultural sector needs to be reformed to develop in a sustainable manner.

France is willing to share its experience with Vietnam in this field, he added.

Source: VNA

 

256/ Agriculture cooperation prospects for Vietnam, Argentina

The People’s Committee of the Mekong Delta city of Can Tho held a working session with Argentine Ambassador to Vietnam Juan Carlos Valle Raleigh on December 6 to discuss cooperation prospects between the city and Argentine partners.

The Ambassador reiterated the Argentine government’s open door policy and called on foreign businesses to invest in the country.

He said Vietnam is not only a priority market in Argentina’s export diversification and expansion strategy but also an important trading partner in Asia and the third-biggest importer of Argentine products in the region.

The diplomat noted that Argentina has strengths in agriculture while Can Tho is a driving economic force of the entire Mekong Delta with many agricultural and aquatic products with high export value, a fact attracting a large number of businesses.

Therefore, Argentine investors hope to build long-term strategic ties with the city, he said.

However, per the initial survey of Argentina’s agricultural experts, the use of science-technology in Can Tho remains ineffective due to lack of investment in logistics service facilities for harvesting and preservation.

He suggested the city work with the National Agricultural Technology Institute (INTA) of Argentina – a prestigious research institute in South America which has made significant contributions to agriculture in Argentina.

The ambassador said the cooperation could help the city find measures to remove bottlenecks to developing agriculture in the Mekong Delta, focusing on food security, climate change, improving soil quality, enhancing market connectivity, increasing value for forestry products and aquaculture.

The INTA could help Can Tho enhance the use of science-technology in developing high-tech agriculture as well as attracting the private economic sector to help poor people in both rural and urban areas enjoy benefits from effective agricultural economic models and advanced cultivation methods.

Through cooperation plans, Can Tho can work with the INTA to seek new ways to solve crucial issues in agriculture development such as increasing the productivity and quality of farm produce, protecting land and water resources and ensuring food safety and hygiene.

Raleigh proposed Can Tho coordinate with the Argentine Embassy in Vietnam to implement programmes to connect agricultural businesses with partners from Argentina and other countries in South America.

This will create an excellent opportunity for Can Tho firms to access cutting edge technologies to increase competitiveness for their products while opening up new international cooperation opportunities.

The Ambassador asked Can Tho to build “clean” investment attraction policies, which encourage businesses and investors to operate towards sustainable development, promote social responsibility and create environmentally-friendly products.

He also suggested the city improve infrastructure and human resources and capacity to connect with businesses in addition to launching tours to introduce the city to international firms.

He took this occasion to invite Can Tho to introduce the delta’s farm produce at AgroActiva, the biggest agriculture fair of Argentina, which is held annually in June in Santa Fe province – about 400km from the capital Buenos Aires.

Chairman of the municipal People’s Committee Vo Thang Thong agreed on the proposals of the ambassador and said the city will do its utmost to improve the business environment, reform human resources attraction mechanisms and create the best conditions for Argentine partners to invest in the city.

He hoped the Argentine Embassy would help Can Tho access Argentine investors and projects.

Can Tho is expected to become a gateway for Argentina to export goods to the Mekong Delta while Argentina can help connect the Mekong Delta with the Latin American market, he said.

Source: VNA

 

257/ Vietnam, Belarus agree to enhance trade ties

Belarus not only wants to export its products to Vietnam, but also transfer technologies and establish joint production plants in Vietnam with local firms, a bilateral business forum heard in Ho Chi Minh City December 6.

Speaking at the first ever meeting of the Vietnam-Belarus Business Council and the Vietnam-Belarus Business Forum, Belarus’ Deputy Minister of Agriculture and Food Igor Brylo said Vietnam is a traditional trade partner for his country in Asia.

The 2016 free trade agreement between the Eurasian Economic Union and Vietnam has boosted investment and trade between the two countries significantly, he said.

Vo Tan Thanh, Director of the Vietnam Chamber of Commerce and Industry’s HCM City office, said last year bilateral trade rose 7 percent to 101 million USD.

The two countries are making efforts to increase it to 500 million USD as agreed by their governments, he said.

In 2016 Belarusian-Vietnamese joint venture “MAZ Asia”, Belarus’s first investment in this country, was licensed in the northern province of Hung Yen.

It has finished construction of a plant and expects to produce 1,500 Maz trucks a year in the first phase, Thanh said.

“Belarus firms also plan to invest in some other projects in manufacturing and dairy and set up a bus assembly plant in Vietnam,” he said.

As the country’s economic hub, HCM City is a promising location for Belarusian businesses, he said.

Denis Nikolaev, trade counsellor at the Belarusian embassy, said his country has set up joint production plants in Vietnam, transferred technology and trained human resources.

“Belarus is willing to shift from pure sales of goods to Vietnam to technology transfer and setting up joint production plants,” Brylo said.

Besides, Vietnam could act as a gateway for Belarus to ASEAN markets while his country could be one of the gateways for Vietnamese goods such as seafood, tea, coffee, and others to penetrate the Eurasian Economic Union, he said.

Andrei Shakhanovich, deputy chairman of the Belarusian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, said 60 leading businesses, which are showcasing their products at the 2018 Vietnam Expo in HCM City and participating the forum, hope to find new partners in HCM City.

“We promise to make more efforts to promote cooperation between businesses of the two countries.”

Nguyen Quang Hung, chairman of the Vietnam-Belarus Council, expressed the hope that many Vietnamese and Belarusian firms would explore trade, investment, science and technology, and tourism opportunities.

The council would be a good channel for dialogue between businesses and government agencies of the two sides, he said.

At the same time the council would help find solutions to difficulties faced by enterprises doing business in the other country, he said.

The event was organised by the VCCI and the Belarusian Chamber of Commerce and Industry.

Source: VNS/VNA

 

 

Ngày 10/12

258/ Thailand initiates WTO dispute complaint against Turkish duties on air conditioners

Thailand has requested WTO dispute consultations with Turkey concerning an additional duty imposed by Turkey on imported air conditioners from Thailand. Thailand’s request was circulated to WTO members on 10 December.

The additional duty was imposed by Turkey as a suspension of concessions under Article 8.2 of the WTO’s Safeguards Agreement in response to the safeguard measure imposed by Thailand on imports of non-alloy hot-rolled steel flat products. Thailand claims the Turkish measure is inconsistent with certain provisions of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) 1994 and the Safeguards Agreement.

Further information is available in document WT/DS573/1

What is a request for consultations?

The request for consultations formally initiates a dispute in the WTO. Consultations give the parties an opportunity to discuss the matter and to find a satisfactory solution without proceeding further with litigation. After 60 days, if consultations have failed to resolve the dispute, the complainant may request adjudication by a panel.

• More on consultations
• Current status of disputes

Source: wto.org

 

259/ US donates USD 600,000 to help developing countries benefit from WTO rules

United States has contributed USD 600,000 (over CHF 600,000) in 2018 to help developing countries and least-developed countries participate effectively in the WTO’s system of trade rules.

The donation to the WTO’s Doha Development Agenda Global Trust Fund (DDAGTF) will finance training workshops for officials in Geneva and elsewhere to help them better understand and implement WTO agreements and to negotiate new accords. Since the creation of the fund in 2001, more than 2,600 workshops have been organized.

Welcoming this new donation from one of the largest contributors to this fund, Director-General Roberto Azevêdo said: “I want to thank the United States for its ongoing generosity. This donation will be a very important contribution to ensuring that poorer countries can expand their trade capacities and improve living standards for their citizens.”

U.S. Ambassador Dennis Shea said: “The United States remains pleased to support the WTO’s principal technical assistance trust fund. This contribution reinforces the conviction of the United States that implementation of WTO rules, including in core areas such as transparency, can be a critical element in advancing economic development.”

The United States has donated over USD 22.5 million to WTO trust funds over the past 16 years.

Source: wto.org

 

260/ DG Azevêdo: “2019 will be a moment to renew and strengthen the WTO”

At a meeting of the full WTO membership on 10 December, Director-General Roberto Azevêdo discussed the outlook for the WTO, stressing that members must work to ease tensions and respond to other systemic issues while also continuing to advance work in other areas. He said that 2019 would be a moment to “turn the challenges that we face into an opportunity to renew and to strengthen the WTO for the years to come.”

The Director-General said:

“We are doing all we can to support efforts to ease tensions, avoid further escalation and identify potential solutions. Bilateral efforts will be important here – but so too is pursuing resolution at the global level, through the WTO. It is positive that members remain strongly engaged here and are using the system to discuss concerns and bring disputes where necessary. I urge members to use all means at their disposal to help work through existing differences. This is in the interests of all our economies, businesses and citizens. We need to see more dialogue, at all levels.”

“It seems that 2019 is going to be a very busy year for all of us,” he said, setting out that in the New Year members would be stepping up preparations for the 12th Ministerial Conference in Astana, Kazakhstan, and seeking to push forward negotiations in all areas, and particularly where there are pending deadlines, such as fisheries subsidies.

He added:

“We must keep pursuing all of this work, even as we respond to the systemic issues before us. We have begun to respond to these issues in a very concrete way, but there is still much to do. We need to redouble our efforts on this front. And we must aim to turn the challenges that we face into an opportunity to renew and to strengthen the WTO for the years to come.”

DG Azevedo also updated members on efforts to resolve the impasse in the appointments to the Appellate Body. He urged members to urgently address this systemic risk, and said that he would be further increasing his own efforts to help members find solutions.

Source: wto.org

 

261/ WTO-World Bank joint publication highlights need for policies to maximize trade gains for extreme poor

Trade has made a significant contribution to poverty reduction but further integration of developing countries into international markets and policies to share the gains from trade more widely will be essential for further reducing poverty and ensuring that no one is left behind, according to a joint publication by the World Bank Group and the World Trade Organization launched today (11 December).

The report,“Trade and Poverty Reduction: New Evidence of Impacts in Developing Countries”, was launched by WTO Director-General Roberto Azevêdo and World Bank Chief Economist Pinelopi Goldberg at the WTO in Geneva. It presents eight case studies showing how trade helps the extreme poor in the developing world, particularly those who live in conflict states, work in rural areas or in informal jobs, or are female. The country-specific approach of the new publication complements the global perspective in a previous joint report entitled “The Role of Trade in Ending Poverty” published by the two institutions in 2015.

“This report looks at the challenges the poorest face in joining global trade flows. It also highlights the fact that, in a scenario of heightened trade policy uncertainty, the poorest stand to lose the most,” DG Azevêdo said in launching the publication. “In doing so, this publication gives governments food for thought on policies that could help maximize the overall positive gains of trade for the extreme poor. It also helps to highlight the importance of international cooperation to ensure that everybody can benefit.”

The publication demonstrates that trade openness has clear, positive impacts on poverty reduction such as by reducing the prices of what the poor consume and increasing their access to overseas markets where they can get a better return on what they sell. Trade can also benefit the poor by allowing producers of goods to access supplies from abroad when confronted with domestic supply chain shocks. Trade can also help particular groups. One case study in the publication highlights that women in Africa who work in exporting firms are paid better than those in non-trading firms.

The case studies show that not all the poor are affected by international trade equally. The effects will depend on where they live (rural versus urban areas), where they work (industry, firm, formal/informal sector), their individual characteristics such as skill level and gender, and whether the highlighted trade policy change resulted in increased import competition or export opportunities

The studies highlight that while trade reforms can create new opportunities, they can also entail challenges for the poor. Access to international markets, for instance, may deliver higher average incomes to farmers who specialize in producing export crops but may also result in greater competition that reduces the work opportunities for the poor in import competing sectors.

In addition to identifying the challenges the extreme poor face, the case studies also point to ways that developing countries’ trade policy reform strategies and initiatives under the Aid for Trade agenda can help to overcome these hurdles. These include:

• reducing the high trade transaction costs faced by poor workers and consumers in developing countries
• ensuring competition and efficiency in the provision of services along domestic distribution networks
• mitigating the risks that poor producers and workers may face from increased import competition as a result of market opening and
• addressing gaps in research and analytical methods for understanding trade and poverty linkages such as data availability and more information on how reducing non-tariff barriers, facilitating trade in services and making greater use of technology can enhance trade benefits for the extreme poor.

Source: wto.org

 

262/ ISO at COP24: International Standards as essential tools for climate action

International Standards help to mainstream climate change actions in transitioning to a low-carbon, climate-resilient future, according to leading sustainability experts who will speak at an ISO side event at the COP24 in Katowice, Poland.

ISO is holding a side event as part of the 24^th Conference of the Parties of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC COP24) taking place in Katowice, Poland, from 2-14 December 2018. Organized by the ISO Climate Change Coordination Task Force (TF7), in conjunction with the Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment (IEMA) and the International Accreditation Forum (IAF), the ISO event will feature talks and discussions about the use of International Standards for driving action, performance and transition on climate change.

The Task Force works with experts from across ISO committees, guiding them to address critical aspects of climate change in ISO standards.

The opportunities that International Standards bring to the global challenges of climate change will be discussed, such as mainstreaming climate action, supporting measurement and monitoring techniques, facilitating technology and non-technology innovation, and promoting behavioural changes and climate change adaptation. ISO standards can also contribute to the progress of the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction that sets the pace for disaster mitigation by 2030.

Nick Blyth, Vice Chair of the ISO TF7, said that International Standards are fundamental in helping organizations advance climate change actions, whether they be management system standards that shape organizational culture and processes or new ISO technical standards.

“ISO standards are built on international collaboration and consensus, by some of the world’s leading experts in the field,” he said.

“They are relevant and powerful tools to help organizations not only measure their impact on climate change, but take strategic actions to transition towards the zero-carbon future and prepare for the inevitable challenges that result from our changing climate.”

The latest ISO standards and guidance related to climate change adaptation and greenhouse gas emissions will be presented and discussed, including ISO 14064-1 for quantifying greenhouse gas emissions and ISO 14067 for quantifying the carbon footprint of products. The event will also introduce new standards in development for adaptation to climate change (ISO 14090); impacts, vulnerability and risk assessment (ISO 14091); and green bonds for environmental performance of projects and assets (ISO 14030).

In addition, the ISO mapping exercise carried out in 2018, which links hundreds of ISO International Standards to the objectives of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, will be profiled.

The ISO event can be viewed, along with all other side events, via video broadcast on the UNFCCC side events webcast page.

Source: iso.org

 

263/ Vietnam among 10 fastest-growing economies

While growth is set to ease in 2019, Vietnam will still be among the top 10 fastest-growing economies globally, according to the “Economic Insight: South-East Asia” report recently released by the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales (ICAEW).

In the report, ICAEW predicts that economic growth across Southeast Asia (SEA) is expected to slow down in 2019 to 5 percent, after an estimated 5.3 percent in 2018. It attributed the slowdown to US-China tensions.

“The resulting slowdown in Chinese demand will weigh significantly on SEA growth, especially for export-dependent economies with a high level of exports to China, like Singapore and Malaysia,” the report said.

Economic growth continued to moderate across most SEA economies in the third quarter of 2018, with the average GDP growth slowing to 4.8 percent year-on-year, from 5.2 percent in second quarter of 2018, it said.

Vietnam was the exception, with GDP growth accelerating 6.9 percent on the year, up from 6.7 percent in the second quarter as FDI inflows continued to support growth in manufacturing activity and exports.

“GDP growth across the region is set to slow next year, as many of the region’s economies are small, open and heavily dependent on exports to China, due to both supply-chain linkages as well as tightening Chinese domestic demand,” the report said.

Domestic demand would likely provide some relief amid a more difficult outlook for exports. In addition, expansionary fiscal policy would also help, with fiscal spending expected to be strong in Indonesia, Thailand and the Philippines ahead of upcoming elections in the first half of 2019.

Many governments in the region, including Indonesia and Malaysia, are expected to miss their ambitious fiscal consolidation targets for 2019.

In Vietnam, while the Government’s fiscal position has improved, there is limited space for any expansionary fiscal policy next year, the report said.

However, Mark Billington, ICAEW Regional Director for South East Asia, said that although domestic demand had held up well this year, it was unlikely to reach the stellar pace achieved in 2018, partly due to lower monetary policy support.

“Combined with a moderation in export growth, we expect GDP growth across all of the SEA economies to ease next year, as a result of the ongoing US-China trade conflict and tighter global monetary conditions,” he said.

Source: VNS/VNA

 

264/ Vietnam, Senegal look to push trade cooperation

A trade promotion programme was held in Senegal by the Trade Office of the Vietnamese Embassy in Algeria and Senegal from December 2-8 to boost trade relations between the two nations.

The event saw the participation of many Vietnamese enterprises specialising in producing agricultural products.

In the framework of the event, representatives from the Trade Office had meetings and working sessions with those from the Senegalese Ministry of Commerce and the Ministry of Industry, as well as its Chamber of Commerce and Industry, to promote negotiations for the signing of a memorandum of understanding (MoU) on industrial and trade cooperation between the two countries.

A workshop to introduce the potentials of Vietnam-Senegal trade bonding was organised on December 4, attracting over 250 enterprises from the West African country.

Addressing the event, Vietnamese Commercial Counsellor Hoang Duc Nhuan updated participants on Vietnam’s economic development and proposed ways to enhance bilateral economic and trade links.

Senegalese Deputy Minister of Trade Makhtar Lah said his country is working hard to promote reform and open its economy, improve the business and investment environment towards luring foreign investment, and realise its goal of become an emerging economy by 2035.

According to Nhuan, trade between Vietnam and Senegal was 70.17 million USD in 2017. Vietnam’s main exports to the country were rice, tea, coffee, peppercorn, vegetables, aquatic and industrial products, footwear and textiles.

Nhuan added that at the meeting, the two sides agreed on the need to swiftly sign the MoU on trade and industrial cooperation, as well as ink agreements on double taxation avoidance and investment encouragement and protection to make it easy for their enterprises to expand investment and business collaboration in each other’s markets.

They also stressed the necessity to promote the role of trade promotion and diplomatic agencies in supporting activities of their businesses.

The Senegalese side called on Vietnamese firms to increase their investment in the West African nation, especially in processing farm produce.

The Vietnamese side took the occasion to visit the International Fair of Dakar – Senegal’s biggest trade event which sees the participation of some 670 domestic and foreign agencies and enterprises.

It also met representatives from Senegalese importers and learned about the country’s goods distribution systems.

Source: VNA

 

Ngày 11/12

265/ DG Azevêdo meets non-resident members and observers participating in ‘Geneva Week’

Director-General Roberto Azevêdo met with Geneva Week participants today (11 December) to welcome them to Geneva and brief them on the WTO’s current work and priorities. In an open discussion, issues raised included the value of the WTO for small and vulnerable economies, the impasse in the Appellate Body and the growing debate on WTO reform. ‘Geneva Week’ is a biannual event organized for WTO members and observers who do not have permanent missions in Geneva.

Geneva Week participants

Antigua and Barbuda	Mr. Colin Trevor MURDOCH Ambassador Office of the Prime Minister
	Miss Joy-Marie Estianne C. KING Director of International Trade Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Belize	Mr. Duane Everett BELISLE Chief Executive Officer Ministry of Investment, Trade and Commerce
Dominica	Mrs Clare SERAPHIN-WALLACE Trade Officer Ministry of Trade, Energy and Employment
Papua New Guinea	Mr. Philip MERCADO Assistant Secretary – Trade Policy and the WTO Department of Commerce and Industry
Saint Kitts and Nevis	Ms Shenille Xenia SMITHEN Trade Policy Officer Ministry of International Trade, Industry, Commerce and Consumer Affairs
Saint Lucia	Mr. George Guy MAYERS High Commissioner High Commission for Saint Lucia in London
	Mrs Lisa Louis PHILIP Coordinator, CARIFORUM-EU Economic Partnership Agreement Department of Commerce, International Trade, Investment, Enterprise Development and Consumer Affairs
Samoa	Mr. Fili Yohni FEPULEAI Senior Fisheries Officer Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries
	Ms Hermine RAELI-MCCARTHY Principal Foreign Service Officer Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade
Suriname	Miss Elaine Helen WOODE Counsellor Embassy of Surinam Paris
	Mr. Paul Stuart SOEBAI Trade Official Ministry of Trade, Industry and Tourism
Tonga	Mr. Viliami Fonongaloa LOLOHEA First Secretary Embassy of the Kingdom of Tonga London
ISDB	Mr. Elmostafa AITAMOR Senior IDBG Coordinator Islamic Development Bank Jeddah – Saudi Arabia

Source: wto.org

266/ Trade Policy Review Body: Overview of developments in the international trading environment

Remarks by DG Azevêdo

Thank you Chair,

Excellencies,

Ladies and gentlemen,

Good afternoon.

We are here to take stock of the recent major developments in the international trading system over the past 12 months.

These developments are presented in my Annual Report, which was circulated to members on 27 November in document WT/TPR/OV/21. As always, this report is issued under my own responsibility.

Transparency is essential to everything that we do at the WTO. It is central to maintain the predictability and stability of the multilateral trading system. This report and this annual overview are very important elements in these efforts.

The Report takes stock of trade and trade-related measures implemented across the WTO membership between mid-October 2017 and mid-October 2018.

It outlines important trends in global trade policy making, and gives an overall assessment of the main developments observed over this period.

The Report also presents a comprehensive account of the state in notifications by WTO members.

This exercise is about transparency, objectivity and facts. It has no legal effect on the rights and obligations of WTO members. It does not seek to pass any judgement on whether a trade measure is protectionist or not. Nor does it question the explicit right of members to adopt certain trade measures.

In a moment, I will outline some of the key findings of the Report. But first, I would like to provide a brief background on the process of preparing this document.

I would like to thank the delegations that have actively participated in this exercise by providing relevant information on time, and by ensuring the subsequent verification of this information.

Some 80 members and two observers contributed to this overview. This represents 49% of the membership, and covers around 93% of world imports.

This is positive, but we can still improve on the membership’s participation. I strongly encourage all members to do so in future.

Of course, the Secretariat remains available to help members’ understanding of this exercise and help facilitate their participation.

Let me now highlight a few of the key findings of the Report.

It shows that 137 new trade-restrictive measures were put in place during the period reviewed. This represents a slightly higher rate than in the previous annual overview.

Members also implemented 162 new measures that facilitate trade. Again, this also represents a higher rate than the previous annual overview.

Looking at the trade coverage helps to give a better perspective of the impact of these measures.

The trade coverage of the import-restrictive measures is estimated at 588 billion dollars. This is more than seven times larger than the figure for the previous annual overview. In fact, this is the largest coverage of such measures recorded by this trade monitoring exercise. This should be of great concern to the WTO membership.

Let me be clear, however, that the trade coverage number does not shed light on the degree of restrictiveness of the measures adopted. Our report, therefore, does not measure the impact of the measures adopted. It simply quantifies the value of trade affected, with no qualitative analysis.

The trade coverage of the import-facilitating measures was estimated at 295 billion dollars. This is almost 1.8 times higher than that recorded in the previous annual overview. However, it represents only half the coverage of trade-restrictive measures recorded for the current review period.

Of course, these results are not surprising. We have all witnessed the tensions in the global trading environment over the past months.

This proliferation of trade restrictive measures and the uncertainty created by such actions could place economic recovery in jeopardy.

Further escalation would carry potentially large risks for global trade, with knock-on effects for economic growth, jobs and consumer prices around the world.

World trade growth is beginning to slow. The latest World Trade Outlook Indicator released on 26 November 2018 signaled a further loss of momentum in trade growth in the last quarter of 2018.

The WTO Secretariat will continue to monitor these and other developments and report back to members regularly.

I urge members to use all means at their disposal to de-escalate the situation. We may be beginning to see some progress, but as yet we clearly still have some way to go. We all need to engage in a ‘solution finding mode’ to dissipate these tensions.

Now, let me say a few words about some of the other findings of the Report.

Trade remedy measures continue to be a very important trade policy tool for WTO members.

They accounted for about 63% of all trade measures captured. The main sectors targeted by trade remedy initiations relate to iron and steel, which represented just over 50% of trade remedy initiations.

The trade coverage of initiations of trade remedy investigations was estimated at 93.6 billion dollars – more than 17 billion higher than the previous annual overview.

The trade coverage of terminations of trade remedy actions was estimated at 18.3 billion dollars, 6 billion higher than the figure reported in the last annual overview.

I should again stress, particularly in the case of trade remedies, that the Report does not call into question the WTO consistency of any of the measures listed. Nor is the Report in a position to establish whether, where or when any perceived distortive trade practices addressed by these measures have taken place.

Now, let me turn to the Report’s findings with respect to general economic support measures and subsidies.

For this Report the Secretariat applied a more comprehensive approach in covering general economic support measures and programmes.

The result of this effort suggests that the nature of economic support measures has evolved considerably over the past decade. They now include wider and more strategic applications of subsidies.

Here, the Secretariat requested the verification of 248 economic support measures taken by WTO members. However, the response rate was quite low.

In addition, a large number of members, in response to the request for verification of such measures, requested that these be omitted from the Report. As a result, it was again not possible to establish a balanced and comprehensive annex to the Report. Members may want to consider how this issue might be best addressed in the future.

Now let me discuss trade in services. Here, most of the new measures implemented during the review period were trade-facilitating. However, several appeared to be trade-restrictive.

The Report also shows the continued commitment of members to notify SPS and TBT measures.

In fact, in both these committees, members have dedicated considerable time to discuss specific trade concerns. This suggests an increasing use of the committees by members as forums in which trade concerns may be resolved non-litigiously.

The Report also shows that an increasing number of trade concerns besides SPS and TBT were also raised in WTO bodies during the review period.

Moreover, several trade concerns were raised in more than one WTO body, indicating that they involve technically complex and cross-cutting issues. This demonstrates the value of WTO committees as constructive platforms to engage.

In addition, the report provides a comprehensive overview of the compliance and timeliness of members’ notifications to the WTO.

It shows that members could do much better on this front.

I want to echo the Chair’s comments here. Timely notifications constitute an essential element for transparency. We must continue to explore ways to improve compliance with notification obligations, including understanding why some members have difficulties here.

Finally, the Report also provides members with an overview of the issues raised in individual Trade Policy Reviews. And on a positive note, it highlights the progress made in the implementation of the WTO’s Trade Facilitation Agreement and the ITA, and also recent developments in intellectual property.

So, these are some of the principal findings that I wanted to share with you today.

I hope that this snapshot provides some food for thought for your discussion this afternoon. I would like to express my thanks again to all participants. I also want to thank the Secretariat for their excellent work here.

The message of the Report before us today is serious. We must work together now to overcome these challenges and ensure that trade continues to play a positive role in economies everywhere.

In doing so, we must continue to strengthen this exercise and ensure that transparency remains a cornerstone of our work.

Thank you for listening. I wish you a very productive meeting.

Source: wto.org

 

267/ DG Azevêdo: Economic research vital to strengthen trade cooperation

Addressing a WTO economic conference on 11 December 2018, entitled ‘Updating Trade Cooperation: An Economic View’, Director-General Roberto Azevêdo argued that current trade tensions provide an opportunity for the rules-based multilateral trading system to prove its value and for reforms to be deliberated in response to the evolving global economy. Sound analysis and strong evidence are vital in this effort, DG Azevêdo said in opening the conference, which looks at pressing issues in international trade cooperation from an economic angle. DG Azevêdo’s full speech is available below.

Good morning everyone.

Welcome to the WTO and to this economic conference on ‘Updating Trade Cooperation‘.

Let me say a particular welcome to World Bank Chief Economist and Senior Vice President Penny Goldberg.

It’s great to have all of you with us today.

This is the first conference of its kind at the WTO, looking at pressing issues in international trade cooperation today from an economic angle. I’d like to thank everybody who was involved in organizing this initiative, especially the Economic Research and Statistics Division.

There is no question that this is a momentous period in global trade. We face a wide range of challenges. But also I believe that this is a once-in-a-generation opportunity to renew cooperation in global trade.

Trade has proven to be an engine of growth, productivity, innovation, job creation and development. The multilateral trading system makes a huge contribution to that end.

We have to ensure that the system continues to play this positive role, and that it helps members deal with the challenges of the modern world.

Events like this can make a huge contribution to this debate.

The aim of this conference is to call on the academic community and trade policy experts to look at how research-based analysis can help us find ways to strengthen and improve the trading system.

Of course, one way in which we can strengthen the system is by making the case for trade, with strong evidence and data. Economic research is vital here. And so I hope that this will be on your minds today as well.

To consider these issues, this conference is bringing together economists, academics, policy-makers, delegates and decision-makers. Everybody has a contribution to make. There is a great deal of brainpower in this room.

And I should be clear, these titles are not mutually exclusive! I can think of many colleagues who qualify as economists and delegates and decision makers. Some of them are joining the great line-up of speakers that we have for you today.

So let’s make the most out of this opportunity.

To help focus these debates, the discussions today will be divided in four sessions.

The first session looks at the value of international cooperation.

The benefits of cooperation on trade issues are many.

The multilateral trading system provides a platform for a myriad of economic gains to be realised. And underpinning everything, it provides stability and predictability.

The system effectively provides the constitution for global trade, establishing shared principles which underpin trading practices around the world. It provides the only global forum for discussion and debate on trade issues. It provides the mechanisms for countries to monitor and review each other’s trade policies. And it provides the means to settle disputes when they arise.

However, the tensions that we are seeing in the global trading environment pose a big risk – both systemic and economic.

Our team, led by Bob, has mapped the economic impacts.

They have been assessing a variety of possible scenarios to illustrate the effects, including the impact of a full, global trade war.

By this we mean a breakdown in international trade cooperation, where instead of tariffs being set cooperatively in the WTO or in other trade agreements, they are set unilaterally.

Under this mindset, tariffs would rise sharply. We would see a reduction of global trade by around 17%.

This would cause a very significant slowdown in GDP growth, and bring major disruptions for workers, firms and communities as they adjust to this new reality.

Clearly, we can’t afford to go down this road. We must find ways to reverse gears.

We need to find ways to ensure that the system remains resilient, but also to ensure that it is fully responsive to members’ needs and priorities.

That is what the second session will explore. It will look at the design of trade agreements and at how they can remain sustainable over time.

In recent years the WTO delivered major deals which promise significant economic gains, including: the Trade Facilitation Agreement, the expanded Information Technology Agreement and the deal to abolish export subsidies in agriculture.

These deals all follow quite different approaches – and as such, they offer us some important lessons in how to move forward. Flexibility is a key feature.

We have flexibility in geometry, for example in plurilateral initiatives like the Government Procurement Agreement, which applies only to the signatories. Or the Information Technology Agreement, which is signed on what we call a Most Favoured Nation basis, so the benefits apply to all members.

And we have flexibility in substance. We saw this with the multilateral Trade Facilitation Agreement, where members may decide how fast they can implement each specific commitment, and may ask for technical assistance to help them to do so.

Some members are now also exploring new forms of flexibility.

This includes the joint initiatives launched by groups of members on a number of issues of growing economic importance, such as electronic commerce, investment facilitation, MSMEs, and the economic empowerment of women. Whether and how these initiatives will evolve is up to members. And, not surprisingly, they have different perspectives here.

Ultimately, in a system with 164 members of different sizes, different priorities and different stages of development, flexibility is one key element of avoiding fragmentation and charting a productive way forward.

We need the system to be able to respond to members’ needs in a way that is faster and more agile.

We have to ask ourselves – is the global trading system equipped for the challenges we face today? And if not, how should we respond?

This leads me to our third session on how to address the fast-changing nature of the global economy.

The world is changing before our eyes. New technologies are challenging our conceptions of international trade.

We could not stop this evolution even if we wanted to – but we can shape it. Indeed, we have a duty to shape it in a way that is helpful for all of us.

If we do not, it is inevitable that many will be left behind. This will create new social problems, new sources of unease and unrest. We need to spread the benefits of trade as far and as wide as possible.

This is why inclusivity is so important – and that will be the focus of the fourth session today.

It will discuss how policies that help workers adapt to new economic realities are essential to build a trading system that works for everybody.

Domestic policy is key here. However, international organizations can also support this debate by offering a platform for discussion, and by helping to inform these conversations.

We often join forces and pool our expertise to put the spotlight on particular issues. And I am pleased that today we can showcase an important example of this kind of cooperation.

The WTO has joined forces with the World Bank to produce a new publication entitled “Trade and Poverty Reduction: New evidence of impacts in developing countries“.  This publication builds on a track record of collaboration between our two organisations – and on our first publication on this issue, which we published in 2015.

I’d like to thank the WTO team who worked on this report – specifically Roberta Piermartini, Robert Teh and Mustapha Sadni-Jallab.

And, let me thank Penny and the World Bank team for your work here as well.

This report looks at the challenges the poorest face in joining global trade flows. It also highlights the fact that, in a scenario of heightened trade policy uncertainty, the poorest stand to lose the most.

In doing so, this publication gives governments food for thought on policies that could help maximize the overall positive gains of trade for the extreme poor. It also helps to highlight the importance of international cooperation to ensure that everybody can benefit.

So I urge you all to take a look. The publication will be available on our website today.

I’m afraid I can’t stay with you for today’s session – I have to leave in just a moment. But let me conclude on this point…

I think it’s clear that we have many challenges before us today. But we should keep a proper perspective on the problems that we face. The trading system has been under pressure before, and each time it has emerged stronger.

In 2008, faced with the worst economic crisis for many decades, the system proved its value, preventing an outbreak of protectionist measures.

In 2013, after years of deadlock, we proved that we could deliver negotiated results.

Today, we must rise to the challenge again, and turn this crisis into an opportunity to renew and strengthen the system for the future.

Developing sound economic analysis on the key issues before us is vital in this effort. So I wish you a very productive discussion today. And I look forward to hearing the results of your deliberations.

Thank you.

Source: wto.org

 

Ngày 12/12

268/ General Council meeting

The General Council adopted the agenda without item 6 on “WTO Accessions: 2018 Annual Report by the Director-General” and will revert to it at a later stage.

1. Report by the Chairman of the Trade Negotiations Committee and Report by the Director-General

The Chairman referred to the Director-General’s report at the 10 December Informal TNC and Informal HODs meetings – where Chairs of negotiating bodies also provided reports on work in their respective areas and where 46 delegations intervened. The Director-General’s statement and the Oral Reports by the Chairs of the Bodies established by the TNC can be found in JOB/TNC/72. Under this item, Paraguay, Barbados, the Republic of Moldova and El Salvador spoke.

2. Implementation of the Bali, Nairobi and Buenos Aires Outcomes – Statement by the Chairman

The Chairman reported on the work taking place in WTO regular bodies to fulfil the Bali, Nairobi and Buenos Aires Ministerial mandates. His full statement can be found in JOB/GC/210. Vanuatu (ACP) and the Central African Republic (LDCs) spoke.

3. Work Programme on Small Economies – Report by the Chairman of the Dedicated Session of the Committee on Trade and Development

The CTD Chair reported that the CTD held its 37th Dedicated Session on Small Economies on 1 November. The discussion had focused on best practices and policy approaches for addressing the challenges identified in its previous session. The SVE Group was working on an outcome document based on the discussions held in 2018 in the Dedicated Session which would be discussed in its next meeting. Guatemala (SVEs) and Mauritius spoke.

4. Work Programme on Electronic Commerce

The GC Chair reported on developments under the work programme on e-commerce since the last periodic review in July – including on his consultations with Members on how to move forward the discussion on the e-commerce moratorium, following the submission by South Africa and India, and on the informal open-ended meeting he convened on 27 November in this regard. The Central African Republic (LDCs), India, South Africa, Vanuatu (ACP), Nigeria and Japan spoke.

5. The Development Assistance Aspects of Cotton – Statement by the Director-General

Deputy Director-General Alan Wolff, on behalf of the Director-General, reported that progress continued to be made on that area and noted the increase in active cotton-specific development assistance and that the work of the Mechanism had become more methodical. He thanked Members of the development community, those who significantly contributed to the South-South Cooperation for Cotton Development Assistance and several multilateral institutions. The Central African Republic (LDCs), the European Union, Mali (C-4) and Turkey spoke.

6. Appellate Body Appointments – Amendments of the Dispute Settlement Understanding

1. Statement by the European Union, China, Canada, Norway, New Zealand, Switzerland, Australia, Republic of Korea, Iceland, Singapore, Mexico, Costa Rica and Montenegro
2. Communication from the European Union, China, Canada, India, Norway, New Zealand, Switzerland, Australia, Republic of Korea, Iceland, Singapore, Mexico, Costa Rica and Montenegro (WT/GC/W/752/Rev.2)
3. Communication from the European Union, China, India and Montenegro (WT/GC/W/753/Rev.1)

The European Union introduced a statement and the two communications in 7(b) and 7(c). The co-sponsors – China, Canada, Norway, New Zealand, Switzerland, Australia, the Republic of Korea, Iceland, Singapore, Mexico, Costa Rica and Montenegro, – took the floor in turns and referred to the relevant sub-items.

In the discussion that followed, the Philippines; Antigua and Barbuda; the Russian Federation; Thailand; Argentina (on behalf of Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Mexico, Paraguay and Uruguay); Vanuatu (ACP); Ukraine; Brazil; Cambodia; the United States; Hong Kong, China; Tanzania; Japan; Afghanistan; Pakistan; Chad (LDCs); Ecuador; South Africa; Guatemala; Indonesia; Peru; Turkey; Uruguay; Nigeria; Chile; Honduras and the Dominican Republic took the floor. China; the United States and the European Union intervened again. The Chairman said that there was a general view among delegations that the matter needed to be addressed very urgently and that more focused discussion was necessary. He would consult with Members on the way forward.

7. Targeted Discussions on Dispute Settlement Issues – Communication from Australia and Singapore

Australia and the other co-sponsors – Singapore, Canada, Switzerland and Costa Rica – presented their communication circulated in WT/GC/W/754/Rev2. The United States, Brazil, Uganda and Japan spoke. The Chairman referred to his concluding remarks under the previous item and reiterated that he would conduct consultations in this regard.

8. Annual Review of the Special Compulsory Licensing System – Paragraph 7 of the Annex to the Amended TRIPS Agreement and Paragraph 8 of the Decision on the Implementation of Paragraph 6 of the Doha Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health – Report of the Council for TRIPS

The General Council took note of the report of the TRIPS Council on the annual review of the Special Compulsory Licensing System circulated in IP/C/82.

9. Waivers under Article IX of the WTO Agreement

The General Council adopted four waivers involving the Introduction of Harmonized System 2002, 2007, 2012 and 2017 changes into WTO Schedules of Tariff Concessions. The Council also conducted the review of six waivers pursuant to Article IX:4 of the WTO Agreement. Montenegro spoke.

10. Committee on Budget, Finance and Administration – Report on Meetings of July, September and November 2018

The General Council took note of the CBFA Chair’s statement, approved the Budget Committee’s specific recommendation in paragraphs 2.13, 3.14 to 3.16 and 4.18 of WT/BFA/176, and adopted the reports in WT/BFA/174, WT/BFA/175 and WT/BFA/176.

11. International Trade Centre UNCTAD/WTO – Report of the Joint Advisory Group on its 52nd Session

Following a statement by the CTD Chairman on that body’s consideration of the report at its meeting on 21 November, the General Council adopted the JAG’s report. The International Trade Centre (Observer) spoke.

12. Review of WTO Activities

The General Council conducted its annual review of WTO activities, in line with the Decision concerning procedures for an annual overview of WTO activities and for reporting under the WTO (WT/L/105).

13. Appointment of Officers to WTO Bodies – Announcement by the Chairman pursuant to Paragraph 7.1(a) of the Guidelines

In line with the Guidelines for the Appointment of Officers to WTO bodies (WT/L/510), the Chair announced that he would be starting the selection process assisted by the serving Chair of the Dispute Settlement Body and former Chair of the General Council.

Under “Other Business“, the delegation of Argentina made a statement on the G20′s work on trade and investment. The Chairman confirmed that there appeared to be consensus on the appointment of Ambassador Morten Jespersen, Permanent Representative of Denmark, to chair the Working Party on the Accession of Ethiopia and Mr. Katsuro Nagai, Deputy Permanent Representative of Japan, to chair the Working Party on the Accession of Sudan. Sudan (Observer) spoke. The Chairman also made a statement on Members and Observers in arrears.

Source: wto.org

 

Ngày 13/12

269/ ASEAN+3 young entrepreneurs and leaders join hands to boost hi-tech agricultural initiatives

More than 160 young entrepreneurs and leaders from ten ASEAN countries along with representatives of South Korea, Japan and China on Thursday gathered in HCM City to discuss and share hi-tech agriculture initiatives, pioneering the realisation of the objectives of the ASEAN Economic Community and contributing to building a sustainable ASEAN Community.

The theme this year is “ASEAN+3 Young Entrepreneurs Towards Innovative Agricultural Startups”.

It aims to address the desire to unleash the economic potential of young people in ASEAN, strengthen capacity and widen the network of young entrepreneurs, facilitate job creation and economic growth in the long term, and contribute to the development of human capital in ASEAN.

Speaking at the opening ceremony, Secretary of the Hồ Chí Minh Communist Youth Union (HCYU) Nguyễn Ngọc Lương said the relationship among the countries had developed in all aspects in the past.

“Innovation and startups in hi-tech agriculture is a global trend. It needs the co-operation of countries, young people and young entrepreneurs who will play a key role in this field,” said Lương.

During the forum, he said comments, ideas and exchanges of experience among delegates and experts would contribute to improving knowledge for each young entrepreneur, thereby contributing to the development of the ASEAN+3 community.

Tan Sijie Darren, a representative of the Singapore delegation, said he was working in a high-tech farm on the terrace of a building in downtown Singapore. The farm employed retired people and provided clean vegetables and fruits to locals.

Tan said ASEAN countries were facing many problems such as population growth, climate change and urbanisation, affecting many areas, including agriculture. Innovative startup was therefore an ideal solution to tackle the problems.

Instead of entering stable working environments, young people are seeking solutions to food issues for the community. The creativity, co-operation and sharing of youth and young entrepreneurs in hi-tech agriculture will help stabilise and develop high-quality food in every country as well as the ASEAN +3 community.

At the forum, which will ends on Sunday, participants discussed the lessons of startups, opportunities and challenges in starting hi-tech agriculture.

The forum is the realisation of the Hà Nội Initiative, endorsed by ASEAN Ministerial Meeting on Youth, with focus on nurturing young human resources, which took place in November 2011.

The same day, they also visited several models of hi-tech agriculture in HCM City and the southern province of Đồng Tháp.

Source: VNS

 

 

Ngày 14/12

270/ India appeals panel ruling in dispute with Japan over safeguard duties on steel products

India filed an appeal on 14 December concerning the WTO panel report in the case brought by Japan in “India — Certain Measures on Imports of Iron and Steel Products” (DS518). The panel report was circulated to WTO members on 6 November.

Further information will be available within the next few days in document WT/DS518/8.

Parties to a dispute can appeal a panel’s ruling. Appeals have to be based on points of law, such as legal interpretation — they cannot re-open factual findings made by the panel. Each appeal is heard by three members of an Appellate Body comprising persons of recognized authority and unaffiliated with any government. Each member of the Appellate Body is appointed for a fixed term. Generally, the Appellate Body has up to 3 months to conclude its report.

Source: wto.org

 

271/New book chronicles history, evolution of GATT dispute settlement

The dispute settlement system under the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) 1947 functioned for nearly 50 years and received more than 300 complaints between contracting parties before being replaced by the WTO’s dispute settlement system. To mark the 70th anniversary of the GATT, the WTO has issued today (14 December) a new publication covering the history and evolution of GATT dispute settlement decisions and procedures.

The publication represents the first comprehensive effort to consolidate information on all disputes during the entire GATT 1947 period (1948-1995). It relies on information from multiple sources, including public and internal records held by the GATT/WTO secretariats.

“This is an ideal moment to look back at various aspects of our GATT heritage,” WTO Director-General Roberto Azevêdo said in his foreword to the book.

“Through a process of pragmatic experimentation, GATT dispute settlement progressively grew from two specific Articles in the GATT 1947 into an impressive body of dispute settlement rules and practices,” DG Azevêdo noted. “The considerable evolution of GATT dispute settlement is a testament to the resilience and flexibility of the multilateral trading system, as well as the increasing importance of the rule of law in international trade.”

The publication consists of two volumes. The first volume contains a 30-page overview of GATT dispute settlement, a one‑page summary for each identified GATT dispute, recording all relevant steps and documents, and detailed indexes of the information by relevant parties, agreements and provisions. The second volume compiles for the first time all GATT dispute settlement procedures, as well as a selection of other key documents of historical interest. It also compiles information on a plethora of related issues, including details about who were the adjudicators to these disputes.

Suja Rishikesh Mavroidis, Director of the WTO’s Market Access Division, recalled that while the GATT 1947 was terminated in 1995, it has continued relevance for its successor, the WTO.

“The GATT 1947 is incorporated by reference into the WTO Agreement, and many of today’s WTO disputes are concerned with GATT provisions that were developed 70 years ago,” she noted. “It is not just the GATT provisions that have continued WTO relevance. During almost half a century, the provisions of the GATT 1947 were enforced and interpreted in numerous GATT disputes. These disputes have continued legal relevance today, including in WTO dispute settlement.”

John Adank, Director of the WTO’s Legal Affairs Division, said that one important challenge in putting together the book was determining what constituted a GATT dispute, given that no official classification existed at the time. Based on criteria set out by the authors, and which were developed by Prof. Robert Hudec in the early 1990s, the publication identified 316 GATT disputes in total, significantly more than previous estimates. More than half of these disputes took place in the last decade of the GATT, which largely coincided with the Uruguay Round negotiations.

Of these 316 disputes initiated, 157 led to the establishment of some form of adjudicator (mostly a working party or a panel) which then issued 136 reports. Of these 136 reports, 96 were adopted by the GATT membership – representing an overall adoption rate of approximately 71%.

The systematic analysis of the primary sources led to the inclusion of disputes that had not been listed in previous compilations. A dedicated online database is currently under development. It will provide user-friendly access to all data and key documents compiled in the research for this publication.

GATT Disputes: 1948-1995 can be downloaded here. Printed copies can be purchased from the WTO’s Online Bookshop.

Source: wto.org

 

272/ Symposium examines trade issues relating to natural disasters

On 14 December, a symposium held at the WTO on natural disasters and trade looked into the economic losses resulting from natural disasters, how to use data to analyze risk, and the case for investment in building resilience to such disasters. The symposium was held as part of a WTO research project approved by WTO members and funded by the Government of Australia. A preliminary scoping of the trade issues emerging from this research was presented.

Increasing levels of damage are being reported from extreme weather events, with losses falling disproportionately on the agriculture sector. These were among the insights provided by the United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (see UNISDR report) and the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (see FAO report) in a session that also featured a presentation by the European Commission on the need for accurate data on hazards and risk to better inform decision-making.

The symposium highlighted that data is a crucial input for risk management, which is needed to improve preparedness for natural disasters and to assist decision-making regarding investment and insurance. Participants discussed the limits to insurability against hazards if action is not taken to address risk factors and vulnerability. They also reflected on how early warning systems and resilience to disasters could be improved through better weather forecasting. A preliminary scoping of trade issues, including in relation to activities to support resilience, was made by the WTO Secretariat. An event is being planned to present the results of the research in early April 2019.

Source: wto.org

273/ Injecting quality into software development with industry-specific guidance on ISO 9001

Developing software is not always a straightforward procedure. An International Standard to apply the principles of the world’s most widely used quality management system enables engineers to smooth out the process. It has just been updated.

ISO/IEC/IEEE 90003, Software engineering – Guidelines for the application of ISO 9001:2015 to computer software, is designed as a checklist for the development, supply and maintenance of computer software. The recently updated version combines the proven benefits of ISO 9001 with some of the world’s most important support documents in software engineering, allowing an organization to benefit from international best practice in improving quality at every step of the life cycle. This includes everything from the supply, acquisition, operation and maintenance, to the circular process of continuous improvement.

Developed in conjunction with the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) and the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), the standard was recently revised to align with the most recent version of ISO 9001 (published in 2015), with new concepts relevant to current software development added.

Dr Sundeep Oberoi, Chair of the joint ISO and IEC subcommittee that developed the standard, said ISO/IEC/IEEE 90003 is important for the industry as it provides a much needed interpretation of ISO 9001 in a language appropriate to software development.

“As it has been written by software experts from many different countries, it adds great value to the wealth of knowledge already accumulated in the software world,” he said.

“It also provides links to other software engineering standards that may be of use to software developers, such as software life-cycle processes, information security and testing.”

ISO/IEC/IEEE 90003 was developed by joint technical committee ISO/IEC JTC 1, Information technology, subcommittee SC 7, Software and systems engineering, whose secretariat is BIS, ISO’s member for India. It can be purchased from your national ISO member or through the ISO Store.

Source: iso.org

 

274/ Vietnamese enterprises advised to expand exports to Poland

Intensifying information connectivity, increasing product quality, developing a system of sales agents and distributors in Poland are necessary factors for Vietnamese enterprises who want to bring their products to the Polish market.

With a population of over 38 million and average per capita income of 24,000 USD a year, Poland is considered the largest market in Eastern Europe, and one of Vietnam’s leading trade partners.

Last year, two-way trade surpassed 1 billion USD and the figure is forecast to continue rising this year.

Vietnam’s export turnover to the Eastern European country enjoys an average growth rate of around 27 percent during 2010-2017, hitting 775 million USD last year, or a year-on-year rise of 29.8 percent.

Vietnam mainly exports electronics and equipment, footwear, textiles and agricultural goods such as coffee, pepper, coconut and cashew to Poland.

However, Poland imports a great deal of rice, fruit and oil products from other countries but very little from Vietnam, which is highly capable of supplying these products, according to Piotr Harasimowicz, chief representative officer of the Polish Investment and Trade Agency in Ho Chi Minh City.

Therefore, he suggested the two countries’ enterprises intensify information connectivity to understand more about each other’s market.

A representative from the Vietnam Food Industries Joint Stock Company (VIFON), which succeeds in exporting instant noodle to Poland with 29.26 percent of the market share, said that the success is attributed to the company’s good product quality (no synthetic colours and artificial preservatives) as well as attractive and diverse packaging.

Source: VNA

 

275/ South Africa expected to be gateway for VN exports to Africa

Việt Nam expects South Africa to be a gateway for exported Vietnamese rice to enter other markets in Africa, said Deputy Head of the Ministry of Industry and Trade’s Import-Export Department Trần Quốc Toản, who led the Vietnamese trade promotion team during a two-day visit to South Africa that ended on Monday.

Speaking at a meeting with the South African business delegation led by Director of the South African Department of Trade and Industry’s Asia Bilateral Relations International Trade and Economic Development Division Madileke Ramushu, Toản shared information relevant to Việt Nam’s tax and customs regulations for rice export and distribution.

Toản said with consumption of about 850,000 tonnes per year, South Africa was a potential export market for Vietnamese enterprises. In addition, as the number of Asian tourists and labourers rises demand for rice is expected to continue to increase. The country produces almost no rice because of its environmental conditions, meaning it will need to import more of the crop.

As a leading economy in Africa with extensive trade relations with many countries in the continent, South Africa acts as a gateway for Vietnamese rice businesses to enter the large African market, said Toản.

“In addition to promoting the consumption of rice in the South African market, Vietnamese businesses need to expand relations with international trading partners here,” said Toản.

Ramushu said South Africa was willing to create the best conditions for Vietnamese businesses to increase their rice exports to the country and would help them gain access to other markets in the continent, especially those in the Southern African Development Community with a total population of 650 million people.

In terms of the trade balance between the two countries, Madileke said the value-added content of South African exports to Việt Nam was still low because it mainly exported raw materials while importing finished products from Việt Nam.

He suggested Vietnamese enterprises support their South African counterparts in increasing processing volume of export products to improve their value.

Madileke also called on Vietnamese businesses to invest in processing in South Africa and thereby bring their products into the African market.

On the same day, the Vietnamese delegation in collaboration with the Vietnamese Embassy in South Africa and the Chamber of Industry and Commerce of Johannesburg held a seminar to promote Vietnamese rice export. In addition to the nine leading rice exporters from Vietnam, the seminar attracted the participation of dozens of South African businesses operating in the field of trade.

Speaking at the event, Vietnamese Ambassador to South Africa Vũ Văn Dũng emphasised that this was a diplomatic activity serving the economy and was part of the series of activities to commemorate the 25th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations between the two countries (1993-2018).

“The trade promotion will help turn the potential into practical co-operative results, bringing economic benefits to the business communities of the two countries as well as contributing to tightening diplomatic relations, which are already very good,” said Dũng.

At the seminar, Vietnamese enterprises focused on the introduction of rice products, processing technology, preservation and packaging, which were appreciated by the South Africa partners for their design and quality.

Source: VNS

 

276/ Mexico to face fierce competition from Vietnam: Mexican economists

Mexican economists have shared the view that once the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) takes effect, Mexico will have to face fierce competition from Vietnam in many sectors, such as garments and textiles, leather and footwear, and electronic equipment.

Arnulfo Gomez, a foreign trade expert, said Vietnam has successfully implemented a commercial strategy that helps improve the quality and competitiveness of its products on the international market by reducing spending on materials and applying technology in production.

With such advantages, Vietnam has more capacity than Mexico to utilise opportunities generated by the CPTPP, he said.

The experts suggested that the Mexican Government set forth new measures to raise the competitiveness of domestic businesses, thus avoiding adverse impacts from the deal.

Statistics of the Mexican Ministry of Economy show that trade between Vietnam and Mexico between January and October 2018 reached 3.85 billion USD, with a trade surplus of 3.5 billion USD in favour of Vietnam.

The CPTPP, formerly named the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP), is made up of 11 signatories following the US withdrawal. The current member states are Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, and Vietnam.

The deal is considered a high-quality free trade agreement and one of the most comprehensive trade deals ever concluded. The CPTPP member states form a giant market with 500 million consumers and a combined gross domestic product of 13.5 trillion USD, accounting for 15 percent of the world’s GDP and 15 percent of the global trade turnover.

The Vietnamese National Assembly passed a resolution ratifying the CPTPP and related documents on November 12. Mexico, Japan, Singapore, New Zealand, Canada, and Australia had already ratified the agreement.

The CPTTP is expected to take effect on December 30 this year.

Source: VNA

 

Ngày 17/12

277/ France pledges EUR 4.5 million to strengthen trade skill set of developing countries

France is donating a total of EUR 4.5 million (CHF 5 million) to finance technical assistance programmes and training activities for developing and least-developed countries (LDCs) over a period of three years (2018, 2019 and 2020). This amount will be directed to five funds housed by the WTO.

• The Chairs Programme will receive each year EUR 50,000 (CHF 56,000) aimed at supporting and promoting the knowledge and understanding of the multilateral trading system through universities and research institutions in developing countries and LDCs. To date, 19 WTO chairs are undertaking curriculum development, research and outreach activities.
• The Doha Development Agenda Global Trust Fund will benefit from EUR 400,000 (CHF 450,000) each year to finance training workshops for officials in Geneva and elsewhere to help them better understand and implement WTO agreements and to take part in multilateral trade negotiations.
• A yearly amount of EUR 150,000 (CHF 170,000) will be allocated to the Standards and Trade Development Facility to help developing countries and LDCs implement food safety, animal health and plant health standards and improve their sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) capacity.
• Another annual contribution of EUR 800,000 (CHF 900,000) will be directed to the internship programme sponsored by France and Ireland and aimed at assisting the permanent missions of developing countries in Geneva.
• The Trade Facilitation Agreement Facility will receive an annual contribution of EUR 100,000 (CHF 113,000) to help developing countries and LDCs implement the WTO’s Trade Facilitation Agreement and to support the objective of full implementation of the Agreement by all WTO members.

WTO Director-General Roberto Azevêdo said: “France’s contribution is very welcome as it will help to strengthen the trading and negotiating capacity of developing countries and LDCs over the next three years. It shows the importance that France attaches to helping poorer countries benefit fully from global trade and further integrate into the world economy.”

The Permanent Representative of France, Jean-Marie Paugam, said: “Trade-related technical assistance is a crucial way of helping developing countries and least-developed countries integrate more fully into the multilateral trading system. France is pleased to be renewing its financial commitment, which has already allowed 194 interns from these countries to work in their permanent missions in Geneva and to strengthen their knowledge of global trading issues.”

Since 2000, France has contributed approximately EUR 25 million (just over CHF 22 million) to WTO trust funds.

Source: wto.org

 

278/ DDG Wolff: Efforts to maintain and improve the multilateral trading system will succeed

Institute for International Economics in Washington D.C. on 17 December, Deputy Director-General Alan Wolff outlined the reasons for being optimistic that the multilateral trading system and the WTO will endure. He emphasized the need for solutions to meet current challenges and what remains to be done to increase the benefits of the system.

The Future of the WTO and the Multilateral Trading System

Remarks of Alan Wm. Wolff Deputy Director General, World Trade Organization

Peterson Institute for International Economics, Washington DC – December 17, 2018

The setting

This is a time when all too many are questioning whether a liberal international economic, social and geopolitical system can be maintained.  They say that the original reasons for creating the present system, founded in 1947, are too distant; that memory does not survive the passage of two generations.  This thought was also captured on the occasion of the death just a few weeks ago of former President George Herbert Walker Bush.  Janan Ganesh writing in the Financial Times put it this way: “Social order is to some extent self-cancelling, the longer people have it the more they take it for granted, historic events that warn them against such complacency pass from living memory to folklore to something more like rumor⁽¹⁾ .

The view expressed by Robert Kagan in his book The Jungle Grows Back is more unsettling.  He concludes that the last 70 years were an aberration, that it was an exceptional time unmarked by wars among major powers and characterized by ever-increasing freedom for international trade.  He tells us that this was an extraordinary period created by the United States with the help of a few others; that the system was created in the wake of two horrendous world wars separated by the Great Depression.  He suggests that the garden we inhabit, if left untended, will succumb to encroachment by the jungle – with the consequent loss of the liberal world order.

I am with him part of the way.   I fully subscribe to the view that the failure to maintain and improve the multilateral trading system can result in its deterioration or worse in these times of serious stress.  However, there is a path forward to strengthen the system and assure its future. There is growing recognition that reform is needed, by the G20 leaders in their statement at their summit in Buenos Aires on December 1.  They declared that “The system is currently falling short of its objectives and there is room for improvement. We therefore support the necessary reform of the WTO to improve its functioning.” ⁽²⁾   More recently, the meeting of the 164 members in a formal session last Wednesday, December 12, in Geneva authorized a process of consultation on what should be done in the way of reform, if reform there is to be.

The 164 countries of the WTO and the nearly two dozen countries seeking to join the organization regularly affirm that the multilateral trading system is essential. That is a fine sentiment.  However, what is required is more than words; it will require deeds.  This is not a criticism of the G20 statement nor the initiatives in the WTO, which are most welcome.  It is a statement of fact.

The question is whether an effort to maintain and improve the system will succeed.  It can, and I believe that it will.  It may take more time than would be ideal, but it will be achieved.

I am decidedly optimistic about the future of the multilateral trading system and the WTO.  This does not mean that the system will be free from serious challenges, far from it.  There will be some low points, some that make the system appear to be sinking into a slough of despond⁽³⁾ .  It will, I believe, recover from any setback.

My purpose today is to lay out why optimism is justified, to outline the need for solutions to meet current major (some say existential) challenges to the multilateral trading system, to reference the growing interest in WTO reform, to suggest a measure of what remains to be done to increase the benefits of the system, and lastly to offer a personal perspective based on my current experience at the WTO.   I will append to a text of these remarks a short inventory of specific areas of value the WTO delivers.  And not least, I will suggest areas where the Peterson Institute might consider future analytical work.

Part I. Reasons for optimism.

There are many solid reasons for optimism, that the multilateral trading system and the WTO with it will endure.

First, there is the force of Ricardian physics.  David Riccardo got it right — open borders and, I would add, rules-based trade, are better for national economies on the whole than protection, and vastly better than seeking autarky.  The need for efficiency is underlined daily.  Those that fail to compete are left behind.  This is even truer today than at any prior time as the world has shrunk due to advances in technology — E-commerce and vastly more capable transportation systems than exist in

Second, there is a widespread fundamental understanding on the part of nearly all governments of the utility of having the multilateral trading system.  For this reason, despite very noteworthy exceptions, most of world trade is in fact currently conducted under the WTO’s rules.  To date there has been no contagion, no expansion to other products, no emulation by other countries leading to the widespread imposition of trade restrictions.  While the rules do not cover all trade, they cover most of it, at least for trade in goods.  Tariffs are on the whole levied within agreed bounds.  Product standards, much more threatening to trade than tariffs, are within an area of the WTO characterized by excellent cooperation, with countries notifying proposed standards in draft, consulting with other countries, and paying attention to comments received – fostering trade, both for imports and exports.

Third, outside the multilateral trading system, there can be no confidence whatsoever that access to foreign markets and supplies will be unimpeded.  Pragmatism drives WTO members to honor the bargains that they make.  In international law, a central principle is pacta sunt servanda⁽⁴⁾ – agreements are to be honored.  In all transactions including those among nations, keeping one’s word, creating trust, counts.  So far there is a large positive balance of trust present in the system, but it risks being eroded the more it is tested.   An alternative basis for relying on the system would be morality.  It may be that nations have morality as well as interests.   I would hope so, but an answer to that question requires more reflection⁽⁵⁾ , and will be reserved for another day.

Fourth, the WTO delivers benefits through the multilateral trading system that cannot be duplicated in plurilateral or regional agreements. A few examples:

• Enforceable nondiscrimination on a global basis is a benefit only a global agreement can confer.
• As a practical matter, limits on agricultural subsidies cannot be negotiated bilaterally or regionally.  There has to be an agreement covering all major subsidizers.
• The same is true for fisheries subsidies.

Fifth, The WTO agreements and procedures provides the baseline of multilateral rules that keeps world commerce from being carved up into trading blocs.  All regional and bilateral trade agreements have the WTO rules as their foundation.  The WTO rules underpin the USMCA (née NAFTA); the EU’s free trade agreements with the Eurasian Free Trade Agreement; the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans Pacific Trade; and the freshly-minted African Continental FTA.

 Sixth, there is a common effort to improve the system not scrap it. The strongest critic of the WTO has said “If we did not have the WTO, we would have to create it.”   No Member has left the WTO and 22 countries currently seek to join it. 

Seventh, the multilateral trading system will prevail because those nations that have tried alternative models, ignoring the dictates of global and domestic market forces, have in the long run, either changed their policies or failed.  This conclusion is true most dramatically with the dissolution of the Soviet Union.  There have been other examples as well.  Most countries have now moved to apply more market-oriented policies.  The lesson has been applied by major economies in Latin America; by the Japan we know today compared with the Japan that existed in the 1960s to the early 1990s bears witness to this pattern; and by the move toward market-based economies engaging in world commerce is to be found, among other places, in Central Asia and the region more generally – in Kazakhstan, in Moldova, and it is anticipated that this will be the case in Belarus and Uzbekistan.

If a country is large enough, it can try autarky, aiming at a high degree of self-sufficiency, but that as a goal leads only to a dead end.  Mercantilism has its limits.  Namely, others do not play along.

Eighth, without the rule of law there is chaos.  Global commerce can only thrive with certainty. Bilateral and regional agreements can provide a patchwork of rules and compliance mechanisms. These sub-multilateral arrangements can increase trade and even contribute to an increase in global GDP.  But for global trade there is only one place where rules of general application can be crafted and applied, and that is at the WTO.  What makes the WTO stand apart from many other international arrangements is that it creates enforceable obligations.

Ninth, and finally, national politics will ultimately align with the underlying reality that it is in the fundamental interest of all countries to have a well-functioning world trading system.  Farmers, ranchers, manufacturers, service providers, inventors, investors, and consumers all have a bottom line interest in a functioning multilateral trading system.  Those that think otherwise will eventually learn that this is the case.  To be sure, it can be a difficult period until they do.

Part II. The System at Risk

Most commentators would agree that the two most pressing challenges facing the world trading system are the U.S.-China exchanges of tariffs, and the termination of the WTO’s Appellate Body.

• The U.S. – China Tariff War

As a WTO official, I am perforce a neutral observer. Despite Fred Bergsten’s and my inclination toward barbed comment, I will not condone or condemn any conduct nor endorse any remedial proposals.  My neutrality does not extend, however, to the relevance of the WTO’s rules to improving trade and trading relations.  If rulemaking can be part of a solution to trade hostilities, clearly that would be a good outcome.

Two of the three cornerstones of the WTO are adhering to contractually bound tariff levels and granting unconditional most-favored-nation treatment, the latter meaning not discriminating among imports based on the country from which they originate – absent some specified exception that allows a departure from these basic rules.  To my knowledge neither the U.S. nor China has articulated a legal defense for the legitimacy of the over $300 billion of mutual trade that have been subjected to additional tariffs.

My assumption has been and remains that part of the answer to the two finding a new equilibrium in their economic relationship should lie in changes in the WTO’s rules so that more if not all of the conduct of each side would be within the WTO’s rules.  Rules-based trade provides greater certainty as to what trade measures are permissible.  I borrowed a metaphor that a Chinese and a European negotiator had used in a different setting at the time of China’s entry into the WTO 23 years ago, that it was of great importance that WTO members not drive on both sides of the road.  Collisions are likely by trading partners if the road is not widened.

The trilateral effort, of Japan, the EU and the U.S., begun at Buenos Aires a year ago was aimed at expanding the coverage of the rules.  It could widen the highway and reduce collisions.  Clearly, China would have to see any changes in the rules to be in its interest if this is to become part of the path to at least a truce.

The last great contest in the trading system involving a rising economic power and the then dominant incumbent was that of Japan and the United States.  What came to mind because of his recent passing were two brief exchanges that I had with President George Bush (“41”), one direct and one indirect.  The first case was a brief conversation I had with the President on a trade issue of that period.  President Bush’s instinctive response to me was that Japan would never deliver on trade.  That did not prove to be correct.  In the second instance, I asked the Chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, Senator Lloyd Bentsen, to ask the President to raise a trade issue with the then Japanese Prime Minister during the President’s upcoming visit to Tokyo.  Despite his skepticism, President Bush never gave up trying. That attitude of never giving up the attempt to resolve differences should still have relevance in today’s circumstances.

• The Death of the Appellate Body.

In America, we do not expect elected officials to stay beyond their term of office.  Cabinet Secretaries routinely clear out their desks before the inauguration of a new President though their former positions might not be filled by the incoming Administration for months.

At the WTO, Appellate Body members continue to render decisions after their terms expire.  This was once done, I understand, with approval of WTO Members and then was adopted as a rule by the Appellate Body itself, in the interests, one would suppose, of good order, and this did not cause anguish or even concern on the part of most WTO Members.   It is one of multiple counts in the U.S. indictment of what it sees as overreach by the Appellate Body.⁽⁶⁾   Most of the U.S. complaints are longstanding, dating back over several prior U.S. administrations.  The list is not short, and it has been detailed at length by the U.S. in meetings at the WTO.

A former Appellate Body member accused the United States of asphyxiating the WTO’s Appellate Body through refusing to allow its vacancies to be filled.  The U.S. view might be that its actions are more of the nature of assisting a suicide.  Either way the loss of an effective dispute settlement system should be avoided.  No later than a year from now, absent resolution of outstanding issues, the Appellate Body will cease to exist.  I strongly support any solution that restores legitimacy to WTO dispute settlement that would be accepted by all 164 WTO members.

Some of the U.S. complaints go to procedures, some run far deeper.  Although statistically the U.S. wins most of the cases that it brings, it is also statistically accurate that it loses most of the cases brought against it when the subject is the use of trade remedies.  Most of the other WTO Members who follow this issue welcome the rulings of the Appellate Body that have an effect of narrowing the scope for use of trade remedies.

It is not my intent to speak on behalf of either school of thought, nor to question the legal correctness of any particular dispute settlement decision, but to address what is in essence a political problem.  Unless there is to be a rule solely by judges, a kritarchy, a system of governance for balance requires a means for policy input from the governed.  In the structure of WTO, this presumably was to come from the legislative functions of the WTO membership, amending agreements or crafting new ones, from guidance from the Dispute Settlement Body, a committee of the whole of the WTO membership, to which Appellate Body decisions are referred for approval, or the General Council, again a meeting of the whole membership.  As it turned out, both the rule-making functions of the WTO and meaningful input from the Dispute Settlement Body or General Council never became effective.

In setting up WTO dispute settlement, there was a degree of ingenuity mixed with pragmatism.  I believe that a solution can be found to the current impasse.   There is now a consensus within the WTO membership to engage in a serious, in-depth discussion to resolve the current impasse.  There is as of last Wednesday the beginning of engagement.  Although positions are separated by a conservable distance, that is progress.  The motto of the City of Geneva is Post Tenebras Lux, after darkness, light⁽⁷⁾ .  No one can predict with any certainty the outcome.  We shall see.

I do not think that it would be possible to reach agreement to a return of the pre-existing GATT system, where the adoption of panel reports could be blocked by the losing party.⁽⁸⁾    That result would likely be unacceptable to most WTO members.  Moreover, I do not think that what some might think were the halcyon days of the GATT era can be recaptured.

There are at least three tests of the future halcynicity of a restoration to the GATT dispute settlement system.  First, what if the losing party thought that the rule itself had no logical basis.  If the DISC or FISC cases were relitigated today, with the U.S. view that there was no justification for a rule differentiating between the rebate of direct taxes (e.g. taxes on corporations) which is prohibited and the rebate of indirect taxes (e.g. the VAT) which is permitted, the result would be the same – a condemnation of the former.  Is it likely that the decision would be accepted by the losing party in the current environment and the provision repealed?  Were there a case brought by the U.S. against a grant from what dispute settlement said was not a “public body”, would the U.S. abide by the decision or just go ahead and retaliate? Lastly, if a Major Member’s claim of national security were not accepted by WTO dispute settlement, is there a high degree of likelihood today of compliance with that finding?

The GATT system depended entirely on voluntary compliance with panel decisions, and the compliance rate was high.  That world may not be a virtue that can be easily recaptured.

What does the U.S. want in order to settle the Appellate Body impasse?  It has not said. The most authoritative statement is the one from a year ago – that it should not be possible to gain through litigation what could not be obtained through negotiation⁽⁹⁾ — a view that the U.S. still maintains.  Pragmatism and ingenuity will be needed to find a solution.  I believe that an appellate function is highly useful to correct egregious errors and to assure consistency in interpretation of the WTO rules. Members may not agree.  It is worth the effort to find an agreed solution, and the beginnings of thoughtful reflection on the subject are in evidence in Geneva at present.

Part III. The Reformation

The WTO Ministerial Meeting in Buenos Aires one year ago, in December 2017, all contemporaneous reports to the contrary notwithstanding, may in the future be considered a turning point for the multilateral trading system.

• The U.S. was present, which was not a foregone conclusion, and spoke in favor of the system and sounded a call for three specific systemic reforms.
• Four major joint initiatives were established, open discussions on how to create a positive environment for electronic commerce, how to be more inclusive of small enterprises and to increase the participation of women in the benefits of trade, as well as improve the global environment for investment and to deal with domestic regulation of services.
• Japan, the European Union, and the United States announced that they were beginning work on specific areas of potential rule changes.  (The first of the trilateral initiatives in which some others have joined has been tabled for consideration in the WTO General Council.  It is an enhanced enforcement mechanism to help assure that notification obligations are honored.)⁽¹⁰⁾
• In May, French President Macron called for WTO reform, and since then Canada called a meeting of trade ministers in Ottawa on reform accompanied by a thoughtful paper, and the EU, Canada, Honduras and China tabled proposals for consideration in Geneva.  The European Union, representing countries accounting for one-third of world trade, has forcefully engaged with extensive proposals for reform (which largely did not garner agreement in substance by the United States but begin a process of engagement on issues raised). However, a joint proposal, originated by the U.S. that notifications should be made as obligated, thus providing greatly improved transparency, has been tabled.  And of course, now Buenos Aires has come through yet again with the recent G20 call for WTO reform.

The above listed areas for reform are heavily aimed at resolving crises.  But there is also some attempt by members on how to make the conduct of work of the WTO more effective. It is timely for Member and academic work, including at the Peterson Institute to review how well the WTO functions.

Governance of any societal structure is composed of three functional elements –   administrative, rule-making and dispute settlement.

Executive functions

Within national governments and sometimes within international organizations, the executive proposes initiatives, monitors compliance, prosecutes noncompliance, and in general administers the agreed rules.  In the WTO the executive function is not explicitly provided for.  Temporary committee chairs are chosen from the ambassadorial corps.⁽¹¹⁾   Initiatives are expected to come from Members not from the chair. The secretariat supports chairs and Members, as called upon to do so.  Monitoring of compliance is confined to Member counternotifications and Member-initiated dispute settlement.

The legislative function.

I am told that the WTO was intended the be a forum for continuing negotiation.  Some of this does occur in the often ignored progress made in the regular committees of the WTO,  largely recorded in informal conclusions. ⁽¹²⁾   The formal rule-making or legislative function has been limited to a few not unimportant items since the WTO was created – e.g., a ban on agricultural export subsidies, adoption of the Trade Facilitation Agreement, and the expansion of the coverage of the Information Technology Agreement. The need to form a consensus of the whole, the 164 members of the WTO has stymied progress.  One important alumna of the WTO officialdom has said that consensus does not mean unanimity.  In other words, not all may agree that a proposition should be adopted, but neither will they impede the process.  Reasons for blocking a decision range from opposition on substance to holding an item hostage as leverage to gain something else.  Hostage-taking is not unknown in any political body, but when abused it leads to malfunction, to a deadlock of the system.   Stasis is the result of Members pursuing a tactic of “me before you”.   No one gets anything, unless they bypass the obstacles to progress.  That is itself a major treat to the multilateral trading system.

The world has changed dramatically since the period of negotiation of the Uruguay Round (1985-94) when the WTO rules were negotiated, and even more distant was the founding of the GATT in 1947.  Consensus based on common purpose probably always shifts over an extended period and may even fail.  Any institution after a span of time would need some review in terms of the relevance of substantive rules as well as finding more effective ways to facilitate rulemaking.   A path that a substantial number of members, representing three quarters of global GDP, have chosen is to work in a plurilateral format but one that is open to all.  Participation has extended far beyond the original signatories.  Questions not yet resolved are how new rights and obligations will apply to non-members, and how the results will be accommodated within the existing WTO structure.

Dispute settlement

(Dealt with in the context of the Appellate Body impasse).

Leadership

To achieve reform among 164 Members, or even a subset of them, what is required is leadership.  The U.S. Ambassador to the WTO correctly points out that the United States is highly active in all the WTO committees and in many of the joint initiatives, as well as being the originator of the transparency through notifications proposal that is the first concrete reform proposal tabled in the WTO.  However, the U.S. would not claim that it does not differ from prior U.S. administrations in the trade policies it pursues and perhaps its role in the WTO.  Near as I can tell, at least at this point, the United States does not see itself as being guarantor, the prime mover, of the multilateral trading system.

More is required of other Members, and it has begun to be forthcoming.  As noted, papers on reform have been introduced last week for consideration by the Membership, by the European Union, by Canada based on the initial discussions held in Ottawa in October among 13 WTO members, by Honduras and by China. There will be ongoing discussions on the margins of the World Economic Forum in Davos on reform and a series of meetings leading up to the next G20 meeting in Japan at the end of June 2019.  There is ferment, which means that attention is being paid to improving the WTO. It is early days yet, but it is possible that some form of collective consensus can help move the WTO move forward.

What is needed from all Members who would lead or would share in collective leadership (and in principle, this should include all) is making a net positive contribution to the multilateral trading system. Except when it comes to dealing with the problems of the least developed, and some others who are closer to that end of the development spectrum, the philanthropic instincts of trade negotiators and the ministries which craft their instruction, are generally underdeveloped.  What has to be understood is that the multilateral trading system is a benefit that requires maintenance.  This goes beyond swapping market access concession on a reciprocal basis.  An investment is needed in the system itself for the common good.  The return on investment is having the trading system.

Part IV. Policy space.

When I travel on behalf of the WTO to visit with government ministries, I make it a point to speak to students at universities.  Upon my concluding a talk on the multilateral trading system, a student at a university in Eurasia, put the first question.  She asked, “what was the WTO going to do about thedeath penalty?”   I answered that the WTO does not regulate domestic conduct unless it impedes or otherwise distorts trade.  It leaves enormous policy space for its members.

A common misperception is that somehow the WTO rules impede, for example, the adoption of environmental regulations.  The relationship of trade to the environment was the subject of a high-level panel at the WTO Public Forum in early October of this year.  Environmental regulations are never prevented, they are only limited by the WTO’s rules if they discriminate against imports, in other words are used as a disguised protectionist measure.  And that is rare.

A major current issue in the WTO is the excessive use of domestic subsidies in both industry and agriculture.  Domestic subsidies are about creating an increase in employment at home and increasingly about gaining a larger share of future industries.  A consequence can be where employment in other countries will decline and what those countries see as impairment of the future development of their economies.

There is a consensus that there is too much policy space for domestic subsidies (although no current agreement on which and whose subsidies need to be subject to international disciplines).  Any country that can afford domestic subsidies, and perhaps some who cannot, uses them.  They are almost completely unregulated by the WTO rules.  Notionally subsidies are of concern when they shift the burden of adjustment from the country employing them to others, the effects transmitted through distortions of trade or investment.  In the 1930s, measures that offloaded adjustment costs on others were called “beggar-thy-neighbor” policies, a colorful and accurate phrase that has fallen into disuse.

The one area that all WTO members have pledged themselves to resolve by the next Ministerial Meeting to be held in Astana in June 2020, is to create disciplines on fisheries subsidies.  There is a desperate need for a breakthrough in this area, and a major attempt is being led by Mexican Ambassador Roberto Zapata, a veteran of the TPP negotiations to deliver positive results.  This, as opposed to some other negotiating challenges, is South-South issue.   I will give you one illustration.  Two weeks ago, looking out at the sea from my hotel room window in Djibouti, there was within view an assortment of large tankers and freighters.  Djibouti is a major port for the Horn of Africa.  Also present was always a warship.  I do not know its nationality. Djibouti is host to a major military presence of Germany, Spain, France, Italy, Japan, China and the United States.  One of the serious problems in that part of the world is piracy.  The presence of heavily subsidized huge foreign fishing vessels is said to have wiped out the livelihood of Somali fishermen, resulting in the need to pursue alternative employment, in many cases, piracy.  The subsidies create nothing short of exporting adjustment costs, increasing employment at home at the expense of employment abroad.

This is a prime example of domestic policies that require international disciplines.  Most domestic policies do not.   There will always be major areas of domestic policy that will remain unregulated by the rules of the world trading system.  As to the benefit of that freedom, much depends on how the absence of international rules is used.  Policy space alone does not boost domestic economic progress.  The countries of the USSR had 80 years of policy space, unencumbered by international rules.  These economies lagged to so great a degree that the former USSR collapsed, and market-oriented reforms are now taking place.  And this is not the only example.

A question for possible academic inquiry is the extent to which freedom from international obligations, to allow for protection of domestic industries, can be effective in a digitalized world.  Not all countries can, or perhaps even should, develop their own platforms for e-commerce, maintain their own cloud services, their own server farms, and the like, while refraining from using foreign services and foreign origin applications in the hope that domestic applications will be created and would suffice if they were.  A major topic of current international interest is the digitalization of agriculture.  This was the subject of conference I attended in Beijing earlier this year and is the subject of a major conference of Agriculture Ministers in which I will participate in February in Berlin.  The digital world has become part of the environment in which trade now takes place, as well as nearly as omnipresent as the air we breathe.  Digital protectionism would have profound negative consequences for the economies of nations that practice it.

PART V. MIND THE GAP – what remains to be done

I find disquieting, from the viewpoint of what it says about the multilateral trading system, the UK Treasury memorandum on the costs to Britain of Brexit.  It states that the loss of GDP for the UK by the year 2035 would be 2% if Brexit resulted in the UK getting a Norway-style deal (accepting most of the rules of the EU for much of its trade), a 5% hit if it got a CETA, an EU Canada type FTA, and a 8% loss of GDP if the UK-EU trade relationship is subject solely to WTO rules.  Applied globally, that is a loss of nearly $90 trillion by 2035.  To put that in perspective, the entire GDP of the African continent is currently $3.3 trillion.

While a global single market is no country’s goal, of necessity there are major areas for improvement in terms of both market-opening and new international rules.  The Peterson Institute has hosted presentations on the gains from liberalization of business services alone.  The gains would be very large.  Here is another area for PIIE inquiry.  Many years ago, there was the Williams Commission that focused on the economic gains from attacking nontariff barriers.  That work laid the foundation for international negotiations.  A start could be made by the Peterson Institute, and perhaps it has already, on the gains to be made by filling parts of the shortfall from the absence of movement toward a global single market. 

Part VI. Hope and Peace

There are many areas of the WTO where progress is hard to come by. I have mentioned the long effort to rein in fisheries subsidies.  Agricultural issues are also always difficult.  Industrial liberalization, such as an agreement to have no tariffs for environmental goods, has not even been mentioned as far as I know by anyone in the 15 months I have been at the WTO.

But there are areas of great value that do not receive much public notice where excellent cooperation within the WTO is always present.  With the luck of the draw, there are two areas in which I am particularly fortunate to be involved and are extraordinarily satisfying.

I chair the Director General’s Consultative Forum on Cotton Development Assistance.  The moving force behind this initiative are four of the poorest WTO Members, four West African countries – Benin, Chad, Mali and Burkina Faso.  Our meetings are characterized by goodwill and good deeds in the form of concerted efforts of all cotton producing and consuming countries, as well as international institutions, to assist development in countries whose growth in future income is heavily dependent on cotton.

A second area in which I am privileged to participate is the accession to the WTO of new members.  Many are fragile and are now or have been conflict-affected.  These include Somalia, Sudan, South Sudan, Syria, Ethiopia, and East Timor.  What these countries seek is integration into the world economy, in order to raise the standard of living of their peoples, and thus have a better chance at stability and peace.

The last two countries to be admitted into the WTO, in 2015, were Liberia, recovering from civil war and Ebola, and Afghanistan.  Their ambassadors are leading advocates and give the most convincing and eloquent testimonials to the value of the WTO.      At our conference on WTO accessions held in the Horn of Africa, the representative of Sudan concluded his presentation with the words: “If there is trade there will be peace.”

The multilateral trading system was created as part of the institutional framework for reconstruction and development, and to help assure peace after World War Two.  One cannot travel far in Europe without coming across a memorial or museum to the catastrophes of the last century – at the museums dedicated to the Great Patriotic War in Moscow and Minsk, to the memorial to the gulag 30 kilometers south of Astana, the capital of Kazakhstan, to the museum of the resistance and deportations in Nantua, France, within an hour’s drive from Geneva, and to the plaques almost everywhere.  The physical scars are still present.

The multilateral trading system embodied in the rules and processes of the WTO is part of the firewall against a return to appallingly bad times, an assurance that those experiences are not to be repeated.  It is a place where the liberal world trading order can be nurtured and improved.  It holds great promise.  It is a garden to be tended.

17 December 2018

Select Inventory of WTO Activities In Administering the Multilateral Trading System

Introduction: What is not covered much in the press, as the current crises overshadow the WTO’s daily work, is that the WTO is fully functioning and in myriad ways supports international trade and development.  The following, with some additional background are some examples, provided by senior WTO secretariat members, of what the WTO provides:

Overview

The eighth round of multilateral trade negotiations, the Uruguay Round, which concluded with the Marrakesh Agreement establishing the WTO along with a significant range of other agreements, stands out for particular mention since the rules negotiated in this Round are those on which the overwhelming proportion of global trade still currently trade under.  It made multilateral a number of earlier GATT Plurilateral Codes as well as concluding new Agreements on trade in goods, services and the Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property.

Market access for agricultural products was for the first time brought comprehensively within the GATT framework of rules through a new Agreement on Agriculture.  All quantitative restrictions had to be converted into tariffs through a tariffication process and agricultural tariffs required to be subject to legal commitments or bindings.

In relation to Non-Agricultural Goods, which in practice account for 95% of world goods trade, the Uruguay Round considerably increased the number of bound tariffs and reduced tariffs by 40% for developed countries on nearly 800 billion dollars’ worth of trade in industrial goods.

The Agreements reached on Technical Barriers to Trade and on Sanitary and Phytosanitary measures further complemented the market access openings through new disciplines applicable to non-tariff regulatory barriers in place for both agricultural and non-agricultural goods.

The Uruguay Round also saw the revision of the procedures and rules concerning antidumping measures as well as safeguards, which along with subsidies, were the subject of separate new detailed agreements. Other goods related agreements expanded or tightened existing rules dealing with import licensing procedures, customs valuation, pre-shipment inspection, trade-related investment measures and rules of origin.

Services represent the fastest growing sector of the global economy, accounting for two thirds of global output, and are estimated to account for over 40% of global trade.  The General Agreement on Trade and Services (GATS) which contains three key elements: the main text containing general obligations and disciplines; annexes dealing with rules for specific sectors; as well as individual countries’ specific commitments set out in Schedules which provide for access to their markets. The Services telecommunications reference paper shaped the regulations and liberalization of the telecoms sector which is reflected in a range of Member scheduled commitments is a notable achievement.

The Trade Related Intellectual Property Rights Agreement (TRIPS) was created to reduce the amount of conflict over the protection of IP by member states due to different standards. The agreement also defines what types of materials members must protect and creates “obligations for members to provide procedures and remedies under their domestic laws to ensure that intellectual property can be effectively enforced by foreign right holders as well as their own nationals.”

The commitments between WTO Members concern 98% of all trade.  And in spite of the tremendous growth of regional initiatives over recent years, the overwhelming bulk of world goods trade – some 80% – remains non-preferential MFN trade which is regulated by WTO market access commitments.

The array of standing Committees and Councils established under the various WTO Agreements which provide a forum for Members to discuss concerns about trade regulations of other Members and to find solutions.  The objective is to try to resolve concerns through informal processes before they escalate further to formal disputes and Members have been successful at doing this in a number of cases.  Similar work is done by practically all Committees of the WTO.

But if they do so escalate, the WTO provides a comprehensive framework for dispute settlement in relation to any of the so-called “covered” agreements.

The decision taken to the Uruguay Round to move to a much more automatic or compulsory dispute settlement than that which had hitherto applied under the GATT was a very conscious one. It was all about ensuring that there was a way to hold trade partners to account through an effective system, in the full knowledge that the price for this was that you yourself would be similarly exposed to challenges relating to non-compliance.

The original system of dispute settlement under the GATT had been an extremely informal one during its first years, even if it became more formalized through a panel process in later years. However, a defendant could block a complainant’s GATT panel request or adoption of final reports of the 136 dispute reports during the GATT, only 95 were adopted, while the remaining 41 (30%) were left unadopted for various reasons.

The WTO Dispute Settlement System ushered in by the Uruguay Round was very much a reaction to this “blocking” experience from the GATT.  In particular, the WTO Dispute Settlement Body, which oversees the implementation of the “Dispute Settlement Understanding”, not only automatically establishes panels to examine complaints but also automatically adopt the findings of panels and the Appellate Body—unless WTO Members agree unanimously not to do so, through “reverse consensus.”

In addition, Members could, under the new system, appeal rulings to a new institution, the WTO Appellate Body.  The rationale behind this right of appeal was that it would act as an additional safeguard against panel reports that were legally defective in some way. This consideration was seen as particularly important given that under the new rules panels would be automatically established, and their reports adopted, unless Members by consensus determined otherwise.  The new system also provided a way to seek redress in the event of non-compliance by providing for the Dispute Settlement Body to authorize suspension of concessions (retaliation).

As of today, around 600 disputes have been brought for member to-member resolution at the WTO. Around 110 Members of the 164 Members, developed and developing countries, have been involved in WTO disputes, as complainants, respondents, or third parties. The United States has been the most active, initiating over 125 disputes and serving as respondent in over 150 cases, with the European Union a close second.

The WTO is a forum for ongoing trade negotiations. Many of the Uruguay Round agreements when they entered into force in 1995 set timetables for future work, including in the key areas of agriculture and services. This “built-in agenda”, which included over 30 items of work, started almost immediately in the aftermath of the Uruguay Round. In some areas, it included new or further negotiations.

The basic formula that has guided the organization is agreement through a consensus among all Members to adopt new rules.  All WTO Members technically have a veto as consensus is required for outcomes.

In 2013 there was the adoption for the first time since the Uruguay Round of an entirely new WTO Agreement, the Trade Facilitation Agreement. This Agreement, which entered into force last year contains provisions for expediting the movement, release and clearance of goods, including goods in transit. It also sets out measures for effective cooperation between customs and other appropriate authorities on trade facilitation and customs compliance issues and contains provisions for technical assistance and capacity building in this area.

The WTO’s Tenth Ministerial Conference was held in Nairobi, Kenya, from 15 to 19 December 2015. The Package of outcomes adopted at that meeting contained a series of six Ministerial Decisions on agriculture, cotton and issues related to least-developed countries (LDCs) as well as a further agreement to reduce IT tariffs valued at 1.3 trillion dollars a year. Importantly, among these decisions was a very historic one in which Ministers agreed to fully eliminate agricultural export subsidies.  This has widely been seen as the most significant step in the reform of agricultural trade since the conclusion of the Uruguay Round.

The WTO Director General, Roberto Azevêdo, in his closing statements at MC11 in December 2017 meeting, after acknowledging the fact that consensus had proved impossible in most areas summed up how he saw things going forward from Buenos Aires.  He said:

“If we really all support the WTO, if we really do, we have to bear in mind that multilateralism doesn’t mean that we get what we want. It means we get what is possible.

It’s not compatible to expect multilateralism to work and at the same time to expect to walk out with everything you wanted. This is a recipe for failure.

If we prize the system, we have to come knowing that we’ll need to make compromises. Sometimes painful compromises.”

It’s important to realize, however, that the fact that significant multilateral deals have continued to be elusive, does not mean that Members of the organization have stopped working for further trade reform.  Within the WTO active negotiations continue in the area of Fisheries Subsidies along with discussions on a range of other issues.  Notably, in Buenos Aires sub-groups of members also came forward to endorse a number of plurilateral initiatives, in areas such as e-commerce and investment facilitation.      

In the area of implementation of existing commitments, one key area of focus of a number of Members is around the need to improve transparency through more timely and higher quality information about trade policies that Members are required to submit by way of formal notifications.  Compliance with notification obligations has not been even, it is low in many cases, with the exception of SPS and TBT measures.

A second area of recent attention has been calls from some WTO Members, and particularly the United States, EU and Japan but also other Members, for improving the existing WTO rules in areas like subsidies and TRIPs, where, some Members consider the current rules unbalanced for not dealing effectively with what they perceive to be unfair trade practices of certain Members.

The question of developing country status and who this should apply to in the WTO of today has also emerged as a key focus of attention.  This was not really an issue if you read the Punta del Este Declaration that simply assumed a separation of the membership between developed and developing countries, a separation that is today in many cases highly contested.   None of these issues are likely to be easily or quickly addressed through consensus agreements but it is clear they will continue to be a focus of ongoing debate and discussion in the period ahead.

A number of core challenges have emerged over the 23 or so years that the dispute settlement system has been in place.

First, a number of disputes in recent years have been rather more complex and complicated in terms of the measures involved and legal arguments, than was the case when the system started over 20 years ago. Submissions and exhibits can be voluminous, and this has as significant impact on the size of panel reports and timeframes.  Second, more panel reports are being appealed, reaching a peak rate of 90% in 2016, and more claims of non-compliance have been filed, requiring panels to examine whether Members have implemented the recommendations and rulings of panels and the Appellate Body. These compliance panel determinations can, too, be appealed, which prolongs the time-frame to bring a dispute to a close. Third, in various areas the DSU procedural rules are not crystal clear in the view of WTO Members. The most obvious example of this is the debate between Members on the so-called “sequencing issue”.

More generally, throughout its history the results generated by dispute settlement panels and the Appellate Body have in some cases attracted criticism from Members. This is not surprising.

The WTO Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU) incorporates a specific warning against over-reach by adjudicating bodies.  In Article 3.2 it states:

“2​…The Members recognize that [the dispute settlement system] serves to preserve the rights and obligations of Members under the covered agreements, and to clarify the existing provisions of those agreements in accordance with customary rules of interpretation of public international law.  Recommendations and Rulings of the DSB cannot add to or diminish the rights and obligations provided in the covered agreements.”

So that’s very clear guidance to both panels and the Appellate Body about what they should and shouldn’t do.  They should not fill gaps but there is a lively debate about whether they do.

The consequences of no resolution to this issue become more serious for the functioning of the WTO DS system as time passes. In particular, if the AB is reduced to the point where it can no longer compose divisions of 3 members to hear appeals, the consequences would be significant.  This is because any party to a dispute may appeal panel findings.  If a panel ruling is appealed, the panel report cannot be submitted for adoption, until the outcome of the appeal has been finalized, at which time the panel report, as amended by the appeal rulings, will be submitted for adoption to the DSB. If the AB was reduced further to the point where it could not convene a Division for an appeal, unless disputing parties agree that a panel report will not be appealed and can be put forward for automatic adoption by the DSB, it would not be possible to adopt the report.  This would mean that the implementation of the ruling and further steps in support of compliance could thereby be avoided, simply by lodging an appeal.

The ability of WTO members to hold each other to account for perceived legal wrongs through a process that always end, in the final event, with automatic adoption of rulings (unless there is a consensus not to adopt them), would be lost. It remains to be seen how WTO Members will manage dispute settlement in the event the system faltered in this way.  For example, some have suggested disputing Members could agree not to appeal panel outcomes or might agree to alternative dispute settlement arbitration procedures under Article 25 of the DSU.  Others have pointed out that this would see a return to the consensual dispute settlement of the GATT days, whereby any losing party could in effect block the adoption of a report.  While this allusion to the GATT may be partially correct, it still fails to recognize that under the GATT consensus was required to even establish panels.  However, within the WTO the situation remains that panel establishment is automatic and that will not change unless the current DSU rules are amended, which would require consensus.  In short, in relation to the dispute settlement system, absent an agreement that resolves the current impasse, we will be heading into unchartered territory.⁽¹³⁾

Economic impact of the WTO

• Several studies show that the predictability of trading conditions that WTO has ensured since 1995 has a large economic value. Here are some data.
• An important component of trade costs that is often neglected is trade policy uncertainty. Exporters evaluate the risk associated with the possible increase in barriers to trade in the destination market when deciding whether to export, and delay exports to risky destinations. The mere reduction of policy uncertainty and not tariff changes explains 22% of Chinese export growth to the U.S. following China’s entry in the WTO.
• Empirical evidence clearly suggests that the WTO acted as a restraint to the use of trade-restrictive actions during the crisis.  Research by the WTO shows that the world would have experienced tariff increases on 9.5 per cent of tariff lines more than actually took place.  (Groppo and Piermartini, 2014).
• World Bank-WTO research shows that the predictability of trading conditions that WTO commitments ensure boosts trade by approximately between 10 to 30% compared to a world where at any moment tariffs could be raised to an arbitrarily high level. (Osnago, Piermartini, Rocha, 2018).
• Absent the WTO, prices would be higher. Economists have estimated that reduced policy uncertainty due to WTO binding commitments lowers prices. For the US, research has estimated that reduced prices following China’s accession to WTO increased consumers’ income by at least 0.8 percent, the welfare equivalent of an 8-percentage point tariff decrease (Handley and Limão, 2013)
• Economists estimate that the success of the WTO at preventing trade wars (where countries freely fix tariffs unilaterally to their national optimum) is worth up to $340 billion per year. (Ossa, 2014)
• Only a multilateral system based on WTO principles can provide solutions for trade policy externalities that would otherwise drive large countries into inefficiently protectionist trade policy (trade war). In other words, multilateral trade cooperation is essential for countries to satisfy domestic interests while not hurting foreign interests.
• The WTO is criticized for failing to agree on new trade deals but when there is no trade war, that is already a testimony to WTO’s success. The multilateral trading system has weathered many shocks, not the least the financial crisis of 2008.
• Predictable trade environment is essential for firms to engage in international trade and make investments. Commitments made at the WTO and their enforceability substantially reduce policy uncertainty.
• The worst-case scenario of a trade war would cost about 17% of global GDP. (Ralph Ossa, University of Zurich).
• The WTO is well-suited for negotiation about long-standing and new issues as it has the structures to support such arrangements.  (Bernard Hoekman, European University Institute).
• Preferential trade agreements (PTAs) are not a solution. First, new issues became difficult to resolve even in more limited settings. Second, PTAs are often restricted to a fixed club of members and hence have a limited impact on reducing costs of regulatory barriers.

Rules

The area of “Rules” has been a key aspect of the multilateral trading system since its inception in 1947. It aims at guaranteeing that trade liberalization does not go hand in hand with the development of unregulated or unfair trade practices. “Rules” encompass disciplines on subsidies, state trading enterprises, investment, and the important topic of trade remedies. WTO disciplines in this area have been substantially developed and modernized over time. They are as close as it gets to a unique set of competition rules at the international level.

They have two main functions: – Discouraging public policies having an adverse impact on trade competition; – and, at the same time, offering a temporary safety valve to Members whose domestic industry is affected by imports.

• The first function is achieved by setting rules on such important topics as subsidies granted by Members; the non-discriminatory administration of State monopolies and other State trading enterprises; and the limitation of trade-restrictive and trade distorting investment measures. None of these practices are prohibited per se, but WTO rules guarantee that the most trade-distorting measures are sanctioned: this is the case, for example, for export subsidies and subsidies contingent upon the use of domestic goods over imported goods. In addition to setting substantial rules on these issues, WTO rules provide for transparency : Members notify and submit their measures to peer-review by other WTO Members.
• At the same time – and this is the second important function of the rules-based trading system - WTO rules allow Members to respond to unfair trade practices by the imposition of remedial border measures. Anti-dumping duties aim at preventing the injurious effects of dumped imports; countervailing measures aim at preventing the injurious effects of subsidized imports. Safeguard measures allow for temporary restrictions or increased tariffs on imports in the event of an unforeseen increase in imports. These instruments play the role of a safety valve, without which Members would be deterred from entering into additional tariff concessions and from engaging in further trade liberalization.

The rules area has attracted tremendous attention over the last few years. Interestingly enough however, Members do not call for less disciplines in this area, but for a more precise and more predictable set of rules. The modernization of existing rules is seen as one of the key aspects of the so-called “WTO reform”.

Assisting Development through Technical Assistance

In order to ensure that Developing, Least-developed Members and developing country observers benefit fully from their participation in the WTO, the WTO provides trade-related technical assistance, whose main purpose is to enhance the human and institutional capacities to take full advantage of the rules-based Multilateral Trading System (MTS), meet their obligations and enforce their rights as Members, and deal with emerging trade-related challenges.

The WTO’s technical assistance and capacity building, focuses on the needs and priorities of beneficiary Members and Observers. Members allocate 20% of the Organization’s resources to support this area of WTO work in addition to voluntary contributions illustrating Members’ commitment to this work of the WTO with a view to ensure that all members enjoy the privileges provided by belonging to the WTO and the security that the trading rules provide.

Apart from targeting government officials as beneficiaries of training, specific programmes are provided to non-Government officials and entities to ensure their effective participation in negotiations and other areas of WTO work.  Between 2013 and 2017, the WTO trained a total of more than 79,000 participants. The support provided by the WTO focuses on achieving the following:

• Government officials are implementing WTO Agreements and fully realising Members’ rights and obligations;
• Acceding governments are participating in accession negotiations;
• Academic institutions and other stakeholders are analyzing WTO issues and reaching out to policy makers; and
• Non-governmental stakeholders are aware of and knowledgeable about WTO work and issues.

The WTO  also has a role and responsibility to ensure that all its Members can effectively participate in – and benefit from – smooth, predictable and fair trade. The WTO’s Aid for Trade initiative helps developing countries to build the trade capacity and infrastructure they need to benefit from trade openings. To give one concrete and practical example: there is  the work of Standards and Trade Development Facility (STDF), a global partnership housed and managed by the WTO. The STDF supports developing countries to meet sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) standards and gain and maintain market access.  It provides a global forum for effective coordination among leading agriculture, health and trade experts from relevant organizations, such as the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations, the World Bank Group, the World Health Organization (WHO) and the World Organization for Animal Health (OIE). To date, the STDF has developed and funded over 180 collaborative and innovative projects across the world, supporting farmers in Uganda, processors in Sri Lanka, and traders in Guatemala. WTO Members appreciate STDF’s role in facilitating safe and inclusive trade from developing countries”

Trade and the environment

Trade policy does not and cannot exist in isolation from other public policy objectives.  Trade is a means to an end and not an end in itself.  It is for this reason that Parties to the founding agreement recognize clearly on page one, paragraph one, that their relations in trade should be conducted with a view to:

“….expanding the production of and trade in goods and services, while allowing for the optimal use of the world’s resources in accordance with the objective of sustainable development, seeking to both protect and preserve the environment…”

This principle has been very powerful and effective and we have seen it put into practice in more than 20 years of jurisprudence in the WTO. In the few cases in which environmental measures were considered in contravention of WTO rules, the environmental objective was never put in question. In all the cases on the fishing of shrimp or tuna, one or more elements of the measure were arbitrary or unjustifiable discriminations that worked against the environmental objective, not in its favour. The WTO has led the way in ensuring that trade does not trump environmental goals, while targeting the protectionist element of the measure.  The WTO jurisprudence has settled many concerns and reduced tensions on the impact of trade rules on environmental measures, as well as the impact of environmental measures on trade.

We should also not forget that trade, under the WTO, has lifted millions out of poverty and made possible resource efficiency gains, all of which has benefitted the environment.  The better we use our resources, the more people we lift out of poverty, the better it is for the environment.  These are not my words but those of a former Executive Director of UN Environment.  There is no doubt we need more dialogue and understanding on how trade contributes to society. This is why we have the WTO Committee on Trade and Environment, where members can debate, exchange experiences, learn from each other and discuss how to better achieve “win-win-win” policies in a systematic way. Its creation was a very significant step in the WTO system.  Without such a multilateral forum to debate, channel concerns and launch ideas, we would have much more frustration from civil society that governments are not listening to their wishes at the international level and potentially many more protests in the streets! This would fuel protectionist tendencies and foster more misunderstanding on the role of trade.

Technical barrier to trade (TBT)  

Most goods traded today that cross borders are affected in one way or another by standards and regulations. Indeed, it is often when standards fail that we notice them: electrical plugs that don’t fit foreign sockets, or complicated and parallel safety requirements in different countries that render uneconomic registration of vehicles while supposedly aimed at the same thing: safe cars. High costs from standards which are unnecessary or unjustified are particularly inefficient. To gain access, foreign manufacturers may need to redesign products specifically for that one market when the required level of health or safety protection is already achieved by its existing products; or when products must undergo duplicative or excessively burdensome inspection, testing or certification procedures.

While a tariff might make a product more expensive, it usually does not actually prevent access to the market. In addition, a tariff is both transparent and predictable and there is not much uncertainty involved. This is not to suggest that tariffs are a welcome trade instrument, they are just preferable to those which are worse. Yet we can’t live without standards and regulations. They are necessary for compatibility and interoperability in an ever more interconnected world with value chains that are fragmented and geographically dispersed. They are critical tools for addressing shared global challenges in spheres from health to the environment. Standards help deliver needed trust and confidence throughout the supply chain. More than that, standards provide incentives to innovate and cooperate, and help disseminate innovations.

It is in balancing the right to regulate and the need to reduce the cost of that regulation on trade that the WTO Technical Barriers to Trade Agreement, and its corresponding committee, has made a very vital contribution to society. The disciplines of the agreement enhance transparency on measures that are often opaque and nebulous, it curbs discrimination and unduly burdensome regulation while safeguarding the legitimate objective of regulating for public policy objectives.  The strong encouragement on the use of international standards provides a common basis for regulation which reduces divergence, and therefore costs.  The TBT Committee has built up an impressive range of decisions and recommendations which improve transparency, establish principles for international standard setting, provide guidance on good regulatory practices and international regulatory cooperation.  These are all vital tools that we need to keep markets effective, products safe and international trade flowing. The Committee through its discussion of specific trade concerns has also headed off trade concerns before they become serious problems for dispute settlement.  Of the over 500 specific trade concerns, only a handful have ended in a dispute panel report.  The TBT Committee has done all of this because it has broad governmental and private sector support. It is one of the bright spots on the WTO system. If we did not have this multilateral agreement, we would have a far less efficient patchwork of divergent practices and many more obstacles

Agriculture

The work of the Committee on Agriculture (CoA) provides the essential foundation for work in other parts of the organization (ie. Negotiations and dispute settlement). Under the Agreement on Agriculture Members are required to submit notifications relating to their scheduled commitments. The data provided in these notifications are essential for informing discussions in the negotiations. In the CoA’s Review process WTO Members can pose questions relating to notified information, amplifying the value of the information by clarifying concepts and identifying data gaps. These types of information exchanges deepen the transparency of measures affecting agricultural trade. Members use the Committee to put collective pressure on their trading partners to provide notified information particularly in areas where public data is scarce, such as on agricultural subsidies. Over the past few years public databases have been developed that contain notified data as well as the full text of the questions and responses posed in the Committee, further enhancing the transparency of government measures that influence the agricultural trade landscape.

The CoA Review process also provides a mechanism for Members to monitor the measures taken by their trading partners that may have impacts on international agricultural markets, unrelated to notifications. This monitoring is an essential element for building and sustaining trust, as well as a way to pre-empt the need for more formal dispute resolution.  Without this monitoring the rules contained in the Agreement on Agriculture, which are intended to limit distortions in international trade, would have less traction.

The Committee’s review process works better the more Members actively participate. At the same time, smaller delegations can benefit from the additional transparency and monitoring with little cost. As noted above, the notified data and exchanges in the committee are publicly available through on-line databases. The Committee thus provides a public good for policy makers, private firms, and civil society through enhanced transparency and predictability.

Individual Member Trade Policy Reviews

• Transparency in trade and trade-policy making is of utmost importance for global trade.  It allows Governments and economic actors to make informed decisions and markets to operate more efficiently.
• Transparency is provided in the WTO through regular notifications (although it must be recognized that the record of compliance with notification obligations can be significantly improved), and the Trade Policy Review Mechanism (TPRM).
• The WTO undertakes the Trade Policy Review of all its Members.  There is no other global institution or organization doing this type of transparency exercise. There is no other place where Governments and private sector representatives can find objective, impartial and comprehensive descriptions of the whole array of trade and trade-related policies of all Members.
• The TPRM provides all government representatives with a unique opportunity to ask questions, make an assessment, and request clarifications from the reviewed Member. And this is done through a collective review exercise which is done in a non-confrontational manner.  It is also a unique opportunity for the Member under review to obtain an “audit” and assessment of its trade policies and practices.  The exercise provides a unique opportunity to exert peer pressure for trade policy reforms.  For example, where else can countries review the Trade Policies of China, or India, or the Russian Federation?
• The WTO provides a forum for all Members to assess developments in Regional Trade Agreements (RTAs).  There is no other global institution or organization that provides for a multilateral review of RTAs.  There is no other place (than at the WTO) where Members can collectively assess the contents and implications of RTAs.  For example, where else can countries assess the implication of the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU)?
• The WTO provided a sort of insurance policy against protectionist tendencies at the time of the Global Financial Crisis in 2008/2009.  Many factors helped resist temptations to erect trade barriers as a response to the crisis. One of them was the collective Trade Monitoring exercise under the WTO.  The Trade Monitoring exercise provides a unique opportunity to exert peer pressure and to have a collective discussion on the basis of an up-to-date factual reporting of all trade measures.  There is no other place where this type of information can be found.

Accessions

One of the objectives of the WTO is to ensure that all countries wishing to do so can use trade as an instrument for promoting economic growth and development. This is why WTO accessions continue to be a systemic priority. Since 1995, the Organization has dealt with 58 accessions, 36 of which have been already concluded successfully with 22 remaining on the agenda. The continued strong interest from governments wishing to join the WTO is a testament to the systemic value of the Organization.

Recent developments:

WTO Members responded positively to the request for accession by South Sudan – currently the world’s newest nation, which gained independence in 2011 – by agreeing to establish an accession Working Party.

Progress is continuing for the accession of Bosnia and Herzegovina.  The accession of Belarus is also moving forward. Belarus is the final member of the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) in the WTO accession process, following the accessions of Russian Federation (2012) and Kazakhstan (2015) and, as such, is addressing complex questions associated with the integration of a regional economic and customs union in a rules-based multilateral system. Completing this accession process is, therefore, of systemic importance for both the WTO and the EAEU.

Good progress was also registered in the accession of The Bahamas after six years of inactivity. The Working Party held its first meeting on the basis of a substantial set of technical inputs. This is the last remaining WTO accession in the Western Hemisphere.

Progress is expected with the government of Serbia, Ethiopia and Uzbekistan. The accessions of Somalia, South Sudan and Timor-Leste remain at the initial activation stages after the establishment of their respective Working Parties in the last 24 months. In addition, Equatorial Guinea, which graduated from LDC status in 2017, has recently indicated renewed interest in moving forward with its accession process.

Addressing Members’ standing request to widen the outreach and support to acceding governments, in 2018 the Secretariat offered technical assistance and capacity building activities to over 600 participants from acceding governments. In particular, the Secretariat carried out accession-specific national seminars, workshops and technical missions in the case of eight acceding governments. Furthermore, since the circulation of the last Annual Report, three accession related experience-sharing activities were carried out: the Sixth and Seventh China Round Tables on Accessions, hosted respectively by Argentina and Kazakhstan, and sponsored by China; and the second Regional Dialogue for acceding governments from the Greater Horn of Africa, hosted by Djibouti. In early 2019, the Secretariat will offer a specialized training on WTO accessions rules which will provide an in-depth focus on the WTO legal disciplines at issue in the accession Working Party Reports.

A new initiative, a g7+ WTO Accessions Group, was launched on the margins of the Ministerial Conference. The objective of this Group is to facilitate the integration of post-conflict and fragile economies into the multilateral trading system through WTO accession-related reforms.  Established as a subgroup of the larger g7+⁽¹⁴⁾ it comprises eight LDCs associated with WTO accession, including three Article XII Members (Afghanistan, Liberia, Yemen) and five acceding governments (Comoros, Sao Tomé and Principe, Somalia, South Sudan and Timor-Leste). The Group aims to facilitate the integration of post-conflict and fragile economies into the multilateral trading system through WTO accession-related reforms.

An Informal Dialogue of Acceding LDCs was established to promote cooperation among acceding LDCs. Both of these initiatives are led by acceding governments. In addition, a series of new activities, including experience-sharing events, were launched under the “Trade for Peace” initiative, coordinated by the Accessions Division.  These new initiatives as they create additional support networks that can play an important role in addressing the challenges associated with the WTO accession process, which remains complex, multifaceted and demanding. This is of particular relevance for many of the applicants which are currently in the accession queue – i.e., small and medium-sized economies, including a number of conflict-affected and fragile states.

By acceding to the WTO, governments send a message that they are committed to the core values of openness, transparency, good governance, and the rule of law. But each accession is also a building block for the multilateral trading system itself. This synergy is particularly relevant today as fundamental questions are being raised about the validity of the rules-based approach to international trade.

Accession-related technical assistance and capacity building activities were also provided by other institutions, and often in partnership with WTO Members. This year, the Secretariat continued to work in partnership with the Advisory Centre on WTO Law, the African Development Bank, the Asian Development Bank, the International Monetary Fund, the Enhanced Integrated Framework, the International Trade Centre, the Islamic Development Bank, the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, the UN Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific, the UN Development Programme, the US Agency for International Development, the World Intellectual Property Organization, and the World Bank.

Concluding thoughts

• The WTO boosts trade;  while RTAs are usually negotiated with  geopolitical allies or “similar” countries, the WTO has been notably useful for boosting trade on a global basis, including among “different” countries (regardless of other relationships, etc);
• Therefore, the WTO promotes peace through trade (One does not attack his main markets) while also raising living standards;
• The WTO simplifies trade rules and enhances the predictability of the trading environment; and therefore reduces the cost of trading;
• Without the WTO, we would end up with a spaghetti bowl of rules (multitude of regional trade agreements, RTAs, with their differing  rules);
• Without the WTO, we would end up in a world of mega-regional agreements that would favor stronger (more developed) countries over the weaker ones; with greater divergencies in the types of rules applied, often incompatibly with one another:
• A trading environment composed of preferential agreements only would undermine the rule of law;
• Without the WTO, “discrimination” would replace the principle of ‘most-favored nation’ (MFN);
• Without the WTO, there would not be any effective dispute settlement.  (What would be the alternative to the WTO dispute settlement ?)

Notes

1. Social order is to some extent self-cancelling, the longer people have it the more they take it for granted,  historic events that warn them against such complacency pass from living memory to folklore to something more like rumor.  Ideas that would have made their forebears shiver become credible, even exciting. Think of the antic glee at the prospect of war in Britain in 1914.  It defies understanding, until you remember the country’s inexperience of mass-mobilized conflict since Napoleonic times.
   We might be living through a (so far milder) version of the same phenomenon: an openness to political extremes born of historic distance from their last trial and error.   The implications of this argument is as bleak as the argument itself.  For the west to rediscover its aversion to wild ideas, perhaps they must be tested to failure.
   The two last Presidents to serve in the Second World War were George Bush (41) and John F. Kennedy.  One was shot down by the then enemy and other whose boat was sunk from under him after a collision with a destroyer.  They had a strong sense of the international order the United States had created and the necessity for maintaining it. back to text
2. The full text of the relevant statement reads:  27. International trade and investment are important engines of growth, productivity, innovation, job creation and development. We recognize the contribution that the multilateral trading system has made to that end. The system is currently falling short of its objectives and there is room for improvement. We therefore support the necessary reform of the WTO to improve its functioning. We will review progress at our next Summit. http://www.g20.utoronto.ca/2018/2018-leaders-declaration.html. back to text
3. The Slough of Despond (“swamp of despair”) is a fictional, deep bog in John Bunyan’s allegory The Pilgrim’s Progress, into which the protagonist Christian sinks under the weight of his sins and his sense of guilt for them. back to text
4. Hugo Grotius: natural law gives rise to the positive law of states; the latter depends for its validity upon the underlying grounds of all social obligation and especially upon that of good faith in keep- ing covenants (the notion that pacta sunt servanda). back to text
5. while the national interest must be protected, it must always be subjected to strict moral limitations.  The Moral Politics of Hans Morgenthau, A. J. H. Murray re: Augustinian v. Hobsian-Machiavelian schools. back to text
6. The U.S. view is that the Appellate Body has, at least by default, become supreme in the WTO system as to what the rights and the obligations of the parties are.  In other circumstances, this is left to another higher authority.  See Isaiah 2:4.  The LORD will mediate between nations and will settle international disputes. They will hammer their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks. Nation will no longer fight against nation, nor train for war anymore.  New Living Translation. In the secular setting of the WTO, it appears that the Members were to be supreme.  back to text
7. The influence of John Calvin. back to text
8. As I understand it, under WTO procedure, the adoption of any agenda, report, decision, or declaration can be blocked by any Member – with the exception of dispute settlement reports. back to text
9. Here I suggest we apply Occam’s razor  Latin: lex parsimoniae ”law of parsimony”) is the problem-solving principle that the simplest solution tends to be the correct one. When presented with competing hypotheses to solve a problem, one should select the solution with the fewest assumptions. The idea is attributed to English Franciscan friar William of Ockham (c. 1287–1347), a scholastic philosopher and theologian. back to text
10. The WTO has problems of a kind first articulated in 1927 by the German physicist Werner Heisenberg, that the position and the velocity of an object cannot both be measured exactly, at the same time, even in theory, at least for sub-atomic particles. This is known as the Heisenberg uncertainty principle or indeterminacy principle.  Trade depends on certainty, but in the absence of required notifications, there is uncertainty as to the conditions under which trade is currently taking place.  With lack of ability to predict whether rules will govern large segments of trade and trade distortions in the future, the future of world trade is likewise uncertain.  A system that has too many unknowns if deficient for the conduct of international trade, and is the key deficiency in the multilateral trading system. back to text
11. In almost all cases, the body of Member Permanent Representatives are anything but permanent.  The corps of Ambassadors are as a whole composed of skilled, experienced and articulate advocates for their country’s policies.  But the body of the whole is deciduous. There is always a turnover in representation.  back to text
12. An example is the creation in the Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade of a list of best practices for standards,. back to text
13. This is section is a much shortened version of excellent and comprehensive remarks deleiverd by John Adank, Director of the WTO’s Legal Affairs Division, at the University of Manchester on November 30, 2018.  back to text
14. The g7+ is an association of 20 fragile and conflict-affected states, established in 2010 in Dili, Timor-Leste, with the aim of forging pathways out of fragility and conflict and to facilitate transition and economic development of its members. Its members are: Afghanistan, Burundi, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Cote d’Ivoire, Democratic Republic of Congo, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Haiti, Liberia, Papua New Guinea, Sao Tomé and Principe, Sierra Leone, Solomon Islands, Somalia, South Sudan, Timor-Leste, Togo, and Yemen.

Source: wto.org

 

Ngày 18/12

279/ Panels established to review claims against trade measures of Costa Rica, Russia, Saudi Arabia

At its meeting on 18 December, the WTO’s Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) agreed to establish a panel to review Mexico’s complaint against import restrictions imposed by Costa Rica on fresh avocados from Mexico. The DSB also agreed to a request from the United States for a panel to review its complaint regarding Russia’s tariffs on imports of certain US goods and from Qatar for a panel to rule on measures in Saudi Arabia on the protection of intellectual property rights.

DS524: Costa Rica — Measures Concerning the Importation of Fresh Avocados from Mexico

Mexico submitted its second request for a panel to rule on Costa Rica’s import restrictions on fresh avocados from Mexico, following Costa Rica’s decision to block Mexico’s first request at the DSB meeting on 4 December. Mexico is challenging measures which ban or severely limit the importation of fresh avocados from Mexico, including certain procedures related to the control, inspection and approval of the avocado imports as well as Costa Rica’s alleged failure to adapt its regulations to take account of the low prevalence of pests or disease in certain regions and make such regionalization operative.

Mexico noted that Costa Rica is a trading partner distinguished by its commitment to free trade and that it had been exporting fresh avocados to Costa Rica for more than 20 years without any problem. Mexico said it has no choice but to request the panel a second time to review its claims.

Costa Rica said it regretted Mexico’s decision to pursue a panel and said it saw no reason for it, particularly in light of a bilateral agreement recently signed by Mexico and Costa Rica establishing a joint technical work programme aimed at resolving the dispute. Costa Rica said its measures were fully in line with WTO requirements and backed by WTO-consistent risk assessments.

The DSB agreed to the establishment of a panel. China, India, the United States, Panama, Honduras, Canada, Russia and the European Union reserved their third-party rights to participate in the proceedings.

DS566: Russian Federation — Additional Duties on Certain Products from the United States

The United States submitted its second request for a panel regarding Russia’s imposition of additional duties on certain US products. The first US request was blocked by Russia at the DSB meeting on 4 December.

The United States said Russia and several other WTO members are unilaterally retaliating against the US for actions fully justified under Article XXI of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) 1994. These members are pretending that the US actions are safeguards and that their unilateral, retaliatory duties constitute suspension of substantially equivalent concessions under the WTO’s Safeguards Agreement. Just as these members appear ready to undermine the dispute settlement system by throwing out the plain meaning of Article XXI and 70 years of practice, so too are they ready to undermine the WTO by pretending to follow WTO rules while taking measures blatantly against those rules. The US has not utilized its domestic law on safeguards to take the actions, and WTO rules on safeguards are not relevant to the US actions. Russia’s duties are nothing more than duties in excess of its WTO commitments and are applied only to the US, contrary to Russia’s most favoured nation (MFN) obligation, the US said.

The Russian Federation said it was disappointed with the second US request and bewildered to hear that it was Russia undermining the dispute settlement system when it is the US arbitrarily imposing additional duties on steel and aluminium and using them as a means to secure trade concessions from certain members. Due to the efforts of the US to “improve” the dispute settlement system through paralysis, the US is the last member to win the title of guardian of the system, Russia said. The actions of the US are yet another effort to turn the WTO house upside down.

The European Union noted the US request is similar to those the US made with regards to four other WTO members and which were approved at a DSB meeting on 21 November. The EU welcomed the fact that Russia, like quite a number of other WTO members, resorted to its right to suspend equivalent obligations vis-à-vis the US and looks forward to defending its right, and the rights of other WTO members, to take such action.

The DSB agreed to the establishment of the panel. Japan, Saudi Arabia, the European Union, Norway, Switzerland, Brazil, Qatar, Thailand, Singapore, Indonesia, Mexico, Chinese Taipei, Turkey, Venezuela, Egypt, Canada, Kazakhstan, India, Malaysia and New Zealand reserved their third-party rights to participate in the proceedings.

DS567: Saudi Arabia — Measures concerning the Protection of Intellectual Property Rights

Qatar submitted its second request for a panel to review its claims that Saudi Arabia has failed to provide adequate protection of intellectual property (IP) rights in line with the WTO’s Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS), in particular with respect to IP rights held, or applied for, by Qatari-based entities. Qatar’s first request was blocked by Saudi Arabia at the DSB meeting on 4 December.

Qatar said its firms not only were denied access to remedies in Saudi Arabia to protect their IP rights, but that Saudi Arabia was actively abetting commercial-scale broadcasting piracy, including piracy of licensed content, and permitting the sale of set-top boxes that allow access to hundreds of proprietary channels and thousands of programmes without the consent of rights holders. This is something that should be addressed through the Saudi domestic courts and criminal system as required by the TRIPS Agreement, but with these IP violations continuing unchecked for more than a year, the WTO is one of the few forums left open to Qatar to address this dispute. Qatar said the absence of diplomatic relations with Saudi Arabia does not render WTO dispute settlement impossible; such relations are not required in order to engage in dispute proceedings.

Saudi Arabia said it deeply regretted the second request for a panel for a matter which has no legitimate connection to the WTO or to compliance with WTO rules. Establishing and maintaining diplomatic relations between nation states is a fundamental exercise of state sovereignty; the WTO and the WTO agreements cannot infringe upon that. Saudi Arabia severed diplomatic relations with the complainant in June 2017 in order to protect its essential security interests, which renders impossible dispute settlement proceedings. Article 73 of the TRIPS Agreement cannot oblige a member to engage in dispute proceedings on matters of national security and a panel has no power to make a finding other than to acknowledge that Article 73 has been invoked.

Saudi Arabia reconfirmed that it fully respects all obligations that apply under the WTO agreements, including the TRIPS Agreement. The WTO cannot be turned into a venue for resolving national security disputes, and Saudi Arabia will not engage in dispute proceedings with a party it does not recognize diplomatically.

The United Arab Emirates said the matter relates to national security under Article 73 of the TRIPS Agreement and that a panel has no proper jurisdiction to hear the dispute. Bahrain said issues related to national security cannot be resolved in the WTO and that, because Saudi Arabia invoked Article 73, the panel has no basis to review the claims.   The European Union said that views regarding the panel’s jurisdiction or authorization over certain issues can be brought before the panel to decide; the national security provisions are GATT and TRIPS exceptions and, therefore, justiciable for panels and the Appellate Body.

The United States said invocation of the national security exception under Article 73 is self-judging and that members decide themselves what is in their national interest; this matter should be resolved outside the WTO dispute settlement context. China said security provisions are sensitive provisions relating to sovereignty and should only be invoked to safeguard genuine national interest and be implemented in a cautious manner. Canada said that when a country becomes a member of the WTO it accepts the compulsory jurisdiction of the dispute settlement system and that that authority of a panel to adjudicate is not negated by the absence of diplomatic relations.

The DSB agreed to the establishment of a panel. The European Union, India, Japan, China, the United States, Australia, Turkey, Norway, Mexico, Russia, Bahrain, Singapore, Chinese Taipei, the UAE and Korea reserved their third-party rights to participate in the proceedings.

DS543: United States — Tariff Measures on Certain Goods from China

China submitted its first request for the establishment of a WTO panel to rule on tariffs imposed by the US on imports of Chinese goods under Section 301 of the US Trade Act of 1974. The tariffs were imposed on the basis of an investigation by the US Trade Representative concerning alleged acts, policies and practices by China related to technology transfer, intellectual property and innovation. The US imposed 25% additional tariffs on approximately $34 billion of Chinese imports from 6 July 2018 and imposed 10% additional tariffs on approximately $200 billion of Chinese imports from 24 September 2018.

China said it first requested consultations on the matter in April and that talks were held on 28 August and 22 October, without success. The US measures at issue affect significant trade interests of China, touching thousands of tariff lines worth hundreds of billions of dollars in trade, further worsening the global economic and trade environment, and damaging global industrial supply chains around the world. The unilateral actions by the US not only infringe China’s rights and interests but also flagrantly violate WTO rules. The WTO is a shield for members to defend themselves against trade protectionism, not a shield to hide any measures that go against WTO rules, China said, adding that the unilateral tendencies of the US is of serious concern to all members.

The United States said it had serious concerns with China’s request for a panel. First, China is seeking to use the dispute settlement system as a shield for a broad range of trade-distorting policies and practices not covered by WTO rules, threatening the overall viability of the WTO system. Second, China’s request is hypocritical; it is currently retaliating against the US by imposing duties on over $100 billion in US trade. Third, the outcome of any dispute proceedings would be pointless; China has already taken the unilateral decision that the US measures cannot be justified and is already imposing tariffs on US goods. China’s unfair trade practices with respect to forced technology transfer are well-documented and spelled out in a comprehensive March 2018 report. A supplemental report was issued in November explaining that China has not fundamentally altered its practices subject to the earlier report, practices that harm every WTO member that relies on technology for maintaining competitiveness in world markets.  The leaders of the US and China have agreed to enter into negotiations to address these issues, and it is those discussions, and not the WTO dispute settlement proceedings, that are the appropriate forum for addressing the technology transfer issues covered by the US investigation. For these reasons the US said it will not agree to the establishment of a panel.

Japan said any trade measures must be consistent with the WTO agreements and that no country benefits from exchanges of trade-restrictive measures and counter-measures taken against each other.

The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to revert to the matter.

DS234: United States – Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act of 2000

The European Union reiterated its request that the United States cease transferring anti-dumping and countervailing duties to the US domestic industry, arguing that every such disbursement was a clear act of non-compliance with the DSB’s recommendations and rulings on the matter. Brazil and Canada agreed with the EU that the matter should remain on the DSB agenda and called on the US to fully comply. The United States referred to its previous statement and said it had taken all action necessary to comply with the DSB’s recommendations and rulings.

DS316: European Communities and Certain Member States – Measures Affecting Trade in Large Civil Aircraft: Implementations of the recommendations adopted by the DSB

The United States again said the European Union has not provided a status report concerning the dispute DS316, “EU — Measures Affecting Trade in Large Civil Aircraft”. The EU has argued that Article 21.6 of the WTO’s Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU) requires that the issue of implementation remain on the DSB agenda until the issue is resolved and that where a member disagrees with another member’s assertion that implementation of a ruling has been achieved, the issue remains unresolved for the purposes of Article 21.6. The stated EU position contradicts its actions in this dispute, the US said, where the EU has admitted that there remains a disagreement on compliance. Under the EU’s own view, the EU should be providing a status report, yet it has failed to do so. The US urged the EU to provide the DSB for the first time any details on its alleged implementation efforts.

The European Union said there was a difference between the position it has taken in the DS234 and DS316. In the former, the case has been adjudicated, no proceedings are pending, and the EU disagrees with the US assertion that it has complied; thus the issue remains unresolved for the purposes of Article 21.6. In the DS316 case, the EU notified its compliance measures, the US disagreed that compliance had been achieved and a compliance panel has been established to rule on the matter. The matter is subject to litigation and the EU is concerned with a reading of Article 21.6 which would require a member to notify the status of implementation while litigation is ongoing.

Statement by the United States on the precedential value of panel or Appellate Body reports

The United States made a lengthy statement in which it criticized the WTO’s Appellate Body “misguided insistence” that its rulings must serve as precedent “absent cogent reasons”. This issue is of fundamental importance to the WTO, the US said; the Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU), the WTO’s rule book for resolving disputes, does not assign precedential value to panel or Appellate Body reports adopted by the DSB. The right to adopt authoritative interpretations of WTO rules is reserved exclusively to WTO members through the Ministerial Conferences or the General Council. Nevertheless, the US said, the Appellate Body has suggested that a panel must follow a prior Appellate Body interpretation absent “cogent reasons” for departing from the earlier interpretation, without any justification or legitimate basis for this interpretation.

Not treating interpretations in a ruling as controlling or a precedent is consistent with the treatment of rulings under the previous GATT dispute settlement system and something the Appellate Body initially acknowledged in one of its earliest rulings (DS11,  Japan — Taxes on Alcoholic Beverages). However, in a subsequent ruling (DS344, US — Anti-Dumping Measures on Stainless Steel from Mexico), the Appellate Body adopted a contradictory position and first introduced the concept of “cogent reasons”; specifically, the Appellate Body said that ensuring security and predictability in the dispute settlement system, as contemplated in Article 3.2 of the DSU, implies that, absent cogent reasons, an adjudicatory body will resolve the same legal question in the same way in a subsequent case.  This approach is fundamentally flawed and at odds with the text of the DSU and the WTO Agreement, the US argued.

In several recent panel reports, the US said, certain panels have simply applied the Appellate Body’s pronouncement on “cogent reasons” and failed to engage with the legal text of the DSU and WTO agreements. This raises grave concerns for the dispute settlement system as it suggests that serious, systemic errors are increasingly being made without any consideration of the actual text the WTO members have agreed to. This practice usurps the authority reserved only for WTO members to adopt authoritative interpretations of WTO rules and is another example of the failure of the Appellate Body to follow the rules agreed to by members, the US said.

Colombia, Chile, Canada, Brazil, Australia, Japan, Singapore, the Philippines, Mexico, China, New Zealand and the European Union took the floor to comment. Many of these members agreed with the US that there was no power under the DSU or the WTO Agreement giving the Appellate Body authority to issue rulings that set binding precedent, but several members questioned whether the Appellate Body was asserting such an authority.

Several said the “cogent reasons”pronouncement which the US claimed the Appellate Body was asserting in “Stainless Steel” was not correct and that in fact the Appellate Body said in the same ruling that it “is well settled that Appellate Body reports are not binding, except with respect to resolving the particular dispute between the parties”. There is a difference between previous rulings setting binding precedence and previous rulings serving as guidance for the Appellate Body and panels to refer to; WTO members themselves, including the US, often refer to previous rulings when making their arguments before a panel or Appellate Body. In fact, they noted, Article 3.2 of the DSU specifically cites the role of the dispute settlement system in providing security and predictability to the multilateral trading system, and reference to these previous rulings, as appropriate, helps fulfill that role. Several other members, such as China and Colombia, said that US concerns on the matter were no reason for the US to continue holding up the appointment of new Appellate Body members.

Appellate Body appointments

Mexico, speaking on behalf of 71 WTO members, once again introduced the group’s proposal calling for the establishment of a selection committee for the appointment of new Appellate Body members, the submission of candidates within 30 days, and the issuance by the committee of recommendations within 60 days. Four vacancies now exist on the Appellate Body, which normally has seven members, with two more members due to depart in one year. The considerable number of members supporting the proposal reflects a common concern with the current situation in the Appellate Body that is seriously affecting its workings and the overall dispute settlement system against the best interest of its members, Mexico said.

The United States again said it was not in a position to agree to the proposal. As it explained in previous meetings, the US said the systemic concerns it has identified remain unaddressed; for more than 15 years and across multiple US administrations, the US has been raising serious concerns with the Appellate Body’s disregard for the rules set by WTO members. This includes the mandatory 90-day deadline for issuing rulings, the review of panel findings on domestic law, the issuance of advisory opinions not necessary to resolve a dispute, the treatment of Appellate Body reports as precedent and  Rule 15 of the Working procedures for appellate review, which allows the Appellate Body to decide whether a member continues working on cases after his/her term as an Appellate Body member has ended, in disregard of WTO rules. The US remains ready to engage with other WTO members on these issues and other critical issues.

Seventeen members, speaking on their own behalf or on behalf of groups, made statements. They reiterated their concerns with the continued impasse regarding the appointment of new Appellate Body members and urged all members to show flexibility in order to resolve the deadlock as soon as possible. The EU reminded members that with each passing month, the gravity and urgency of the situation increases. Many said again that while they were prepared to discuss the US concerns, they should not prevent the appointment of new Appellate Body members.

Costa Rica (for the group of Latin American and Caribbean members), Brazil and China said there was nothing in the WTO rules which required consensus among members to agree to the launch of the selection process. Mexico, for the 71 proponents, said it regretted that, for the 19th occasion, members have not been able to start the selection process and that there was no legal justification for the blockage, which is causing concrete nullification and impairment for many members.

Surveillance of implementation

The United States presented status reports with regard to DS184, “US — Anti-Dumping Measures on Certain Hot-Rolled Steel Products from Japan”,  DS160, “United States — Section 110(5) of US Copyright Act”, DS464, “United States — Anti-Dumping and Countervailing Measures on Large Residential Washers from Korea”, DS471, “United States — Certain Methodologies and their Application to Anti-Dumping Proceedings Involving China” and DS488, “US — Anti-Dumping Measures on Certain Oil Country Tubular Goods from Korea”.

The European Union presented status reports with regard to DS291, “EC — Measures Affecting the Approval and Marketing of Biotech Products”.

Indonesia presented its status report in DS484, “Indonesia — Measures Concerning the Importation of Chicken Meat and Chicken Products”.

Next meeting

The next meeting of the DSB will take place on 28 January 2019.

Source: wto.org

 

280/ Sweden gives CHF 1 million to help developing countries meet standards for farm trade

Sweden is contributing SEK 10,000,000 (just over 1,100,000 CHF) in 2019 to help developing and least-developed countries (LDCs) participate more actively in global agricultural trade. This grant to the Standards and Trade Development Facility (STDF) aims to support developing countries in complying with international food safety, animal and plant health standards with the objective of increasing their access to world markets.

WTO Director-General Roberto Azevêdo said: “As one of the biggest contributors to our technical assistance activities, Sweden is demonstrating its continued commitment to help developing countries and LDCs maximize the benefits of trade. In particular, Sweden’s new donation will help these countries improve their sanitary and phytosanitary standards so as to connect more easily to global agricultural markets.”

Sweden’s Minister for EU Affairs and Trade, Ann Linde, said: “Enhancing the capacities of developing countries to meet sanitary and phytosanitary standards is critical to helping them increase their exports of agricultural products and better integrate into global trade. Given the important contribution the STDF is making to inclusive growth, poverty reduction and to meeting the Sustainable Development Goals, Sweden is pleased to be continuing our long-lasting partnership.”

Sweden has donated over CHF 51 million to WTO trust funds over the past 18 years.

The STDF is a global coordination platform that brings together leading trade, health and agriculture experts worldwide to share knowledge, tools and good practice and strengthen the effectiveness of SPS technical assistance provided to developing countries. The STDF also provides support and funding for the development and implementation of collaborative and innovative projects that promote compliance with international SPS requirements. The STDF is housed and managed by the WTO.

Source: wto.org

 

281/ ICC-WTO Small Business Champions: DG welcomes Brazilian project to lower barriers for MSMEs

Director-General Roberto Azevêdo met with Brazil’s National Confederation of Industry (CNI) in Brasilia on 18 December and received an update on their ‘Small Business Without Barriers’ project, selected as a successful proposal under the ICC-WTO Small Business Champions initiative in March 2018.

DG Azevêdo and ICC Brazil Executive-Director, Gabriel Petrus, heard that CNI has successfully completed a range of activities, including a survey of small businesses aimed at identifying the difficulties they face in trading internationally, a series of capacity-building roadshows in nine Brazilian states and the development of information-sharing and training activities via brochures, online courses and videos.

The Director-General said:

“I am very impressed by how much the Confederation has accomplished in such a short space of time. I commend Brazil’s National Confederation of Industry for their commitment to improving the trading opportunities for small businesses in Brazil. I look forward to seeing more business organizations step up to provide innovative tools that can help their small businesses access global markets.”

ICC also congratulated the work done:

“ICC strongly believes that the growth in global trade in the next years will be driven by SMEs. Countries like Brazil, that can still increase significantly their participation in international trade, need to create systems and tools that enable their SMEs to reach beyond their national borders. Initiatives like the one CNI is spearheading are crucial and will have a positive impact for Brazil’s economic and social growth. This is exactly what Small Business Champions, an initiative of ICC and the WTO, aims to achieve.”

CNI conducted a survey of 500 exporting companies, including 429 micro, small and medium-sized enterprises (MSMEs), to identify the main barriers faced by Brazilian MSMEs when trading internationally. The survey found that the main barriers include tariffs, customs bureaucracy in the importing country, technical standards, sanitary or phytosanitary measures, and obstacles regarding rules of origin, trade defence measures and quantitative import restrictions. The results of the survey were summarized in a brochure that will be circulated widely.

Another successful initiative were the capacity-building roadshows targeting small businesses in nine Brazilian states (Amazonas, Bahia, Goiás, Minas Gerais, Paraná, Rio de Janeiro, Rio Grande do Sul, Santa Catarina and São Paulo). These states were selected due to their high level of activity in the export market, particularly in terms of MSMEs. One of the tools used by these roadshows was a guide to trade barriers, explaining in easy-to-understand terms how companies can identify and overcome various types of barriers in export markets. CNI also conducted an online course to increase MSMEs’ capacity to deal with trade barriers.

CNI also created a coalition of businesses, mobilised to raise awareness about trade barriers and to call for trade policies that create a supportive environment for MSMEs. The coalition consists of 42 private sector associations and 27 federations of industry, which will focus on tackling trade barriers.

In addition, CNI produced a video to highlight the importance of private sector engagement in the issue of trade barriers and developed 30 case studies on particular barriers faced by companies in a variety of markets, with specific analysis and recommendations on how to overcome these barriers.

The ICC-WTO Small Business Champions initiative invited companies and private sector organizations to propose innovative, practical ideas designed to encourage MSMEs to do business across borders. The call for proposals for the initiative closed in December 2017.

A range of businesses, including eBay, Argentina’s Chamber of Commerce and Services and Mercado Libre, have submitted successful proposals. Following successful completion of the projects, the businesses are recognized as ICC-WTO Small Business Champions.

Google and the Institute of Export and International Trade have already been recognized as Small Business Champions.

Source: wto.org

 

Ngày 19/12

282/ Keeping safe on the roads: series of standards for vehicle electronics functional safety just updated

In today’s world where the technology of road vehicles is moving ahead at racing pace, it is important that these exciting new electronic features are safe. A series of International Standards for functional safety of electrical and electronic systems in road vehicles has just been updated to keep the automotive industry ahead of the pack.

Cars have come a long way from the days of internal combustion engines a century ago, or even manual wind-down windows. These days, it seems, everything is done by the touch of a button or through a simple voice command. Electronics are behind a mind-boggling array of vehicle functionalities and the technology just keeps on coming.

But with any powerful technology comes a set of risks. The purpose of the ISO 26262 series of standards is to mitigate those risks by providing guidelines and requirements for the functional safety of electrical and electronic systems in today’s road vehicles.

Published in 12 individual parts, ISO 26262, Road vehicles – Functional safety, has just been updated to keep abreast of these new and rapidly evolving technologies, and be relevant to even more applications.

Mr Susumu Akiyama, Chair of the ISO subcommittee that developed the standards, said functional safety for electrical and electronic systems in road vehicles is essential for overall quality and product safety, as well as for the manufacturer’s reputation.

“Therefore, the ISO 26262 series of standards is a useful tool for the automotive industry to ensure safety of the vehicle, and is generic enough to still allow some flexibility for innovation in its development,” he said.

Changes to the newly revised versions include the addition of important specific requirements for semi-conductors as well as new requirements for motorcycles.

Functional safety features form an integral part of each automotive product’s development phase, from specification and design to implementation, integration, verification, validation, and ultimately production release. ISO 26262 defines functional safety for all automotive electronic and electrical safety-related systems, covering their entire life cycle including the development, production, operation, service and decommissioning.

The series also details an automotive-specific, risk-based approach for determining risk classes, known as Automotive Safety Integrity Levels (ASILs). ASILs are established by performing a risk analysis of potential hazards based on three variables: severity, probability of exposure and controllability by the driver.

ISO 26262, Parts 1 to 12, were developed by ISO technical committee ISO/TC 22, Road vehicles, subcommittee SC 32, Electrical and electronic components and general system aspects, whose secretariat is held by JISC, ISO’s member for Japan. They can be purchased from your national ISO member or through the ISO Store.

Source: iso.org

 

Ngày 20/12

283/ Republic of Korea gives USD 300,000 to deepen negotiating skills of developing countries

The Republic of Korea is contributing USD 300,000 (approximately CHF 300,000) to help developing and least-developed countries participate more fully in multilateral trade negotiations.

This donation to the WTO’s Doha Development Agenda Global Trust Fund will finance training workshops for officials in Geneva and elsewhere to help them better understand and implement WTO agreements. Over 2,600 workshops have been organized since the fund was created in 2001.

WTO Director-General Roberto Azevêdo said: “Korea’s donation provides very welcome support to help improve the trading prospects of the WTO’s developing and least-developed members, thereby helping them to integrate more fully into the world economy. I thank Korea for its sustained generosity.”

The WTO Ambassador for the Republic of Korea, Ms Ji-ah Paik, said: “As one of the biggest beneficiaries of the multilateral trading system, Korea strongly supports the WTO’s efforts in helping developing and least-developed countries maximize trade opportunities so that they can advance their economic and social development. Through this contribution, Korea aims to further enhance the negotiating skills and expertise of trade officials in these countries.”

Overall, the Republic of Korea has donated approximately USD 5.5 million (CHF 5.5 million) to WTO trust funds over the last 15 years.

Source: wto.org

 

284/ WTO members voice commitment to intensify fisheries subsidies negotiations in 2019

At the 14 December meeting of the Negotiating Group on Rules, heads of WTO member delegations declared their commitment to intensify negotiations on fisheries subsidies in the new year to meet the end-2019 target for an agreement. Heads of delegation further confirmed their support for the January-July 2019 work programme recently agreed in the Negotiating Group.

The Negotiating Group Chair, Ambassador Roberto Zapata Barradas (Mexico), at the meeting called on heads of delegation to empower their technical experts to step up efforts to build consensus and bridge gaps in the negotiations so that an agreement can be successfully forged.

“We all know the mandate is to reach an agreement by end-2019 and we all know getting there is not easy,” the chair said. “If we are serious about getting this done, we have to move into the uncomfortable zone of compromise and accommodation.”

Members responded with support for a shift into full negotiating mode as of January, noting the urgent deadline for an agreement and the importance of ensuring the sustainability of fisheries resources for people’s livelihood and food security needs as well as for the protection of the environment. Several members emphasized the need for pragmatism and echoed the chair’s call for engagement in a genuine compromise-seeking mode. There were calls to improve compliance with notifications of subsidy programmes in order to facilitate the negotiations, and different views on flexibilities for developing and least-developed country members. A number of members expressed the view that success in these negotiations is vital for the credibility of the organization.

Members expressed support for the recently-agreed work programme for January to July 2019, which comprises monthly week-long clusters of meetings. Each cluster will include a mix of member-organized meetings as well as open-ended meetings of the Negotiating Group, organized around four main topics: subsidies to illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing; subsidies to fishing where stocks are overfished; subsidies contributing to fleet overcapacity and overfishing ; and the cross-cutting issues of special and differential treatment for developing and least-developed members, dispute settlement, institutional issues, and notification and transparency. Four individuals have been selected to act as facilitators for each of these issue areas, to assist members and the chair as the negotiations progress.

In the most recent cluster of fisheries subsidies meetings, from 3 to 7 December, in addition to the work programme, members discussed the draft negotiating texts covering subsidies to illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing, and subsidies to fishing where fish stocks are overfished. The four Incubator Groups that had been tasked with generating ideas on pending issues also presented reports, and a technical workshop was held on the role of artisanal and small-scale fishing in developing countries.

Pursuant to the September to December 2018 work programme, which concluded on 7 December, members completed the streamlining of their negotiating texts into a single document, completed the Incubator Group brainstorming process with reports on a total of 18 topics  and held technical sessions on a range of issues before the Group. All of these activities were aimed at developing inputs and paving the way for the resumed full negotiations in 2019.

Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) Target 14.6 calls for prohibiting certain forms of fisheries subsidies which contribute to overcapacity and overfishing, eliminating subsidies that contribute to illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing, and refraining from introducing new such subsidies, by 2020. Target 14.6 also recognizes that appropriate and effective special and differential treatment for developing and least developed countries should be an integral part of the WTO fisheries subsidies negotiations.

In the 2017 Ministerial Decision on Fisheries Subsidies, members agreed to continue to engage constructively in fisheries subsidies negotiations, with a view to adopting an agreement by the next Ministerial Conference in 2019. In taking the subsequent decision to hold that Ministerial Conference in June 2020, members reaffirmed their commitment to complete the fisheries subsidies negotiations by the end of 2019.

Source: wto.org

 

Ngày 21/12

285/Austria gives EUR 400,000 to help developing countries take part in trade talks

The government of Austria is contributing a total of EUR 400,000 (CHF 450,000) to fund WTO trade-related programmes over a period of two years (2018 and 2019), with the aim of helping developing and least-developed countries (LDCs) participate more fully in multilateral trade negotiations.

This donation to the WTO’s Doha Development Agenda Global Trust Fund will finance training workshops for officials in Geneva and elsewhere to help them better understand and implement WTO agreements. Over 2,600 workshops have been organized since the fund was created in 2001.

Director-General Roberto Azevêdo said: “I want to thank Austria for supporting WTO trade-related programmes aimed at enhancing the capacity of developing countries and LDCs to trade and to fully participate in multilateral trade negotiations. Austria’s generous donations are very welcome.”

Austria’s Federal Minister for Digital and Economic Affairs, Margarete Schramböck, said: “I firmly believe that the multilateral trading system, particularly the World Trade Organization, plays an essential role in boosting international trade and helping improve the livelihoods of millions of people in both developed and developing economies. Through our contribution to the Trust Fund, we aim to help developing economies integrate into world trade and contribute more actively to the world economy.”

Austria has donated approximately EUR 4 million (over CHF 4.6 million) to WTO trust funds over the last 15 years.

Source: wto.org

 

Ngày 24/12

286/Conference orients foreign investment attraction in Vietnam

Deputy Prime Minister Trinh Dinh Dung chaired a consultation conference on foreign investment attraction and orientations in the northern province of Vinh Phuc on December 21, during which he affirmed that attracting foreign investment is a consistent policy of the Vietnamese Party and State.

The FDI sector has contributed to boosting technological reform, increasing labour productivity and product quality, creating more jobs, and fostering economic growth, Dung affirmed.

To better attract foreign investment, he stressed the need for localities nationwide to prepare the foundations for construction planning, combine the planning of industrial zones with urban planning, upgrade infrastructure, and step up connectivity.

Localities should ensure the interests of locals when conducting ground clearance to serve construction of industrial zones, while continuing to speed up administrative procedure reform, investing in human resources development, and ensuring security and order at foreign-invested areas, he suggested.

The Deputy PM also expressed his hope that foreign investors will strictly follow their commitments and Vietnamese law, pay attention to developing technology, and coordinate with Vietnamese enterprises to develop the support industry.

Deputy Minister of Planning and Investment Vu Dai Thang said that after 30 years, the FDI sector has become an important part of the Vietnamese economy as a dynamically developing sector which has made significant contributions to the country’s socio-economic development.

As of November 2018, the country has around 27,000 foreign-invested projects from 128 nations and territories, with a total registered capital of nearly 340 billion USD, of which 188.8 billion USD was disbursed.

These projects focus on the industrial field, accounting for 57 percent of the total registered capital. Foreign investors were also present in all provinces and cities, mainly in the Red River and southeastern regions. Last year, the FDI sector contributed over 8 billion USD to the State budget, making up 17.1 percent of the total collection, and created jobs for 3.6 million direct labourers and 5-6 million indirect ones.

According to Tetsu Funayama, head of the Business Forum Committee under the Japanese Business Association in Vietnam, 65 percent of Japanese enterprises chose Vietnam as a top destination in Southeast Asia, with most paying close attention to the country’s policies to developing the support industry.

Therefore, he suggested Vietnam carry out more policies to boost the support industry and facilitate Japanese investment in the country.

Japan and Vietnam should expand cooperation in training Vietnamese experts, engineers, and technicians to improve the quality of human resources, he added.

At the conference, investment registration certificates were granted to several FDI projects in Vinh Phuc province.

Source: VNA

 

Ngày 28/12

287/ Vietnam-South Africa relations develop comprehensively: Ambassador

The relations between Vietnam and South Africa have developed in all fields since the establishment of diplomatic ties in 1993, especially in politics, diplomacy, economy-trade, security-defence, science-technology, and education, according to Vietnamese Ambassador to South Africa Vu Van Dung.

He made the statement in a recent interview granted to correspondents of the Vietnam News Agency in Pretoria on the occasion of the 25th anniversary of Vietnam-South Africa diplomatic relations.

Regarding politics and diplomacy, the two sides have maintained high-level delegation exchanges and strengthened legal frameworks for comprehensive cooperation.

South Africa shares its viewpoint with Vietnam on the peaceful settlement of disputes in the East Sea based on international law.

In the field of economy, the two countries have closely worked together in the exchange of farm produce, shipbuilding, aquaculture, and fishing.

South Africa is a leading trade partner of Vietnam in Africa with two-way trade increasing five times over the past decade from 189 million USD in 2007 to 920 million USD in 2013 and one billion USD in 2017, he said.

Vietnam and South Africa strive to increase the bilateral trade to 2 billion USD in the coming year, according to the ambassador.

The two nations have also exchanged cooperation orientations in the fields of telecommunication, training, and crime prevention, he said.

A number of agreements and Memoranda of Understanding (MoU) have been signed and negotiated to boost cooperation in various realms such as investment protection and promotion, double taxation avoidance, cross-border crime prevention, natural resources, education-training, and forestry, he noted.

As developing countries and members of the Non-Aligned Movement, Vietnam and South Africa actively support each other in the international arena for common peace and development, Dung said.

The two countries advocated each other to become a non-permanent member of the UN Security Council for the 2007-2008 and 2019-2020 tenures (South Africa) and 2008-2009 and 2020-2021 tenures (Vietnam).

As regards security-defence, based on the mutual trust and the annual defence policy dialogue, Vietnam and South Africa have explored numerous opportunities to boost bilateral and multilateral cooperation in specific fields such as logistics, training, sharing experience in peacekeeping activities, and defence industry.

Progresses were also seen in the bilateral cooperation in environment, science-technology, tourism, and education, especially after the two sides signed a tourism cooperation agreement in 2010, a MoU on water resources cooperation in 2010, and a MoU and an action plan on wild animal protection in 2012 and 2013 respectively. The signing of a MoU on tertiary education is under discussion.

Source: VNA