The New Frontier of Competitiveness in Developing Countries - Implementing Trade Facilitation

Transport Trade Facilitation Series . 5 AT THE NEW FRONTIER OF COMPETITIVENESS IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES Implementing trade facilitation 1 frontier competitiveness developing countries: Implementing trade facilitation AT 2 Note designations employed presentation material imply expression opinion part United Nations legal status country, territory, city area, authorities delimitation frontiers boundaries. Material publication freely quoted reprinted, acknowledgement requested, copy publication quotation reprint UNCTAD secretariat. publication formally edited. 3 Table Contents List tables ......................................................................................................................... 4 List figures ........................................................................................................................ 4 Abbreviations ........................................................................................................................ 6 Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 7 . Trade facilitation UNCTAD ................................................................................................................ 7 . Goals methodology ............................................................................................................................. 8 . Scope content .................................................................................................................................... 10 CHAPTER ........................................................................................................................ 11 Moving variable speed: Level implementation trade facilitation developing countries ....................................................................................................... 11 . Linking implementation country’ level development ................................................ 11 . Identifying major -implemented areas .................................................................................... 13 . Identifying main reasons -implementation ..................................................................... 20 . Conclusions chapter .............................................................................................................................. 24 CHAPTER II ...................................................................................................................... 25 ready move : Implementation priorities time financial requirements ........................................................................................................ 25 . Identifying trade facilitation implementation priorities .............................................................. 25 . Estimating implementation times ......................................................................................................... 27 . Assessing implementation costs ..................................................................................................... 33 . Conclusions chapter II ............................................................................................................................ 37 CHAPTER III .................................................................................................................... 39 assistance: Expressed special differential treatment ............................................................................................................................. 39 . Measures expected included requests special differential treatment .................. 39 . priorities terms technical assistance capacity-building ................................. 42 . Conclusions chapter III .......................................................................................................................... 45 CHAPTER IV ..................................................................................................................... 47 specific implementation tools: Customs automations systems national trade facilitation committees ................................................................................ 47 . Trade facilitation customs automation systems .......................................................................... 47 . role impact national trade facilitation committees ................................................. 51 . Conclusions chapter IV .......................................................................................................................... 54 Conclusions ........................................................................................................................ 55 References........................................................................................................................... 57 Annex 1: List trade facilitation measures covered report .............................................................. 59 Annex 2: List countries covered report ............................................................................................ 61 4 List Tables Table 1: Main trade facilitation measures level implementation ................................................. 18 Table 2: Main reasons -implementation trade facilitation measures ( countries) ................................................................................................................................ 22 Table 3: Trade facilitation measures level priority ( countries) ............................................... 26 Table 4: Top 10 measures highest estimated implementation times .................................... 32 Table 5: Estimated costs trade facilitation measures (thousands $) ........................................... 35 Table 6: Ten measures highest estimated implementation costs (average) ......................... 37 Table 7: Top 10 measures highest estimated TACB ............................................... 43 Table 8: List trade facilitation measures benefit ASYCUDA ............................................................................................................................ 47 Table 9: ASYCUDA implementing trade facilitation reforms........................................... 48 List Figures Figure 1: Level implementation trade facilitation measures country ..................... 12 Figure 2: Distribution countries percentage fully implemented measures (LDCs -LDCs) .............................................................. 12 Figure 3: Distribution percentage -implemented measures LDCs -LDCs ....................................................................................................................... 13 Figure 4: Full implementation level area ( countries) ................................................................... 14 Figure 5: Major -compliance areas LDCs -LDCs ....................................................... 15 Figure 6: Full implementation level area: LDCs -LDCs ................................................... 15 Figure 7: Full implementation level trade facilitation measures ( countries) ..................... 17 Figure 8: Full implementation level trade facilitation measures (LDCs - LDCs) ..................................................................................................................................... 19 Figure 9: Top 10 implemented measures LDCs -LDCs .......................................... 20 Figure 10: Top 10 implemented measures LDCs -LDCs ....................................... 20 Figure 11: quoted reasons -implementation ( countries) ..................................... 23 Figure 12: quoted reasons -implementation (LDCs -LDCs) (percentage) ............................................................................................................................ 23 Figure 13: Trade facilitation implementation priorities ( countries) ................................................. 25 Figure 14: Highest trade facilitation implementation priorities LDCs - LDCs ....................................................................................................................................... 27 Figure 15: Estimated priorities trade facilitation measures (LDCs -LDCs) .................... 27 Figure 16: Estimated total implementation time (LDCs -LDCs)........................................... 28 Figure 17: Estimated total implementation time ( countries) ............................................................ 28 Figure 18: Estimated implementation times current implementation level................................. 29 Figure 19: Average implementation time measure ........................................................................... 30 5 Figure 20: Distribution measures average implementation time ..................... 31 Figure 21: Implementation times trade facilitation measure (LDCs - LDCs) ..................................................................................................................................... 32 Figure 22: Estimated total implementation costs (LDCs -LDCs) (millions $) .............................................................................................................................................. 34 Figure 23: Distribution estimated total costs (millions $, number countries) ................................................................................................................................ 34 Figure 24: Estimated costs level compliance ........................................................................ 35 Figure 25: Average costs trade facilitation measures (thousands $) ........................................... 36 Figure 26: Distribution measures based average costs (thousands $) ......................... 36 Figure 27: Percentages measures requiring STD (categories ) .................................... 40 Figure 28: SDT expressed countries .................................................................................. 40 Figure 29: Expressed SDT measure.......................................................................................... 41 Figure 30: Percentage measures requiring TACB ........................................................................ 42 Figure 31: Planned requests TACB individual trade facilitation measures ............................ 43 Figure 32: Requests TACB LDCs -LDCs ................................................................. 44 Figure 33: Top 10 measures requiring TACB (LDCs -LDCs) ............................................... 45 Figure 34: ASYCUDA full implementation levels .................................................................... 50 Figure 35: -implementation level selected measures (ASYCUDA countries) ................................................................................................................................ 50 Figure 36: Full compliance level countries national trade facilitation body place .......................................................................................................................... 52 Figure 37: National trade facilitation committees participating countries ............................... 53 Figure 38: Proposed commitments national trade facilitation committees ................................... 54 6 Abbreviations ASYCUDA Automated System Customs Data FALPRO UNCTAD Special Programme Trade Facilitation ICT information communications technology IT information technology LDCs developed countries LLDCs landlocked developing countries OECD Organization Economic Cooperation Development OECS Organization Eastern Caribbean States SIDs small island developing states TACB technical assistance capacity-building UNDP United Nations Development Programme WCO World Customs Organization WTO World Trade Organization 7 Introduction . Trade facilitation UNCTAD Trade facilitation long history UNCTAD, mandate area dates Final Act Ministerial Conference 1964. Final Act Conference recommended UNCTAD “ promote, United Nations family, arrangements : ... () Inter-governmental action research improved marketing techniques, organization trade fairs, dissemination market intelligence simplification formalities relating Customs procedure, commercial travel, .” (UNCTAD, 1964). fifty years, UNCTAD’ work trade facilitation area variety forms, constantly adjusting priorities diverse membership. included helping countries assess trade facilitation reforms, developing institutional technical tools implementing reforms, facilitating participation developing countries regional multilateral standard setting activities. Automated System Customs Data (ASYCUDA), 90 countries, possibly concrete result UNCTAD’ work field ( http://www.asycuda.org/). UNCTAD Special Programme Trade Facilitation (FALPRO) Expert Working Group Trade Efficiency, lead adoption 1994 Columbus Ministerial Declaration Trade Efficiency. declaration, turn, instrumental inclusion trade facilitation World Trade Organization (WTO) agenda Singapore Ministerial Conference 1996. beginning negotiations WTO Trade Facilitation Agreement 2004, supporting developing countries negotiations major focus UNCTAD trade facilitation activities (UNCTAD, 2013). support included preparing analytical policy publications trade facilitation issues, organizing training awareness-raising events developing countries Geneva Geneva-based delegates, implementing technical assistance capacity-building (TACB) activities tailored developing countries. 2011 UNCTAD proposed analysis practical actions future agreement trade facilitation WTO require national level step . purpose UNCTAD developed approach lead effort carried collaboration Annex organizations aimed helping developing countries prepare national implementation plans trade facilitation measures proposed WTO negotiations. work funded projects, funded European Union, Norway, Sweden, United Nations Development Account. additional countries, UNCTAD carried specific national projects, funded World Bank United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), included trade facilitation component. framework projects, 2012 2013 UNCTAD worked closely 29 developing countries, included developed countries (LDCs), middle income developing countries, landlocked countries, transit developing countries, small island economies Africa, Asia, Caribbean Latin America. time writing, countries finalizing project activities; present study based results 26 countries. implementing project activities, UNCTAD mobilized local international expertise actively engaged wide range trade facilitations stakeholders 8 existing national trade facilitation committees, informal working groups types cooperation platforms. resulting 26 national trade facilitation implementation plans update current implementation status trade facilitation measures, considered WTO, activities required implementation reach full compliance capacity, countries’ terms time, resources TACB. implementation plans built expanded complementary previously ( 2007 2010) prepared WTO -assessments. individual implementation plans prepared respective Governments remained confidential cases, UNCTAD compiled results lessons learned present analytical report, designed assist developing countries donor countries agencies gain factual view implementation challenges, including resource time requirements. section describe methodology UNCTAD helping countries prepare national implementation plans. . Goals methodology , goal assistance UNCTAD participating developing countries elaborate national implementation plans measures included WTO draft consolidated negotiating text trade facilitation time elaboration plan. purpose, standardized questionnaire developed UNCTAD based latest revision draft consolidated negotiating text (TN/TF//165). questionnaire structured content section negotiating text. purpose project, provisions section divided 39 measures. full list analysed measures included annex 1. 39 measures, (measure 4 notification) post-implementation measure complied prior entry force agreement. measure , , analysed project. measure (measure 10 appeal mechanism customs union WTO member) applicable countries, belonged union. considered measures, questionnaire included: () relevant excerpt WTO draft consolidated negotiating text ( ) including text squared brackets; () Background information measure, including extract country’ earlier WTO “ Assessment Trade Facilitation Priorities” / relevant sources information, UNCTAD’ “Technical Notes Trade Facilitation Measures” (UNCTAD/DTL/TLB/2010/1); () Questions measure, including specific questions relating measure general questions implementation issues. participating country, questionnaire completed based -person interviews selected officials relevant government agencies members private sector. interviews conducted UNCTAD national consultant. choice interviewees based involvement, knowledge understanding trade facilitation negotiations / implementation, 9 UNCTAD national consultant government focal point() project. countries functioning national trade facilitation committees similar bodies, project activities carried close cooperation respective competent institution. -country activities included : () launching event country special meeting national trade facilitation committee trade facilitation stakeholders; () Recruitment national consultant UNCTAD; () Collection information national consultant interviews, desk research field visits; () Preparation draft implementation plan; () National validation conference; () Finalization implementation plan, incorporating feedback received validation conference. draft implementation plans, elaborated questionnaire common template UNCTAD, contained () description current situation individual trade facilitation measures, () list actions required implementation measures implemented country, () external resources, () leading implementation agency, () preliminary implementation sequence. national validation conference entailed -depth presentation draft implementation plan members national trade facilitation committee trade facilitation stakeholders large aimed validating findings proposed actions, reinforcing national ownership document. final version implementation plan completed UNCTAD property Government. content national plan , , result joint analysis UNCTAD, national consultant, national public private stakeholders interest trade facilitation. national plan implementation necessarily represent country’ official negotiating position considered trade facilitation issues, reflects consensus reached major trade facilitation stakeholders country stage implementation reached respective country issues time validation conference. annex organizations received project documents main tools ( questionnaire template national implementation plans). Organization Economic Cooperation Development (OECD), World Customs Organization (WCO) World Bank contributed project execution designating experts carry selected fact-finding validation missions participating drafting reviewing national trade facilitation implementation plan. project methodology implemented 26 participating countries, cover major regions, LDCs -LDCs, land-locked, transit, small island developing States, WTO members WTO observers. list participating countries included annex 2. present report information countries participating project, disclosing individual countries’ disclosing information specific country’ situation. 10 . Scope content consolidated results 26 national implementation plans provide series insights progress achieved implementation trade facilitation measures, negotiated WTO, challenges remain addressed. insights, summarized present report, concern: () Level implementation trade facilitation participating countries (chapter ); () Implementation priorities time financial requirements (chapter II); () Expressed special differential treatment (SDT) (chapter III); () selected implementation tools: special focus customs automation systems national trade facilitation committees (chapter IV). conclusions (chapter ) present number policy implications drawn terms implementing trade facilitation reforms framework future WTO Trade Facilitation Agreement. analysis pays attention situation LDCs highlights specificities situation expressed implementation . hoped report provide guidance tool trade facilitation policymakers national, regional multilateral levels developed developing countries, assisting plan implement trade facilitation reforms / tailor TACB activities developing countries. 11 CHAPTER Moving variable speed: Level implementation trade facilitation developing countries framework UNCTAD projects development national trade facilitation implementation plans, 26 countries, comprising LDCs, middle income developing countries, landlocked countries small island economies Africa, Asia, Caribbean Latin America, evaluated current situation respect considered trade facilitation measures negotiated WTO. , assessed current level implementation measure included WTO negotiating text, rating implementation level absent, partial full. results national assessments shed light current state implementation trade facilitation measures developing countries , , : () Linking implementation country’ level development; () Identifying major -implemented areas; () Identifying main reasons -implementation. . Linking implementation country’ level development 50 cent considered trade facilitation measures fully implemented majority participating developing countries. countries considered reached level full implementation analysed measures.1 graph (figure 1) presents consolidated results countries’ implementation levels ( order countries based percentage fully implemented measures). participating countries rate full implementation 76 cent, lowest implementation rate 19 cent. 1 full implementation defined meaning measures included WTO draft consolidated negotiating text implemented manner achieve compliance. 12 FFigure 1. Level implementation trade facilitation measures country time, measures implemented constitute clear minority, ranging 3 28 cent. majority trade facilitation measures, 16 cent 68 cent, depending country, midway implementation process. results suggest significant correlation level development level implementation trade facilitation measures. level implementation LDCs, located left Figure 1. Figure 2, 8 11 LDCs ( 73 cent) situate 40 cent implementation level; LDCs ( 18 cent) belong quintile (9 cent) fourth. country lowest implementation level LDC. Figure 2. Distribution countries percentage fully implemented measures (LDCs -LDCs) 13 , Figure 3, percentage -implemented measures appears majority LDCs -LDCs. FFigure 3. Distribution percentage -implemented measures LDCs -LDCs results implementation trade facilitation remains major challenge developing countries greater LDCs. sense, findings report provide evidence strong link level country’ development ( income group) trade facilitation performance, highlighted trade facilitation-related studies (Moïé Sorescu, 2013, . 17), (Wang Duval, 2013, . 12). time, appears handful trade facilitation reforms completely 26 developing countries concerned, implementing considered measures. . Identifying major -implemented areas Analysing implementation levels specific areas trade facilitation measures individual trade facilitation measures helps identify major areas -compliance developing countries. fourteen substantive areas trade facilitation measures considered WTO. include : publication availability information (article 1); prior publication consultation (article 2); advance ruling (article 3); appeal/review procedures (article 4); measures enhance impartiality, -discrimination transparency (article 5); disciplines fees charges imposed connection importation exportation (article 6); release clearance goods (article 7); consularization (article 8); border agency cooperation (article 9); declaration transhipped -transit goods (article 9bis); formalities connected importation exportation transit (article10); freedom transit (article 11); customs cooperation (article 12); National Committee Trade Facilitation (article 14). 14 fourteen areas, illustrated Figure 4 lowest implementation levels , general, observed : Publication availability information (article1); Advance ruling (article 3); Border agency cooperation (article 9); Prior publication consultation (article 2); National Committee Trade Facilitation (article 14). FFigure 4. Full implementation level area ( countries) Figure 5 Figure 6, major -compliance areas largely coincide LDCs -LDCs. , situation identical sets countries. differences performance LDCs -LDCs significant areas freedom transit, customs cooperation, border agencies cooperation publication, availability information, LDCs generally performance. 15 FFigure 5. Major areas -implementation LDCs -LDCs Figure 6. Full implementation level area: LDCs -LDCs detailed picture obtained analysing implementation levels considered trade facilitation measures ( terms percentage Publication availability information Advance ruling Prior publication consultation Border agency cooperation Appeal [review] procedures LDCs -LDCs measures enhance impartiality, -discrimination transparency 16 countries measure fully implemented). 2 Figure 7 presents implementation rate individual measures ranking lowest highest. 2 Due limitation space, , abbreviations names considered trade facilitation measures . annex 1 full title measures reference WTO draft consolidated negotiating text. 17 FFigure 7. Full implementation level trade facilitation measures ( countries) observed implementation levels, measures , , implemented developing countries (Table 1): 18 TTable 1. Main trade facilitation measures level implementation Top 10 implemented measures 1. TempAdmission (measure 35) 2. Outward Proc (measure 36) 3. Prohib Cons Trans (measure 23) 4. Uniform FormsDoc (measure 33) 5. Decl Trans Goods (measure 25) 6. Elim Pre-PostShip Exp (measure 30) 7. Border Proc (measure 32) 8. Opt Return Goods (measure 34) 9. Expedited Shipments (measure 22) 10. Sep/Release/Payment (measure 17) Top 10 implemented measures 1. Information Internet (measure 2) 2. Single window (measure 29) 3. Enquiry Points (measure 3) 4. Advance Ruling (measure 8) 5. Test Procedures (measure 13) 6. Disciplines Fees/Charges (measure 14) 7. Av. Release Times (measure 20) 8. Authorized Operators (measure 21) 9. Border AgencyCoop (measure 24) 10. Publication (measure 1) appears results measures strongest traditional customs-related component, measures option return rejected goods exporter, temporary admission goods, outward processing, declaration transhipped transit goods common border procedures requirements, highest implementation rate. time, cross-sectoral cross- agency measures, single window, enquiry points, publication, disciplines fees charges, advanced customs techniques, advance ruling authorized operators, bottom implementation ladder. situation pronounced LDCs, shown Figure 8 compares levels full implementation LDCs -LDCs ( measures ranked implementation levels LDCs). 19 FFigure 8. Full implementation level trade facilitation measures (LDCs -LDCs) 20 observed LDCs full implementation performance -existent cross-sectorial measures publication, publication Internet enquiry points, , advanced customs measures, advanced ruling authorized operators. Generally, large overlap implemented measures LDCs -LDCs, level implementation generally higher . Figure 9 Figure 10 6 10 implemented 7 10 implemented measures LDCs -LDCs: FFigure 9. Top 10 implemented measures LDCs -LDCs Figure 10. Top 10 implemented measures LDCs -LDCs results suggest challenging demanding trade facilitation measures, terms required level inter-agency cooperation sophistication existing institutional, legal regulatory framework, remain implemented developing countries. . Identifying main reasons -implementation assessment current implementation status, partial -implementation trade facilitation measure observed, trade facilitation stakeholders countries invited offer opinion main reasons fact. 8. Advance Ruling 24.Border AgencyCoop 14. Disciplines/FeesCharges 29. Single Window 2. Information /Internet 3. Enquiry Points 13. Test Procedures 10. Appeal/Custom Union 20. Av. Release Times 21. Authorized Operator LDCs -LDCs LDCs -LDCs 22. Expedited Shipments 30. ElimPre/PostShipExp 37. Freedom Transit 31. ProhibConsTrans 35. Temp.Admission 36. Inward_OutwardProc 25. Decl_Transhipped 32. Com_Border_Proc 33. UniformFormsDoc 34. OptReturnGoods 11.Import/Rapid Alerts 1. Publication 27.Red/FormandDocs 12. Detention 38.Customs Coop 10. Appeal/Customs Union 17. Sep/Release/Payment 21 basis responses received, additional insights inferred description current situation, broad categories reasons partial -implementation status identified: Lack understanding proposed measure lack knowledge benefits measure: , trade facilitation measure , frequently, benefits traders / administrations involved, understood trade facilitation stakeholders. existing legal framework: , situations captured. , measure applied practice administrations concerned, common practice, clear legal basis action, , cases, lead time discontinuation application administration’ discretion. , countries, administrations consult private sector forthcoming trade related legislation explicit legal obligation . , existing legal framework obstacle application measure, acceptable providing clear tangible benefits. , countries, outdated customs code requires goods physically present customs declaration submitted, effectively preventing pre-arrival processing. Lack resources: term “resources” encompasses financial, technological, institutional human resources equipment facilities. Information communications technology (ICT) infrastructure issues: ICT infrastructure place effectively prevent application measure. frequent lack interoperability information technology (IT) platforms administrations involved process procedure. Lack inter-agency cooperation: lack dialogue cooperation governmental agencies involved, absence - established mechanism cooperation “turf” issues respective institutions. Lack organizational framework: Absence dedicated coordinating responsible unit agency, operation proper implementation measure. noted cases reasons quoted trade facilitation stakeholders interpretation considered trade facilitation measure, line requirements proposed WTO. representative situation measure test procedures (measure 13), , WTO context, concerns administrative procedures trigger request testing goods encompass specific equipment resources involved sampling testing goods. cases, , administrations concerned considered measure properly carried upgrading testing facilities. lack resource , , frequently quoted main reason -implementation. countries, laboratories perceived needed implement measure constituted highest amounts budgeted part implementation future agreement WTO. Table 2 quoted reasons trade facilitation stakeholders countries measure fully implemented. 22 TTable 2. Main reasons -implementation trade facilitation measures ( countries) Measure Lack understanding /knowledge measure existing legal framework Lack resources ICT/ infr. issues Lack inter- agency cooperation Lack org. inst. framework 1. Publication 2. Information /Internet 3. Enquiry Points 5. Interval publ/entry 6. Comment/ Legis 7. Consultations 8. Advance Ruling 9. Appeal 10. Appeal/Custom Union 11. Import Alerts/Rapid 12. Detention 13. Test Procedures 14. Disciplines/FeesCharg 15. Penalty Disciplines 16. Pre-arrival Processing 17. Sep/Release/Payment 18. Risk Management 19. Post-clearance Audit 20. Av. Release Times 21. Authorized Operators 22. Expedited Shipments 23. Prohib Cons Trans 24. Border Agency Coop 25. Decl/Transhipped 26. Review Form 27. Red/Form Docs 28. Int Standards 29. Single Window 30. Elim Pre-Post Ship 31. Customs Brokers 32. /Border Proc 33. Uniform Forms Doc 34. Opt Return Goods 35. Temp Admission 36. Outward Proc 37. Freedom Transit 38. Customs Cooperation 39. Nat TF shown Figure 11, analysis reasons frequently quoted countries shows lack inadequate existing legal framework quoted reason absence full implementation. quoted reasons lack resources lack organizational institutional framework. lack knowledge understanding measure appears significant reason -implementation. 23 FFigure 11. quoted reasons -implementation ( countries) Breaking responses LDCs -LDCs , existing legal framework remains frequently quoted reason, lack resources lack understanding knowledge measure higher impact implementation LDCs -LDCs (Figure 12). Figure 12. quoted reasons -implementation (LDCs -LDCs) (percentage) 24 lack resources appears prevent developing countries LDCs, , fully implementing trade facilitation measures, fact absence suitable legal framework quoted participating countries main obstacle full implementation significant. supports frequent view trade facilitation measures applied practice informal manner clear legal basis. sense, legally binding international agreement, envisaged WTO, provide -needed obligation establish legal basis , , normative certainty informal practices. lack organizational institutional frameworks cases consequence lack resources legal mandate, quoted separate reason respective respondents project countries. Finally, fact lack knowledge understanding measure benefits significant reason -implementation, highlights importance awareness raising training activities subject trade facilitation LDCs, . . Conclusions chapter results national trade facilitation implementation plans, prepared context projects, illustrate challenge developing countries, LDCs , face subscribing multilateral legal commitments trade facilitation area. current situation, surveyed countries position fully conform legally binding rules entire range trade facilitation measures presently considered. addition, countries comply provisions measures. sense, findings justice concerns expressed Geneva developing countries’ delegations implementation challenges posed eventual WTO Trade Facilitation Agreement. great majority trade facilitation measures LDCs -LDCs studied reached partial implementation. , high implementation levels observed specific measures, traditional Customs- based trade facilitation measures concerned. , detailed analysis trade facilitation implementation level shows gaps implementation challenging demanding measures, terms required level inter- agency cooperation effectiveness existing institutional, legal regulatory frameworks. understandable , lack resources remain primary reason observed implementation gap, factors hindering progress trade facilitation reforms play , notably, existing legal, regulatory institutional frameworks lack awareness understanding rationale trade facilitation reforms expected benefits. 25 CHAPTER II ready move : Implementation priorities time financial requirements Moving assessment current situation implementation issues, trade facilitation stakeholders participating countries analysed activities needed fill gaps reach capacity fully compliant proposed WTO disciplines. case specificities, section discusses main components analysis, : () Identifying trade facilitation implementation priorities; () Estimating implementation times; () Assessing implementation costs actions reach full compliance. . Identifying trade facilitation implementation priorities establishing actions measures, fully implemented, countries assigned implementation priority level scale 1 (lowest) 5 (highest). priority meant reflect importance measure economic development strategy. Figure 13 displays analysed trade facilitation measures order priority countries shows great majority measures high priority rate ( 3 5), sign recognition importance trade facilitation national economic development. FFigure 13. Trade facilitation implementation priorities ( countries) 26 , measures received, , 10 highest 10 lowest implementation priority ratings participating countries (Table 3). TTable 3. Trade facilitation measures level priority ( countries)3 10 measures highest priority 1. Uniform Forms Doc (measure 33) 2. Risk Management (measure 18) 3. Single Window (measure 29) 4. Post-clearance Audit (measure 19) 5. Border Agency Coop (measure 24) 6. Publication (measure 1) 7. Red Form Docs (measure 27) 8. Int Standards (measure 28) 9. Enquiry Points (measure 3) 10. Test Procedures (measure 13) 10 measures lowest priority 1. Customs Brokers (measure 31) 2. Decl Transhipped Goods (measure 25) 3. Expedited Shipments (measure 22) 4. Detention (measure 12) 5. Sep/Release/Payment (measure 17) 6. Outward Proc (measure 36) 7. Interval publ entry (measure 5) 8. Review Form Docs (measure 26) 9. Appeal (measure 9) 10. Disciplines/Fees Charges (measure 14) appears participating countries tend award higher priority ambitious trade facilitation measures, single window border agency cooperation, recognize importance traditional trade facilitation reforms, risk management, publication availability information national trade facilitation committees. large overlap measures ( ten) received highest priority LDCs -LDCs (Figure 14). , Figure 15 trade facilitation stakeholders -LDCs tend award higher priority trade facilitation reforms LDCs. 3 ranking measures based average priority individual trade facilitation measures, expressed trade facilitation stakeholders participating countries. 27 FFigure 14. Highest trade facilitation implementation priorities LDCs -LDCs Figure 15. Estimated priorities trade facilitation measures (LDCs -LDCs) picture priorities developing countries, LDCs - LDCs alike, positive. developing countries recognize importance trade facilitation impact national economic development, highlighted studies trade costs (Arvis al., 2013, . 34). measures, received high priority rating participating countries, generally considered significant impact trade flows. 2013 study OECD, analysed relative economic trade impact specific trade facilitation measures 100 countries, measures related information availability, harmonization simplification documents, automated processes risk management, streamlining border procedures good governance impartiality highest impact trade volumes (Moïé Sorescu, 2013). developing countries sample, , good grasp measures expected bring tangible development benefits. . Estimating implementation times national implementation plans estimate implementation time. estimation proved hard cases due 29.Single Window 18. Risk Management 33. Uniform Forms Doc 19. Post-clearance Audit 3. Enquiry Points 24. Border Agency Coop 1. Publication LDCs -LDCs 2. Information Internet 21.Authorized Operators 39.Nat TF 27.Red Form Docs 28. Int Standards 13. Test Procedures 28 difficulty combining estimated implementation times measure proper sequencing implementation. 23 26 participating countries, trade facilitation stakeholders proposed estimation total time required implement considered actions reach full compliance trade facilitation measures. countries, chosen implementation start time measures. , plans included phased sequence implementation. estimates shown (Figure 16 Figure 17), great majority participating countries (18 23 countries 78 cent) reach full implementation capacity measures -year period. majority LDCs belong group. remaining countries, including LDCs -LDCs, stretch plans period 10 years. FFigure 16. Estimated total implementation time (LDCs -LDCs) Figure 17. Estimated total implementation time ( countries) 29 Interestingly , implementation time fully correlate level implementation. countries high compliance rate preferred opt 10-year implementation period, anticipating difficulties covering “ mile” trade facilitation reforms (Figure 18). FFigure 18. Estimated implementation times current implementation level implementation time specific trade facilitation measures concerned, range countries’ estimates wide Figure 19, average times measure established 37 trade facilitation measures. 30 FFigure 19. Estimated implementation time measure average estimated implementation time majority measures (28 37 measures 76 cent) shorter years years remainder reforms ( measures 24 cent) (Figure 20).4 4 implementation time estimated beginning implementation activities starting point time assessment coming force agreement. 31 FFigure 20. Distribution measures average implementation time consistent earlier studies analysing times implementing selected trade facilitation measures, identified similar implementation times, ranging 1.5 4.5 years, majority measures -year mark (Duval, 2006, . 34). Figure 21, longer implementation times measure frequent surveyed LDCs -LDCs. case 22 37 measures (60 cent). Average times LDCs -LDCs 4 measures (11 cent). 11 measures (30 cent) implementation LDCs estimated time -LDCs (measures 1, 2, 10, 19, 20, 26, 29, 31, 33, 35 38), reflecting fact perceived capacity implement actions short periods time systematically relate actual development stage depend existing favourable conditions trade facilitation reforms. 32 FFigure 21. Implementation times trade facilitation measure (LDCs -LDCs) measures estimated time consuming detailed Table 4. Table 4. Top 10 measures highest estimated implementation times 1. Appeal Custom Union (measure 10) 2. Freedom Transit (measure 37) 3. Border Agency Coop (measure 24) 4. Decl Transhipped Goods (measure 25) 5. Single Window (measure 29) 6. Customs Brokers (measure 31) 7. Disciplines Fees Charges (measure 14) 8. Test Procedures (measure 13) 9. Import/Rapid Alerts (measure 11) 10. Penalty Disciplines (measure 15) 33 reasons long implementation times differ depending measure. include significant time political decision national regional levels (measures 10, 24, 31), time carry profound administrative reforms (measures 14 15) set complex legal, institutional technological required reforms (measures 29 37). cases, longer implementation times explained country’ desire implement ambitious version trade facilitation measure envisaged WTO (measure 13). estimates provide good basis planning future WTO-oriented trade facilitation reforms, clear adjusted, depending progress implementation inherent linkages measures . countries considered sequencing actions national implementation plans exercise important challenging possibly requiring adjustments future. addition, number countries implementation levels estimated short implementation times. cases reflected strong national ambition trade facilitation area. , total implementation time increase decrease depending national ambition time. context, important -emphasize developing countries carefully sequencing trade facilitation measures anticipate positive negative spill- effects implementation measure successful introduction (World Bank, 2011; Moïé, 2013, . 6; Duval, 2006, . 21). . Assessing implementation costs work national implementation plans, UNCTAD trade facilitation stakeholders participating countries discussed issue costs considered trade facilitation reforms. participating countries monetary cost analysed trade facilitation measures estimated, 10 26 countries seized opportunity investigate financial costs reaching full compliance future WTO Trade Facilitation Agreement (Figure 22 Figure 23). estimated total costs reaching full implementation status considered trade facilitation measures range widely, $136,000 $15.4 million. LDC decisive impact total implementation costs; , required resources, modest size, easily mobilized. 34 FFigure 22. Estimated total implementation costs (LDCs -LDCs) (millions $) countries, costs estimated $10 million, countries $10 million $15 million slightly $15 million. Figure 23. Distribution estimated total costs (millions $, number countries) observed results consistent findings gathered annex organizations separate field research. 2011 study World Bank focusing developing countries comparable range total cost implementation (, total maximum costs $ millions 2.4, 8 10.5 participating countries). linear correlation percentage implemented measures estimated implementation costs (World Bank, 2011). study OECD reported estimated implementation costs developing transition economies , ( $ millions), 4.5, 9, 15.5 24. country lowest estimated costs LDC country highest estimates (Moïé, 2013, . 12). case implementation times, linear correlation level current implementation total implementation costs. established tendency costs higher ambitious implementation times considered (Figure 24). 35 FFigure 24. Estimated costs level compliance case estimated implementation times, costs implementing individual trade facilitation measures vary largely depending country. , cost estimates 36 measures (Table 5 Figure 25). Table 5: Estimated costs trade facilitation measures (thousands $) Measure Minimum Median Average Maximum 1.Publication 24 100 785 3000 2.Information Internet 25 100 382 1280 3.Enquiry Points 40 82 228 1000 5.Interval publ entry 2.4 10 12 24 6.Comment Legis 5 24 55 250 7.Consultations 13 28 62 250 8.Advance Ruling 4.5 35 63 200 9. Appeal 1.1 18 34 100 11.Import/Rapid Alerts 4.5 180 588 2400 12.Detention 1.1 9 18 50 13.Test Procedures 3.4 277 2428 8100 14.Disciplines Fees/Charges 10 36 235 1000 15.Penalty Disciplines 1.1 1.1 1 1.1 16.Pre-arrival Processing 1.1 59.5 47 66 17.Sep/Release/Payment 1.1 10 12 25 18.Risk Management 2.3 98.25 234 1000 19.Post-clearance Audit 1.7 73.5 96 310 20.Av. Release Times 1.7 26.875 39 100 21.Authorized Operators 1.7 100 117 250 22.Expedited Shipments 1.7 22.5 37 100 24.Border Agency Coop 6 32 635 4000 25.Decl Transhipped Goods 200 850 850 1500 26.Review Form/Docs 14 30 28 39 27.Reduction Form/Docs 5.6 40 320 2000 28.Int Standards 4.5 34 28 50 29.Single Window 4.5 200 3133 10000 30.Elim Pre-PostShip Exp 45 68.5 69 92 31.Customs Brokers 12 110.5 133 300 32. Border Proc 16 23 23 30 36 33.Uniform Forms Doc 24 24 24 24 34.Opt Return Goods 24 62 62 100 36. Outward Proc 1.1 1.1 1 1.1 37.Freedom Transit 24 32 54 107 38.Customs Cooperation 3.4 18 24 50 39.Nat TF 4 50 45 100 FFigure 25. Average costs trade facilitation measures (thousands $) Figure 26, average cost large majority trade facilitation measures (63 cent) estimated $100,000, implement (6 cent total) investments ranging $2 million $4 million needed. measures single window test procedures (including, , test equipment facilities perceived required). Figure 26: Distribution measures based average costs (thousands $) measures, represent combination measures requiring intensive domestic, cross-border regional cooperation / infrastructure ICT investments, estimated costly fully implement (Table 6). 37 TTable 6. Ten measures highest estimated implementation costs (average) 1. Single Window(measure 29) 2. Test Procedures(measure 13) 3. Decl Transhipped Goods(measure 25) 4. Publication(measure 1) 5. Border Agency Coop(measure 24) 6. Import Alerts/Rapid Alerts(measure 11) 7. Information Internet(measure 2) 8. Reduction Form/Docs (measure 27) 9. Disciplines Fees Charges(measure 14) 10. Risk Management(measure 18) ranking coincides, excluding misperceived test procedures, experts’ countries’ qualitative assessments set- cost selected trade facilitation measures, reported earlier studies, ranked single window, risk management, online publication, border agencies cooperation measures highest expected set- costs (Duval, 2006; Moïé, 2013). time, important bear mind measures , cases, large number measures, implementations costs estimated including actions reaching compliance proposed WTO requirements. measure test procedures (measure 13), mentioned , countries included costly upgrading existing test laboratories customs, ministries agriculture agencies concerned, WTO text, analyzed version, easily implemented simply adjusting existing procedures administrative acceptance results confirmatory test existing accredited test laboratory. Finally, noted 6 top 10 measures, , measures 11, 13, 14, 24, 14 29, belong previously identified top 10 measures highest estimated implementation times. , basic correlation analysis times costs estimates measures suggest clear negative positive correlation estimated times costs. . Conclusions chapter II results countries’ estimates terms implementation priorities, times costs provide valuable inputs countries planning carry trade facilitation reforms support reforms developing countries. large number proposed measures considered important economic development countries recognized high priority. , countries considered position implement measures -year period. estimated financial resources required implementation remain modest, light substantial continuous increase international aid trade facilitation related TACB. findings largely consistent experts’ views studies declarations annex organizations costs times considered reforms. UNCTAD included information cost estimates reported national implementation plan, important mind estimates 38 depend range conditions. country starting point (level implementation achieved), size economy price levels. , countries starting similar bases, cost estimates vary, depending : level ambition: country aim compliant, aim seizing opportunity implement ambitious trade facilitation reforms. , modernizing larger number border posts, setting national laboratories significant cost implications; speed implementation: Aiming quick results costly time implementing measure progressively. , aiming setting single window stakeholders involved beginning costly starting limited key agencies allowing join stage. cases, , longer implementation times bring higher costs; national international expertise: country aims working largely national experts existing staff implement reforms cost depending international procurement expertise. essential bear mind discussions potential costs trade facilitation measures revealed large number factors influencing estimates, , depending situation, lead -estimation inflation costs. factors include total absence capacities implementation measure; insufficient understanding scope measure WTO requirements; link proposed measure existing trade transport infrastructure issues; difficulty isolating actions required full implementation modernization reforms. factors lead - -estimation difficulties reforms, depending situation country, deserve careful consideration making time cost estimates. conclusion, results lessons learned development national implementation plans highlight importance carefully situation country resisting danger assessing costs time requirements simply based country’ development status high percentage implemented measures. factors play estimating time resource requirements; impact linear. current progress WTO trade facilitation negotiations, developing countries decide measures request additional implementation periods duration measures require TACB magnitude. exchange countries’ experience area tailored advice advanced countries agencies delivering TACB ensure developing countries accurately assess respect adjust ambitions. chapter considers countries’ intentions SDT envisaged WTO trade facilitation negotiations. 39 CHAPTER III assistance: Expressed special differential treatment Devising innovative SDT developing developed countries major challenges ongoing trade facilitation negotiations WTO (UNCTAD, 2011, . 45). current proposal table seeks flexibility terms implementation periods, scope undertaken legal obligations link receiving TACB. Concretely, WTO draft consolidated negotiating text proposes developing countries’ commitment contained trade facilitation measures classified categories : Category : Provisions developing member designates implementation entry force agreement; Category : Provisions developing member designates implementation date transitional period time entry force agreement; Category : Provisions developing member designates implementation date requiring transitional period time entry force agreement technical / financial assistance support capacity-building. full advantage proposed SDT requires developing developed countries capacity accurately anticipate terms total implementation times, required TACB. project activities participating countries, major trade facilitation stakeholders engaged identifying measures SDT requested form, , additional implementation time additional time technical financial assistance. chapter summarizes main findings terms : () Estimated range measures expected SDT; () priorities terms TACB. . Measures expected included requests special differential treatment categorizations expressed national implementation plans, developing countries intend significant WTO SDT implementation trade facilitation reforms. true LDCs. Figure 27, percentage measures require additional time additional time TACB ranges 10 cent 67 cent. majority countries LDCs, measures constitute, , measures included draft WTO text. 40 FFigure 27. Percentages measures requiring STD (categories ) , shown Figure 28, majority countries (14 26), including LDCs, considered TACB ( terms percentage measures TACB delays requested) higher additional implementation time. case quarters LDCs (8 11) -LDCs (6 15). Figure 28. SDT expressed countries individual trade facilitation measures, analysis shows SDT expressed participating countries (Figure 29). 41 FFigure 29. Expressed SDT measure 0 20 40 60 80 100 335.TempAdmission 36. Outward Proc 23.Prohib Cons Trans 33.Uniform FormsDoc 25.Decl Transhipped Goods 30.Elim Pre-PostShip Exp 32. Border Proc 17.Sep/Release/Payment 37.Freedom Transit 22.Expedited Shipments 34.Opt Return Goods 15.Penalty Disciplines 10.Appeal Custom Union 16.Pre-arrival Processing 28.Int Standards 38.Customs Cooperation 31.Customs Brokers 9. Appeal 39.Nat TF 12.Detention 11.Import/Rapid Alerts 19.Post-clearance Audit 5.Interval publ entry 18.Risk Management 26.Review Form/Docs 27.Reduction Form/Docs 6.Comment Legis 7.Consultations 20.Av. Release Times 1.Publication 24.Border AgencyCoop 14.Disciplines Fees/Charges 21.Authorized Operators 8.Advance Ruling 13.Test Procedures 3.Enquiry Points 2.Information Internet 29.Single Window Countries (percentage) TACB Additional time 42 expressed SDT measure largely correspond implementation challenges identified chapter 1, , measures lowest implementation levels developing countries (Table 1). . priorities terms technical assistance capacity-building draft consolidated negotiating text WTO establishes clear link developing countries’ commitment implement trade facilitation measure acquisition implementation capacity receiving TACB. , demand TACB met volume, nature coverage aid international community. consolidated results national implementation plans shed light requests TACB expected developing countries. Figure 30 illustrates percentage measures require TACB ranges (8 cent) significant (48 cent) part measures depending country. FFigure 30. Percentage measures requiring TACB expected, level foreseen request TACB strongly linked level country’ development , , higher LDCs (Figure 31). 11 participating LDCs plan request TACB 30 50 cent measures. 43 FFigure 31. Planned requests TACB individual trade facilitation measures , TACB considered highest 10 measures (Table 7), correspond measures lowest implementation levels (chapter 1, Table 1) represent combination measures requiring intensive domestic cross-border cooperation, / infrastructure ICT investments / advanced customs techniques: Table 7. Top 10 measures highest estimated TACB 1. Single Window (measure 29) 2. Test Procedures (measure 13) 3. Information Internet (measure 2) 4. Border Agency Coop (measure 24) 5. Advance Ruling (measure 8) 6. Enquiry Points(measure 3) 7. Disciplines Fees/Charges(measure 14) 8. Publication(measure 1) 9. Reduction Form/Docs (measure 27) 10. Risk Management (measure 18) 44 -LDCs LDCs TACB,5 trade facilitation measures concerned, identical largely shown Figure 32 , ranks measures TACB expressed LDCs. FFigure 32. Requests TACB LDCs -LDCs top 10 measures requiring TACB LDCs - LDCs (Figure 33). 5 section, assessed terms “TACB requirements measure” entering detail actual requirements terms skills, knowledge, training, technology, , differ significantly categories countries individually. 45 FFigure 33. Top 10 measures requiring TACB (LDCs -LDCs) appears countries expect significantly rely SDT, terms additional implementation times tailored TACB, large number trade facilitation measures. essential demand met agencies, countries regional groupings provide assistance. . Conclusions chapter III positive development trade facilitation area decades growing recognition importance trade facilitation reforms international community , , growing volume aid allocated reforms. figures OECD, aid flows trade facilitation increased 400 cent 2002 (OECD Development Cooperation Directorate, 2012). volume international aid trade facilitation important subject WTO trade facilitation negotiations draft consolidated negotiating text proposals specific reporting tools donors. experience projects national implementation plans shows measures require assistance , country , major areas, requests assistance , identified. analysis current implementation levels, expressed SDT, suggests , financial assistance address ICT infrastructure issues, wide range activities needed effectively enhance trade facilitation implementation developing countries. nature trade facilitation measures, assistance required, activities include: Awareness-raising training trade facilitation related issues entire community trade facilitation stakeholders, public private sectors; Reinforcing domestic institutions promoting good governance; Building trust cooperation administrations private sector; Extensive training staff administration concerned traders. LDCs 11.Import/Rapid Alerts 18. Risk Management 27.Red/FormandDocs 1 Publication 2. Information /Internet 3. Enquiry Points 8. Advance ruling 13. Test Procedures 24. Border AgencyCoop 29. Single Window -LDCs 10. Appeal Custom Union 14. Disciplines FeesCharges 20. Av. Release Times 46 successful implementation considered trade facilitation reforms, developing countries fully met , ensuring sheer volume aid assigned trade facilitation, donors adjust nature scope assistance programmes specific exact areas, assistance needed. 47 CHAPTER IV specific implementation tools: Customs automations systems national trade facilitation committees discussing potential implementation issues, project participating countries highlighted elements, considered importance success considered trade facilitation reforms, .. Customs automation systems role national trade facilitation committees. section offers insights accounts, based countries’ assessment analysis current planned implementation activities. . Trade facilitation customs automation systems Information communications technology customs automation systems, , key tools implementing enhancing operation trade facilitation disciplines. , cases, customs automation closely simplification procedures. Customs automation systems important tool implementing trade facilitation reforms. illustrated UNCTAD ASYCUDA programme, operational 90 developing countries. Table 8 Table 9, ASYCUDA ICT tools implementing majority trade facilitation measures (28) analysed 38 measures. ASYCUDA instrumental implementation measures: TTable 8. List trade facilitation measures benefit ASYCUDA Measure 8. Advance Ruling Measure 16.Pre-arrival Processing Measure 17.Sep/Release/Payment Measure 18. Risk Management Measure 19. Post-clearance Audit Measure 20. Av. Release Times Measure 21.Authorized Operators Measure 22.Expedited Shipments Measure 24.Border AgencyCoop Measure 25. Decl/Transhipped Measure 28. IntStandards Measure 29.Single Window Measure 32. /Border Proc Measure 33. UniformFormsDoc Measure 34.OptReturnGoods Measure 35. TempAdmission Measure 36. Inward_OutwardProc Measure 37. Freedom Transit 48 TTa bl 9 . se SY CU DA fo pl em en tin tra de fa cil ita tio fo rm ea su ai ls 1. Pu bl ic io 2. fo rm io av ai la bl ro ug te rn SY nt ra te ts ys te ra de el ed la tio (ta rif fs , ee , im po rt– po rt pr oc ed ur es , tc ). ro ug te rfa ce SY ay li nk fo rm io ov er nm en ta eb si te ak av ai la bl ub lic ro ug te rn . pl : da 3. En qu iry oi nt os si bl sp ec ia er ro fil es ne ct SY ak qu iri es bo ut pp lic ab le ar iff du tie , cl si fic io , tc . 4. ot ifi ca tio 5. te rv al ee pu bl ic io en fo rc 6. pp tu ni ty om en ne en de ru le 7. su lta tio ns 8. dv ce ru lin SY fa ci lit es tre en dv ce ru lin , ot ab ly , ith sp ec ta rif la ss ifi ca tio va lu io . 9. ig ht pp ea 10 . pp ea ec ha ni sm 11 . po rt al er ts /ra pi al er ts SY ak es os si bl , ro ug te gr sy st em el ec tio cr ite ria , le ct ro ni al er ot ifi ca tio ns ot ith tw ee ve rn en ta ge nc , el ir pr om pt te rm io . 12 . en tio SY ro vi de te ch ni ca oo om ic ith pe te nt ut ho rit po rte , ce ne ce ss ar pr ot oc ol ee es ta bl pe te nt ut ho rit de nt ifi ed . 13 . es ro ce du 14 . ci pl es fe es ch ar ge im po se nn ec tio ith im po rta tio po rta tio SY ro vi de ea su rin st ep - - st ep oo al cu la te im ur ce sp en ar io ha se cl ea ra nc pr oc es (. . im ne ce ss ar al id cu st om de cl ar io ) , , lp es tim st se op er io ns . 15 . en al ty ci pl es SY ro vi de ol fo pl em en tin pe na lti es ci pl es , ro ug “ te nt io ut om ed ys te ”. ay st ab lis di ffe nt sa nc tio ns cc di ng se ve rit fra ct io pa st tra ve nt io ns . 16 . - rr iv al ro ce ss El ec tro ni pr - ar riv al ro ce ss ta ar fu nc tio na lit fe SY ys te , ks sp ec ia lly el ith lia bl im po rte rs . 17 . ep ar io le fro fi na er io pa ym en ut , ta xe , fe es ha rg es st da fu nc tio na lit fe SY ks sp ec ia lly el ith gi st er ed tr te tra de rs . 18 . ag em en st da fu nc tio na lit fe SY . 19 .[ Po st - le ar ce ud ] [ ud ] ta ar fu nc tio na lit fe SY . ts fo rm io da ta ba se ed pl fu tu os - le ar ce ud ed se el ev cr ite ria , ha es ul ts ith er ge nc , er im po rta nt ly , su lts ud pd ris pa ra er ri sk ag em en . 49 20 . st ab lis hm en ub lic io ve ra ge le tim es SY llo ea su rin pr oc es si ng ti aj le ar ce te ps ( nl oa di ng , nt ry de cl ar io , al id io le oo ds ). ow ev er , fo rm io av ai la bl es ot nc lu de xa ct ea ns ve nt ua de la ys ; ig ht ar ac ea tr sp se . 21 .[ ut ho riz ed pe ra rs ] ag au iz ed pe ra rs st da fu nc tio na lit fe SY . 22 . xp ed ite sh ip en ts ag pe di te sh ip en ts st da ct io na lit fe SY . sy st em ag es xp ed ite sh ip en ts ty pe ut ho riz ed pe ra rs . 23 . ro bi tio su la ra ns ac tio qu ire en 24 . de ge nc op er io SY ro vi de pl fo rm nt er - ge nc op er io ot na tio na ( gl , di na te ris ag em en , jo sp ec tio ns ) cr os - bo er ev el . te ro pe ra bi lit ch ge fo rm io ca ea si ly ac ev ed ve ot ou nt rie se SY , hr ou gh es sa ge ; ve ou gh op er io ve fa ci lit ed ey . 25 . ec la ra tio tr sh ip pe tr si oo ds ag es tic tr si st da fu nc tio na lit fe SY 26 . ev al iti es oc um en ta tio qu ire en ts Ea ch st al la tio da te SY sy st em ea ns ap pi ng tin fo rm al iti es cu en ta tio qu ire en ts im po rt, xp tr si . ur pe ra tio , ro vi de ur ce gr ap pr es en ta tio di ffe nt st ep oc um en ts ac st ep ro ce du . 27 . ed uc tio lim ita tio fo rm al iti es Ea ch ns ta lla tio pd SY ys te al op po rtu ni ty si pl ify xi st fo rm al iti es cu en ta tio qu ire en ts fo po rt, xp tr si . 28 . se nt er na tio na ta ar ds te rn io na st da , su ch od el LK nt ra pa rts SY ys te . ew st da ea si ly te gr ed , ee de . 29 . gl SY ro vi de lid la tfo rm ul ly le dg ed gl ys te , nv ol vi ng el ev ve rn en ta ag en ci es til iz fu lly IC ur ce xp er tis av ai la bl fro . 30 . lim io - pm en / po st - pm en ns pe ct io ns 31 . se ro ke rs SY llo nn ec tin di vi du al ic pe ra rs ur po se fil lin ub itt cu st om de cl ar io ns . ov er nm en ta ut ho rit ag sy st em rig ht iv ac ce ss ny er ge nt ou ld ne ce ss ar ily ro ke . 32 . om de ro ce du [ qu ire en ts ] tro du ci ng SY ll bo er - ro ss po ts , om de pr oc ed ur es oc um en ta eq ui en ts cu st om ur po se ns ur ed , sy st em pd ed en tra lly si ul ta ne ou sl . 33 . ni fo rm fo rm oc um en ta tio qu ire en ts [] Se su pr 34 . pt io tu rn je ct ed oo ds po rte st da fu nc tio na lit fe SY . 35 . em po ra ry dm si oo ds st da fu nc tio na lit fe SY . 36 . nw ar ut ar Pr oc es si ng st da fu nc tio na lit fe SY . 37 . ed om ra ns ev id en ce xi st pl es ( EX , ES ), SY ffe rs ol id te ch ni ca ol ut io fo em fu lly au ed ila te ra , gi al ul til er al tr si ys te , im ite tri es si ng SY . 38 . oo pe ra tio ch ge nt er op er ab ili ty da ta fa ci lit ed SY , pr ov id ed ha ne ce ss ar gu la ry fra ew la ce . 39 . io na om itt ee tra de fa ci lit io 50 time, conclusions work national trade facilitation implementation plans availability suitable customs automation system, important, achieve implementation . facilities offered system, observable link trade facilitation implementation customs automated system (Figure 34). countries ASYCUDA distributed evenly countries participating project lowest highest implementation levels. FFigure 34. ASYCUDA full implementation levels (percentage) shown Figure 35, level compliance measures, implementation facilitated ASYCUDA (listed Table 9) high countries system. time, -implementation level remains high measures, including advance ruling, single window, measuring average release times, authorized operators, benefit technological functionality customs automated system proper rules procedures adopted. Figure 35. -implementation level selected measures (ASYCUDA countries) national implementation plans, countries referred possibilities offered ASYCUDA system, observing lack managerial decision lack suitable legal framework prevented full advantage 51 system’ extensive functionalities. case trade facilitation measures listed , facilitated ASYCUDA, rate -implementation remains high countries system. , fully implemented measures require, addition technical solution, robust institutional legal framework. important note, , availability ICT resources constituting sufficient condition implementing trade facilitation reforms. time, upgrading ICT systems country hand hand substantive regulatory policy reform , cases, countries reported intention planned migration latest version ASYCUDA system opportunity introduce considered trade facilitation reforms, including customs centric single window. . role impact national trade facilitation committees key tool implementing trade facilitation reforms, role highlighted national discussions, national trade facilitation committee. envisaged WTO negotiators, cooperative platform set member country entrusted facilitating domestic coordination implementation provisions WTO Trade Facilitation Agreement. Working national implementation plans, countries pointed , light traditional role national trade facilitation bodies, committee play key role reaching compliance specific trade facilitation measures. committee’ role implementation measures highlighted: Measure 7. Consultations Measure 18. Risk management Measure 20. Av. release times Measure 24. Border agency coop Measure 26. Review form docs Measure 27. Reduction form docs Measure 29. Single window UNCTAD extensive experience national trade facilitation bodies (UNCTAD, 2006). UNCTAD repository national trade facilitation bodies forty detailed case-studies developing countries. international organizations dealing trade facilitation issues time recognized national trade facilitation committees support creation operation developed developing countries (World Bank, 2011; Duval, 2006; Economic Social Commission Asia Pacific Asian Development Bank, 2009; Economic Commission Europe, 2001). 52 project execution independent conclusions countries level implementation measure 39 national trade facilitation committee, opportunity assess functioning bodies participating countries. 26 participating countries, 14 national trade facilitation body6 place, representing functioning group main trade facilitation stakeholders met regularly discuss trade facilitation issues, including measures negotiated WTO (Figure 36). interesting note , shown graph , countries (blue columns) tend perform terms trade facilitation implementation measured percentage fully implemented TF measures. FFigure 36. Full compliance level countries national trade facilitation body place , countries estimated committees fully functional carry tasks stipulated draft WTO text. countries (16 26) considered incipient partially functioning committee reported mechanism place (Figure 37). 6 term “national trade facilitation body” , opposed national trade facilitation committee, referred WTO text, designate private–public body stakeholders dealing trade facilitation issues large. 53 FFigure 37. State national trade facilitation bodies participating countries , lack effective capacity national trade facilitation committees widely acknowledged majority countries expressed clear TACB setting bodies making operational. acute LDCs, (8 11) fully functional national trade facilitation body. time, number countries recognized pivotal role institution coordination successful implementation trade facilitation reforms considered , partial level implementation, subscribe obligation creating operating committee time agreement enters force. 31 cent countries estimated functional committee, 46 cent countries trade facilitation stakeholders considered commit setting body time agreement’ entry force (Figure 38). 54 FFigure 38. Proposed commitments national trade facilitation committees expected TACB set reinforce existing national trade facilitation committee increasingly demand developing countries prior entry force eventual WTO Trade Facilitation Agreement. . Conclusions chapter IV Success carrying trade facilitation reforms relies making proper specific implementation tools. , , ICT ( customs automation systems ), national trade facilitation committees, stand terms impact quality sustainability introduced . Customs automation systems sufficient condition trade facilitation reforms underestimating impact aspects, legal, regulatory institutional transformations significantly reduce benefits reforms slow halt pace. Discussing adjusting scope reform national trade facilitation committee ways ensure sufficient consideration large number interests, resources, actors, constraints goals involved trade facilitation reform. handful developing countries clear minority LDCs structures place efforts nationally internationally support reinforce mechanisms. 55 Conclusions reported results relate sample developing countries, policy implications drawn terms implementing trade facilitation reforms framework future WTO Trade Facilitation Agreement: Trade facilitation remains major challenge developing countries LDCs : 50 cent considered trade facilitation measures fully implemented majority developing countries level implementation LDCs, large majority 40 cent implementation level; challenging trade facilitation measures remain implemented: cross-sectoral inter-agency measures, single window, enquiry points, publication, disciplines fees charges, advanced customs techniques, advance ruling authorized operators, constitute main -compliance areas developing countries LDCs. measures challenging demanding terms required level inter-agency cooperation sophistication institutional, legal regulatory frameworks; Lack resources appears significant obstacle trade facilitation implementation: lack resources quoted main reasons -implementation trade facilitation measures. time, frequently quoted reason, including LDCs, lack existing suitable legal framework. highlights benefit international legal agreement providing -needed regulatory framework large number practiced trade facilitation measures, legal footing achieve level full implementation; estimated costs implementation times considered trade facilitation reforms place implementation trade facilitation measures proposed WTO agreement reasonable time financial requirements: , accurately accessing costs time requirements challenging task estimations expectations based current implementation development level country; SDT treatment acute careful examination: implementation trade facilitation measures, countries expect rely significantly SDT offered WTO. international community meet demand, volume nature, paying due attention LDCs; importance fundamental trade facilitation tools: ICTs component trade facilitation reforms, suffice. challenges successful implementation lay increasingly robust institutional setting involvement trade facilitation stakeholders. national trade facilitation committees crucial creation operations proactively supported international community. 56 highlighted challenges trade facilitation implementation developing countries argument favour legally binding trade facilitation agreement WTO. , developing countries LDCs implementing trade facilitation measures. achieve progress, international legal regime area, combined SDT, matching required assistance actual significantly developing WTO members. 57 References Arvis -, Duval , Shepherd , Utoktham (2013). Trade costs developing world, 1995–2010. World Bank policy research work paper . 6309. World Bank. http://elibrary.worldbank.org/doi/pdf/10.1596/1813-9450-6309 (accessed 2 June 2014). Duval (2006). Cost benefits implementing trade facilitation measures negotiations WTO: exploratory survey. Asia-Pacific Research Training Network Trade working paper series . 3. ARTNet. Economic Social Commission Asia Pacific Asian Development Bank (2009). Designing Implementing Trade Facilitation Asia Pacific. Asian Development Bank, Philippines. Economic Commission Europe (2001). National Trade Facilitation Bodies. Recommendation . 4, adopted United Nations Centre Trade Facilitation Electronic Business. Geneva. October. Moïé (2013). costs challenges implementing trade facilitation measures. OECD trade policy papers . 157. OECD Publishing. Moïé Sorescu (2013). Trade facilitation indicators: potential impact trade facilitation developing countries’ trade. OECD trade policy papers . 144. OECD Publishing. OECD Development Cooperation Directorate (2012). Aid trade facilitation. OECD. WTO Symposium Trade Facilitation, Geneva, 11 July 2012. UNCTAD (1964). Proceedings United Nations Conference Trade Development, Geneva, 23 March–16 June. United Nations, York. UNCTAD (2006). Trade Facilitation Handbook, Part , National Facilitation Bodies: Lessons Experience. United Nations publications. UNCTAD/SDTE/TLB/2005/1. York Geneva. UNCTAD (2011). Reflections Future Trade Facilitation Agreement: Implementation WTO Obligations. Comparison Existing WTO Provisions. Transport Trade Facilitation Series . 2. United Nations publication. UNCTAD/DTL/TLB/2010/2. York Geneva. UNCTAD (2013). Review Maritime Transport 2012. United Nations publication. UNCTAD/RMT/2012. York Geneva. Wang Duval (2013). Trade facilitation paperless trade Asia: Results expert survey. Trade Investment Division staff working paper. ESCAP. Bangkok. World Bank (2011). Practical experience implementing trade facilitation reforms, including costs benefits. Gap assessment study. Geneva. http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tradfa_e/case_studies_e/symp_agendanov11_e.htm 58 59 ne 1: Li st ra de fa ci lit io ea su ov er ed po rt rt ic le 7 ea su Sh ef er en ce Pu bl ic io av ai la bi lit fo rm io rti cl 1, ar . 1 Pu bl ic io 1. Pu bl ic io rti cl 1, ar . 2 fo rm io av ai la bl ro ug te rn 2. fo rm io te rn rti cl 1, ar . 3 En qu iry oi nt 3. En qu iry oi nt rti cl 1, ar . 4 ot ifi ca tio 4. ot ifi ca tio Pr io ub lic io ns ul ta tio rti cl 2, ar . 1 te rv al ee pu bl ic io en fo rc 5. te rv al ub nt ry rti cl 2, ar . 2 pp tu ni ty om en ne en de ru le 6. om en ne le gi rti cl 2, ar . 3 su lta tio ns 7. su lta tio ns dv ce ru lin rti cl 3 Pr ov io dv ce ru lin 8. dv ce ru lin pp ea [ vi ew ] ro ce du rti cl 4, ar . 1 ig ht pp ea 9. ig ht pp ea rti cl 4, ar . 2 pp ea ec ha ni sm [ cu st om ni ][ TO em ] 10 . pp ea cu st om ni er ea su en ha nc im pa rti al ity , - di sc rim io tra ns pa nc rti cl 5, ar . 1 Im po rt al er ts /ra pi al er ts 11 . po rt/ ra pi al er ts rti cl 5, ar . 1 en tio 12 . en tio rti cl 5, ar . 3 Te st ro ce du 13 . es ro ce du ci pl es fe es ha rg es im po se nn ec tio ith im po rta tio po rta tio rti cl 6, ar . 1 ci pl es fe es ha rg es im po se nn ec tio ith im po rta tio po rta tio 14 . ci pl es fe es / ha rg es rti cl 6, ar . 2 Pe na lty ci pl es 15 . en al ty ci pl es el ea se le ar ce oo ds rti cl 7, ar . 1 Pr - ar riv al ro ce ss 16 . - rr iv al ro ce ss rti cl 7, ar . 2 Se pa ra tio le fr om fi na er io pa ym en ut , ta xe , fe es ha rg es 17 . ep / le / pa ym en rti cl 7, ar . 3 ag em en 18 . ag em en rti cl 7, ar . 4 [ os - le ar ce ud ] [ ud ] 19 . os - le ar ce ud rti cl 7, ar . 5 Es ta bl hm en ub lic io ve ra ge le tim es 20 . . le tim es 7 ed TN / / /1 65 / ev .1 2. 60 rt ic le 7 ea su Sh ef er en ce rti cl 7, ar . 6 [ ut ho riz ed pe ra rs ] 21 . ut ho riz ed pe ra rs rti cl 7, ar . 7 pe di te sh ip en ts 22 . xp ed ite sh ip en ts su la riz io rti cl 8 Pr ib iti su la ra ns ac tio qu ire en 23 . ro ns tr de ge nc op er io rti cl 9 de ge nc op er io 24 . de ge nc yc oo ec la ra tio tr sh ip pe tr si od ] [ om es tic tr si ] rti cl 9b ec la ra tio tr sh ip pe tr si oo ds ] [ es tic tra ns ] 25 . ec tra ns pp ed oo ds Fo rm al iti es ne ct ed ith im po rta tio po rta tio rti cl 10 , ar . 1 ev al iti es oc um en ta tio qu ire en ts 26 . ev / oc rti cl 10 , ar . 2 ed uc tio / lim ita tio fo rm al iti es oc um en ta tio qu ire en ts 27 . ed uc tio fo rm / oc rti cl 10 , ar . 3 se nt er na tio na ta ar ds 28 . ta ar ds rti cl 10 , ar . 4 Si ng le 29 . gl rti cl 10 , ar . 5 [ lim io ] [ da ry ] - pm en [ po st - sh ip en ns pe ct io ns ] 30 . lim - os ts rti cl 10 , ar . 6 se ro ke rs 31 . ro ke rs rti cl 10 , ar . 7 om de ro ce du [ qu ire en ts ] 32 . om de ro rti cl 10 , ar . 8 ni fo rm fo rm oc um en ta tio qu ire en ts la tin le ar ce ] 33 . ni fo rm fo rm oc rti cl 10 , ar . 9 pt io tu rn je ct ed oo ds po rte 34 . pt tu rn oo ds rti cl 10 , ar . 10 Te po ra ry dm si oo ds 35 . em ad si rti cl 10 , ar . 11 ar ou tw ar pr oc es sin 36 . ar ou tw ar pr oc Fr ee ra ns rti cl 11 Fr ee ra ns 37 . ed om ra ns oo pe ra tio rti cl 12 oo pe ra tio 38 . oo pe ra tio io na om itt ee tra de fa ci lit io rti cl 14 io na om itt ee tra de fa ci lit io 39 . 61 ne 2: ou nt rie ov er ed po rt ou nt ry io ev . ta tu eo gr ap hy tr ad fa ci lit io ne ed ss es sm en Pr oj ec ea 1. ng ol es fr ic LD ov '0 8 TA 2. nt ig ua ar bu da Ea st ar ib ev el op SI Ju ne - ec '08 TA / EC 3. ah ra es si ev el op ct ’0 9 TA / 4. gl ad es ut si LD ct '0 7 TA / EC 5. en es fr ic LD pr il' 08 TA 6. hu ta * ut si LD La lo ck ed TA 7. ur ki na es fr ic LD La lo ck ed ct '0 8 TA 8. ur di Ea st fr ic LD La lo ck ed ov '0 7 TA 9. om ic Ea st ar ib ev el op SI Ju ne - ec '08 TA / EC 10 . om ic ep ub lic en tra er ic ev el op ec '0 8 TA / 11 . ab es fr ic ev el op Ju ly '0 8 TA / 12 . na da Ea st ar ib ev el op SI Ju ne - ec '08 TA / EC 13 . ua te al en tra er ic ev el op ar ch '0 8 TA 14 . Jo id dl Ea st ev el op ec '0 7 TA 15 . ep al ut si LD La lo ck ed pr il' 08 TA 16 . ic ar ag ua en tra er ic ev el op pr il 09 TA 17 . Pa ki st ut si ev el op Ju ne 0 8 TA / 18 . Pa ra gu ay ut er ic ev el op La lo ck ed ov '0 7 TA 19 . da Ea st fr ic LD La lo ck ed ar ch '0 8 TA 20 . Sa itt ev Ea st ar ib ev el op SI Ju ne - ec '08 TA / EC 21 . Sa uc ia Ea st ar ib ev el op SI Ju ne - ec '08 TA / EC 22 . Sa ce nt na di ne Ea st ar ib ev el op SI Ju ne - ec '08 TA / EC 23 . Su da * fr ic LD ct '0 9 TA / TO 24 . Su ri na ut er ic ev el op Fe ' 09 TA 25 . za ni Ea st fr ic LD ct ’0 7 TA 26 . ga Ea st fr ic LD La lo ck ed ov '0 7 TA * TO bs er ve ; = ld . Printed United Nations, Geneva – 1409011 () – August 2014 – 411 – UNCTAD/DTL/TLB/2013/2