RESTRICTED  
  
WT/COMTD/SE/M/44  
 
23 May 2023  
(23-3519) Page: 1/17 
Committee on Trade and Development  
Forty -Fourth Dedicated Session    
 
NOTE ON THE MEETING OF 30 MARCH 2023  
Chairperson: H.E. Ms Usha Chandnee Dwarka -Canabady (Mauritius)  
 
A. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA  ................................ ................................ ....................  1 
B. INTEGRATING SMALL ECONOMIES INTO THE POST COVID -19 ECONOMY: EFFECTS 
OF THE PANDEMIC, CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES – BACKGROUND NOTE BY THE 
SECRETARIAT (WT/ COMTD/SE/W/45)  ................................ ................................ ............  1 
C. OTHER BUSINESS  ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 16 
ANNEX 1  ................................ ................................ ................................ ........................  17 
 
A. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA  
1. The Chairperson  said that, before turning to the draft agenda for the 44th Dedicated Session 
on Small Economies of the Committee on Trade and Development (CTD) , she wished to request all 
delegations that would speak at the present meeting to email their statements to: ctd@wto.org . 
As this was the first meeting of the CTD's Dedicated Session on Small Economies in which she was 
informing delegations of this method to submit statements, she wanted her words on this matter to 
be reflected in the minutes of the meeting. Submitting statements to this email address would allow 
a more efficient preparation of the minutes of the meeting by the Secretariat. She thanked all 
delegations for doing so in the context of the present meeting, as well as in the context of future 
meetings of the CTD's Dedicated Session on Small Economies.  
2. The draft agenda as contained in Airgram WTO/AIR/COMTD/SE/16  of 2 March 2023 was 
adopted . 
B. INTEGRATING SMALL ECONOMIES INTO THE POST COVID -19 ECONOMY: EFFECTS 
OF THE PANDEMIC, CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES – BACKGROUND NOTE BY THE 
SECRETARIAT (WT/COMTD/SE/W/45)  
3. The Chairperson  said that, at the Twelfth WTO Ministerial Conference (MC12) held in June 
2022, a Ministerial Decision was taken on the Work Programme on Small Economies (WT/MIN(22)/25 
- WT/L/1136). The Ministerial Decision contained, inter alia , a reaffirmation of Member s' commitment 
at Ministerial level to the Work Programme on Small Economies. Note was taken of all the work 
conducted to date, and the CTD was instructed to continue its work in the Dedicated Session on 
Small Economies under the overall responsibility of t he General Council. The Dedicated Session was 
to continue monitoring the progress of the small economy proposals in WTO bodies and in 
negotiating groups with the aim of providing responses, as soon as possible, to the trade -related 
issues identified for th e fuller integration of small, vulnerable economies (SVEs) into the multilateral 
trading system. In terms of future work in the Dedicated Session, the Decision instructed the 
WTO Secretariat to provide relevant information and factual analysis for discussi on among Members 
on the topic of "integrating small economies into the post COVID -19 economy: effects of the 
pandemic, challenges and opportunities." A Secretariat background note on this topic was circulated 
on 14  February 2023 in document WT/COMTD/SE/W/45. This background note was based on an 
outline proposed by the SVE Group, which was agreed at the CTD's 43rd Dedicated Session on Small 
Economies held on 20  May 2022. The background note was the focus of the present meeting. 
She expressed a ppreciation to the Secretariat for having prepared such an in -depth statistical paper. WT/COMTD/SE/M/44  
 
- 2 - 
 
  Although this was not the first Secretariat paper to have been drafted to respond to a Ministerial 
mandate concerning the Work Programme on Small Economies, it had been prepared at a time when 
Secretariat resources available for studies of this nature had become scarce. She recalled that the 
scarcity of Secretariat resources for such studies was raised at the last formal meeting of the 
Dedicated Session. She then invited a representative of the Economic Research and Statistics 
Division (ERSD) to introduce the background note.  
4. The representative of the ERSD  said that the 33 members of the SVE Group were used as the 
basis for the statistical analysis in the Secretariat backg round note. For purposes of the document, 
the term "SVEs" referred to the members of the SVE Group. She indicated that she would begin her 
presentation by looking at long -term trade trends. Between 2010 and 2019, SVEs' merchandise 
export volume rose by 3% on average per year, while the import volume increased by 2.9%. Growth 
was slightly faster than for world trade, which averaged 2.7%. In value terms, SVEs' merchandise 
exports reached USD 136.6 billion in 2019. Exports had been rising by 2.7% on average pe r year 
since 2010. Merchandise imports were worth USD 207.4 billion, up by 3.1% on annual average, 
compared to 2.5% for the rest of the world. SVEs were net merchandise importers. Despite rapid 
growth, SVEs' participation in global merchandise exports rema ined well below 1% over the nine -
year period. The share of world imports rose from 1.02% in 2010 to 1.07% in 2019. One of the main 
reasons was that trade was concentrated on a few players. The ten leading exporters accounted for 
almost 82% of the group 's exports in 2019. Ecuador was the largest trader over the years, 
accounting for 16.3% of exports and 10.9% of imports in 2019. Trade was also concentrated on a 
few export markets. The main export market for SVEs was the United States, followed by the 
Europea n Union, China, Japan and Brazil. Imports were equally concentrated. The ten leading 
importers formed 75% of SVE imports in 2019. In terms of product composition, SVEs' merchandise 
exports were driven by primary commodities, with a share of almost 60% in 2 019. The share 
remained relatively stable over the period. Fuels, food products, ores and minerals were the main 
exported products in 2019. Among the SVEs, 17 were dependent on primary commodities for 
merchandise exports. Excluding fuels, SVEs had a low pa rticipation in trade in intermediate goods, 
which implied a low integration as a group in global supply chains. SVEs' share in intermediate goods 
stagnated at 0.6% for exports and 0.9% for imports. The main exported intermediate goods were 
gold, copper ore s, coffee, iron ores, methanol and palm oil. Papua New Guinea was the leading 
exporter in both 2010 and 2019.  
5. Turning to long -term trends in services trade, she said that SVEs were net services exporters. 
In 2019, their services exports were worth USD 84 b illion. Exports rose by 6% on average per year, 
compared to 5% for the rest of the world. Services imports rose from USD 33.7 billion in 2010 to 
USD 54.7 billion in 2019. Despite rapid growth in services exports, SVEs' participation in world 
services expor ts was negligible, standing at between 1.3% and 1.4% over the years. Their share 
was even lower on the import side, standing at 0.9% in 2019. Panama, Cuba and the 
Dominican  Republic were the leading services exporters in 2019. This was also the case in 201 0, 
although in a different order. Sri Lanka was the leading services importer in both 2010 and 2019. 
Many SVEs' economies were tourism driven. Travel formed over 55% of services exports in 2019, 
up from 48% in 2010. Because of this rapid growth, the partic ipation of SVEs in global travel exports 
reached 3.1% in 2019, up from 2.5% in 2010. The United States, the European Union and the 
United  Kingdom were the main export destinations. With regard to the impact of the COVID -19 
pandemic, she said that SVEs' mer chandise trade volume fell by 12.7% in 2020, which was more 
than the global decline of 5.3%. Export volume dropped by 8.4% and imports by 17%, as industrial 
activity declined due to COVID -19. In value terms, SVEs' merchandise exports declined by 10.7%, 
and imports by over 20%. This was significantly more than the 7.3% drop in the rest of the world. 
In 2021, SVEs' merchandise trade exceeded pre -pandemic levels due to high demand, rising 
commodity prices and supply chain disruptions. In mid -2022, SVEs' export s of fuels and mining 
products were 54% above 2019 levels in the same period, and agricultural products were 36% 
higher. The war in Ukraine added to supply -side issues in a context of high demand. According to 
the WTO forecast of October 2022, SVEs' export  volume growth was expected to slow to 3.2% in 
2023, and imports to 2.2%.  
6. She went on to say that the volatility in commodity prices had significant effects on SVEs' 
trade and gross domestic product (GDP). Commodity exports contributed significantly to GD P in 
many SVEs, in some cases up to 60%. Product concentration, low partner diversification, and high 
reliance on commodity export revenues increased SVEs' vulnerability to shocks. Real GDP dropped 
by 6.5% in commodity dependent SVEs in 2020, which was mor e than twice as much as in the world. 
The increase in 2021 was essentially rebound growth. In other SVEs, mainly tourism -dependent WT/COMTD/SE/M/44  
 
- 3 - 
 
  economies, the contraction in GDP in 2020 was 12%, due to the collapse in international travel. With 
regard to inflation, she  said that the COVID -19 pandemic and the war in Ukraine had interrupted a 
long period of low global inflation. Inflation was at historically low levels in SVEs as well, standing at 
2% in 2019. Furthermore, inflation fell to 1.3% in 2020 as 13 SVEs recorded  deflation, which 
reflected the economic downturn. In 2021, inflation started to increase in all SVEs to reach 7.2% on 
average. Inflation reached 8.1% in October 2022 in 23 SVEs. Food inflation was among the main 
drivers of inflation. Food price inflation ranged between 10% and 20% in several SVEs. Due to their 
reliance on food imports, the rise in global food prices was especially penalizing for SVEs. Transport 
inflation reached up to 24% in some SVEs, due to the spike in energy prices combined with their 
geographical remoteness. This had ripple effects on the productive sector. Core inflation also started 
to increase. The current surge in food prices was particularly painful to the poor as they spent 
relatively more on food. In 2023, the average annual con sumer price inflation in 31 SVEs, excluding 
Cuba and Sri Lanka, was projected by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) to be 4.1%. This was 
down from the 7.5% recorded in 2022, but still higher than before the pandemic.  
7. With regard to short -term services t rade trends, she said that cross -border mobility 
restrictions implemented during the pandemic had hit services hard at a global level. In 2020, SVEs' 
services exports dropped by 47%, to USD 44.2 billion, due to the collapse in international travel. 
Because  of their excessive reliance on international tourism as a source of revenue, SVEs were 
significantly more affected than the rest of the world, which saw a decline of 17%. SVEs' transport 
exports fell by 33%, which was linked to the 70% drop in air passeng er transport. Sea transport 
services were only marginally affected. Port services exports continued to rise. SVEs also saw a 12% 
decline in other commercial services exports. This was unlike the rest of the world, which 
experienced an increase of 1%. In 20 21, most subsectors in SVEs had not recovered to 2019 values, 
except for computer services which increased by 31% and insurance services which increased by 
4%. In the first half of 2022, services exports were still down by 16% in 21 SVEs compared to the 
same period in 2019, unlike the rest of the world which saw an increase of 17%. SVEs' travel exports 
remained 22% below pre -pandemic levels, although these were on a path to recovery. Excluding 
Panama, transport exports were down by 23% compared to the pre -pandemic level. Other 
commercial services exports were 9% above 2019 levels, but growth was slower than in other 
countries. On the import side, the surge in shipping prices due to supply chain disruptions resulted 
in a 33% increase in 21 SVEs' imports of tr ansport services in the first half of 2022 compared with 
pre-pandemic levels.  
8. She noted that the COVID -19 pandemic had accelerated digitalization and internet penetration 
in SVEs. In 2020, 63.2% of individuals on average, in 19 SVEs, used the Internet. Thi s was an 
increase of 57.2% from 2019. Industry and consumer readiness were important for leveraging 
e-commerce opportunities. Online business activities had increased during the pandemic according 
to World Bank survey data on the short -term impact of the p andemic on 2,381 firms in six SVEs. 
Country -case studies suggested that higher digitalization in surveyed SVEs – including digital 
payment, Internet access and infrastructure – didn't necessarily translate into higher online 
purchases. SVEs lagged in their  participation in global exports of digitally delivered services. This 
stunted growth posed challenges for their integration into regional and global value chains. SVEs 
received on average only 1.4% of global FDI flows, or USD 21.5 billion, in the three ye ars preceding 
the pandemic. In 2020, FDI inflows dropped by 36% to USD 13.3 billion. They had since recovered 
to USD 19.1 billion in 2021, although they were still considerably lower than the pre -pandemic 
average. The pandemic also led to a significant dro p in greenfield investment in SVEs, both in number 
and in value. Receiving a steady stream of foreign investment was a major challenge, especially for 
the smaller and more remote island countries. In the four years prior to the pandemic, 14  SVEs 
received l ess than ten greenfield investments. Investment in SVEs targeted only a few countries, 
which was one of the reasons their share in global FDI was so low.  Panama, the Dominican Republic, 
Mongolia and Sri Lanka received half of all average FDI in the three p re-pandemic years. However, 
FDI played an important role in SVEs. Between 2016 and 2019, 15 SVEs received investments that 
represented more than 5% of their average GDP. For seven SVEs, the figure was more than 8%. 
She also noted that the COVID -19 pandemic  had affected SVEs unevenly. In 2020, some SVEs 
suffered sharp contractions in FDI while others received even more flows compared to 2019.  
9. She indicated that she would end her presentation with some points on the challenges and 
opportunities for SVEs. She said that the COVID -19 pandemic represented a real shock to the global 
economy, which made it more inflationary than earlier economic crises. High commodity prices had 
benefited SVEs that were net exporters of natural resources while net importers were hur t by the 
rising prices. However, even the gains to net exporters could be unsustainable over the medium to WT/COMTD/SE/M/44  
 
- 4 - 
 
  long term. This was because surging commodity prices could contribute to decreased participation 
of SVEs in global supply chains as countries looked to secure their energy and food supplies and 
re-shore production. SVEs needed to ensure that their natural resources were not over -exploited 
and that attracting investment to boost economic development did not cause long -term harm to the 
environment. The p andemic and the conflict in Ukraine had exposed the fragility of the global food 
system. This was particularly strongly felt in SVEs, given their reliance on imported food. Climate 
change could further exacerbate these vulnerabilities as it would increase the frequency of acute 
weather events such as drought, heatwaves and floods. Calibrating the right mix of policy to boost 
post-pandemic recovery against the backdrop of high inflation, limited fiscal space , and a difficult 
geopolitical context represented a challenge to policymakers in SVEs. Digitalization was crucial to 
maintain international competitiveness. An important trend emerging in the outsourcing industry 
was the move toward automation and higher value -added services. Upgrading the labour force co uld 
strengthen the position of SVEs within regional and global value chains. SVEs needed to take steps 
to ensure inclusive digital development within their own countries. Data highlighted the continued 
inaccessibility of digital technologies for women. Man y SVEs were highly dependent on tourism. As 
the sector continued to recover from the COVID -19 pandemic, SVEs could consider diversifying their 
tourism industries by targeting new types of customers interested in niche activities such as 
eco-tourism and wil dlife tourism, while also widening their source markets. The recent re -opening 
of Chinese borders could be an opportunity.  
10. The Chairperson  recalled that, in her report to the General Council at its meeting of 6 -7 March 
2023, she had indicated that the pres ent meeting of the Dedicated Session was a first opportunity 
to delve into the topic of integrating small economies into the post COVID -19 economy. She believed 
that there would be scope to continue and deepen the discussion in future meetings. For example , 
members of the SVE Group could make presentations on their experiences in integrating into the 
post-COVID -19 economy. The Dedicated Session could possibly also hear from other international 
organizations that had undertaken relevant work on this matter. The way forward would need to be 
determined by Members. She invited delegations to share any thoughts they may have in this regard. 
This would be helpful for the new CTD Chair in charting a course for the work of the Dedicated 
Session in the coming months.   
11. The representative of Fiji delivered the following statement:  
12. Fiji wishes to acknowledge your leadership and your guidance as Chair of this important 
Committee. We would also like to thank the Secretariat for the hard work that materialized in this 
paper , which is in line with the Ministerial Decision on the Work Programme. This paper is very useful 
and comprehensive and helps provide the fundamental and factual analyses that are critical when 
we negotiate and discuss the impact of the COVID -19 pandemic a nd other issues in relation to small 
economies. It provides a uniform formula that makes useful comparisons across SVEs irrespective 
of their development trajectory. As noted, the SVEs' merchandise trade is largely driven by primary 
commodities. They don 't have the luxury of land and rich mineral resources. They have a few fragile 
service sectors which are vulnerable to climate change, natural and man -made disasters, as well as 
public health emergencies like the COVID -19 pandemic. The 2020 economic contract ion due to the 
COVID -19 pandemic was the largest in Fiji 's modern history. The fiscal deficit reached 13.7% of GDP 
in 2020 -2021 and remained at the same level in 2021 -2022. This was accompanied by a rise in 
public debt by nearly 90% of GDP by the end of th e fiscal year, which provided further pressure on 
an already struggling economy. Year -on-year consumer price inflation reached -2.8% at the end of 
2020 and is slowly easing up. Fiji 's GDP fell mainly due to the closure of tourism -related activities. 
The tr avel restrictions and closing of borders due to COVID -19 variants almost completely shut down 
Fiji's tourism sector. The drop was even more pronounced across Pacific small island developing 
states (SIDS), going from 18% to 7% after the onset of COVID -19. F ollowing three years of 
consecutive growth in the sector, travel restrictions led to an 80% reduction in the number of visitor 
arrivals in 2020 relative to 2019. With the lifting of restrictions, it seems that our tourism is slowly 
coming back, and the eco nomy is trying to take this into account in terms of our reforms. During 
the COVID -19 pandemic, Fiji was also hit by three tropical cyclones, which added to the 
COVID -19-induced downturn and resulted in further challenges for our economy. In monetary terms , 
the impact of Tropical Cyclone Harold cost the economy about USD 13 million. Tropical Cyclone Yasa 
cost the economy USD 12 million, and likewise for the third cyclone. These cyclones caused severe 
disruptions in addition to those already caused by the lo ckdown and other restrictions. Our neighbour 
country Tonga was hit by a massive volcanic eruption which resulted in tidal waves and further 
aggravated their situation.  WT/COMTD/SE/M/44  
 
- 5 - 
 
  13. With regard to the social and environmental challenges, job losses and reduced hours af fected 
at least one -third of Fiji 's labour force. As a result, many Fijians moved from urban areas back to 
their villages and had to rely on the ocean for subsistence. Tuna exports suffered from reduced 
demand and increased costs. Aquaculture production de creased owing to the decline in demand and 
dependence of imported feed. High levels of informality in key sectors posed challenges for 
government assistance for social inclusivity and reform. This also posed an undue burden on women 
and girls. Against this  backdrop, we have five comments to make, as follows: (i) SVEs are a diverse 
group. While some are rich in mineral resources and have larger land masses, others are intrinsically 
tied to the tourism or service sector, and a few have fuels and minerals. Som e stumbled during the 
COVID -19 pandemic while a few had a steady trajectory; (ii) the COVID -19 pandemic led to rising 
commodity prices, inflation and supply chains disruption. Clear contrasts were noted before and 
after the pandemic. Inflation rates prior to the pandemic were at an all -time low but were at an 
all-time high during the pandemic and its aftermath; (iii) besides the pandemic, geopolitical crises 
such as the war in Ukraine further exacerbated our vulnerabilities which affected food security and 
led to supply chain distortion, inflation and more. This shows how closely we are interconnected in 
the global economy; (iv) the COVID -19 pandemic accelerated the use of digital tools worldwide, 
which enhanced economic activities. Digitalization played a k ey role in the recovery process, 
although some of us are still insecure in using online platforms; and (v) irrespective of the differences 
between us, SVEs still have many features in common. These include small domestic markets; a 
limited resource base; a  high dependence on trade; vulnerability to human -made and natural 
disasters and climate change; and high transportation and communication costs due to distance 
from international markets. In light of the report, we are pondering on a few questions, as fol lows: 
(i) how can the WTO assist in addressing our challenges, for example by working with development 
institutions to accept certain criteria that take into account the unique vulnerabilities of SVEs ; 
(ii) how could this report leverage precise, effective , and operational special and differential 
treatment (S&D), noting that climate change and natural disasters, geopolitical conflicts and the 
remnants of the pandemic are still with us; and (iii) now that we have seen a comprehensive 
formulation of the impa ct of the COVID -19 pandemic, how do we move forward from here? Perhaps 
we need more experience -sharing and also need to hear from other institutions about how they 
could support SVEs. Now that we have seen the issues, we need to move a step forward by look ing 
into ways to address those issues and help our economies. Thank you again for your leadership and 
thanks to the delegation of Mauritius for its support.  
14. The representative of Barbados  on behalf of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) Group, 
delivered the following statement:  
15. The Secretariat must be commended for its excellent work in producing the study. We believe 
that it will go a long way in guiding Members ' engagement on issues of relevance to SVEs, particularly 
as we pursue fuller integration into the  post COVID -19 economy. Despite the apparent limited 
Secretariat capacity, we ask that a simple updating of this paper be done annually so that we have 
at hand the latest data. We have been asked in many negotiating groups, regular sessions and 
informal me etings to be more precise on our needs and on the intersection of our vulnerabilities. 
This document goes a long way in answering those questions and we urge all Members to share it 
widely amongst your delegations and capitals as a means to continue to bui ld the evidence and 
sensitization of our very real vulnerabilities. The very nature of structural constraints is that they 
are endemic, pervasive and persistent. These include narrow production structures, reliance on one 
or two sectors for the bulk of eco nomic growth, few exports and a small number of trading partners. 
We know this. You know this. The Secretariat paper reaffirms this. Our lack of integration into global 
supply chains and the challenges in developing regional supply chains means that we con tinue to be 
exposed to exogenous shocks. We saw this during the pandemic. It was devastating for largely net 
food importing countries with a reliance on tourism, remittances and trade to maintain growth, jobs 
and social cohesion. With our high debt -to-GDP ratio, and our vulnerability to climate -related and 
natural disaster shocks adding to our vulnerability, we saw both economic contraction and decline 
in GDP. However, with vulnerability comes forced resilience and only now are we seeing the clouds 
lifting at the end of the pandemic storm. In 2021, the region's merchandise trade bounced back 
from its collapse earlier in the pandemic and we have seen a good return to pre -pandemic tourist 
arrivals in some countries. However, the pace of recovery is uneven and has diverged strongly across 
member States with exports remaining below their pre -pandemic levels. As alluded to earlier, some 
concrete concerns remain.  
16. Never before has the awareness of the devastation of climate change been more front and 
centre in WTO discussions. SVEs are on the frontline in this war. With rising sea levels, heating WT/COMTD/SE/M/44  
 
- 6 - 
 
  oceans, water shortages, devastating storms, biodiversity loss and limited access to mitigation and 
adaptation financing, SVEs are facing another longer -term pandemic. Food  insecurity continues to 
be a grave matter of concern. The food import bill continues to rise and now stands at USD  5 billion. 
This must be addressed, including by looking more at food availability from regional sources as a 
mechanism to achieving food sec urity in the Caribbean. The Bridgetown Initiative, which has been 
championed by many of the countries in the Caribbean, provides a greater assessment of these 
issues, especially as it relates to access to international financing. It is calling for a relook  at 
treatment – not based on archaic indices, but on real needs. This brings us full circle to the analysis 
and evidence in the Secretariat document. However, when one acknowledges the challenges, it is 
also time to embrace the opportunities. These include : (i) investing in the digital ecosystem and 
closing the digital divide while also ensuring attention to cost related digital access; (ii)  greater 
attention to building our orange economies, which is the creative economy; (iii)  a deeper dive on 
issues of access to finance – especially for our micro, small and medium -sized enterprises (MSMEs) 
– and a need to be more sensitive to matters of correspondence banking in the Caribbean; 
(iv) investments in green value chains and green technologies – not just to become importers of 
green technology, but creators and producers as well; (v)  a reassessment of the kind of tourism 
product we are offering to include adventure tourism , nature -based tourism , cultural , meetings and 
conference tourism , and community  tourism. This also includes diversifying our tourism markets to 
include China, countries in Africa and our neighbours in Latin America; (vi)  the re -development of 
local and regional agriculture, including building more value addition of our products and b etter 
linking our agriculture sector to our tourism product; (vii)  examining how we can use trade to 
support our sustainability commitments; and (viii)  paying greater attention to building the resilience 
of supply chains. This is why Barbados is co -hosting  a global supply chain forum conference with the 
United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) in March 2024 with a particular 
accent on small islands.  
17. These issues and more deserve dedicated discussions in the CTD on Small Economies. We 
should also look innovatively at cross fertilization with other committees such as the Committee on 
Trade and Environment; the Working Group on Trade and Transfer of Technology; the Committee 
on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures; and the Working Group on Trade, Debt and Finance. In 
addition, we should consider dedicated sessions with other agencies such as UNCTAD, the World 
Tourism Organization (UNWTO), the United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO), 
the International Trade Centre (ITC), th e Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), the World 
Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), the International Telecommunications Union (ITU), the 
Commonwealth Secretariat and more, in order to look at pathways for new and enhanced investment 
and econom ic activity in SVEs around all of these issues. In closing, we invite Members to engage 
constructively on this document which highlights the various challenges and opportunities for the 
growth and development of SVEs. We hope that this allows for further d iscussions at the level of all 
WTO bodies and negotiations where we have pitched for specific treatment for SVEs based on our 
clear vulnerabilities.  
18. The representative of El Salvador  delivered the following statement:  
19. Thank you for your work in leading t his Committee. We wish to thank the Secretariat for 
preparing and presenting the document under review, in compliance with the Decision adopted at 
MC12 on the Work Programme on Small Economies. We are also grateful that this document is based 
on the outlin e proposed by the SVE Group, as agreed by this Committee. Having the information 
and factual analysis of the effects of the pandemic helps in identifying the main challenges and 
opportunities to face it – such as accelerating digitalization to maintain int ernational competitiveness 
or diversifying tourism, with a particular focus on specialized activities such as ecotourism. We 
consider the inputs provided by the study to be of vital importance, especially as many of these 
economies are also affected by geo political situations and a string of natural disasters, which can 
only exacerbate their vulnerability. We believe that the COVID 19 crisis has been universal, affecting 
everyone, but particularly small economies. For example, as shown by the study, exports  of goods 
fell by 10.7%, while imports shrank by 20.3%. These decreases were greater than in the rest of the 
world, where the value of traded goods fell by an average of 7.3%. Similarly, in 2020, real GDP 
shrank by 6.5% in commodity dependent SVEs, more th an twice as much as the rest of the world, 
despite its subsequent recovery. The document also highlights that, although there are differences 
between our countries, we are united by particular characteristics, including our low participation in 
world trade . According to the document, despite dynamic growth, SVEs' participation in global 
merchandise trade remained below 1%. In response to the Chair's request for guidance on future 
work, and taking into account the detailed work in the document, we would sugg est addressing the WT/COMTD/SE/M/44  
 
- 7 - 
 
  discussions through thematic sessions, which could be divided into the areas covered in the 
document: (i) trends in merchandise and services trade; (ii) effects of the COVID -19 pandemic on 
small economies' trade; and (iii) challenges and  opportunities in the post COVID -19 recovery phase. 
This would enable us to deepen the discussions in each of these areas and to have presentations 
from proponents and other stakeholders, including international organizations. As WTO Members, 
we have an en ormous responsibility to contribute to the search for solutions to the challenges 
identified and to help to enhance the opportunities identified for SVEs to improve their integration 
into trade.  
20. The representative of Antigua and Barbuda , on behalf of the O rganization of Eastern Caribbean 
States (OECS) WTO Members, delivered the following statement:  
21. We align with the statements by the SVE Group and the CARICOM Group. We are very grateful 
to the WTO Secretariat for its background note. The background note is both cogent and timely, and 
we commend the Secretariat for its excellent work. The COVID -19 pandemic had a significant 
economic impact on the six OECS WTO Members, namely Antigua and Barbuda, Dominica, Grenada, 
Saint Lucia, St Kitts and Nevis and St Vincen t and the Grenadines. It adversely affected merchandise 
trade and disrupted travel and tourism -related services, which induced a deep recession in these 
economies. As a result, the GDP growth in all six countries in 2020 declined drastically, ranging from 
4% to 19%. The sharp decline in GDP translated to commensurate losses in goods and services 
trade. For example, in 2020, the combined exports of these six countries declined by around 19%, 
which is more than twice the 8% drop in world trade during the past  year. The significant dependence 
of these economies on services exports, particularly in -person services such as travel and tourism, 
made them extremely vulnerable to this shock. Had the pandemic not occurred, the global exports 
of these six countries in 2020 could have been as much as USD  800 million higher in absolute terms 
or about 19%. Before the onset of the pandemic, their combined global goods and services exports 
were estimated to reach USD  4.31 billion in 2020. However, the actual figure for 2020 was 
USD 3.5 billion, reflecting the loss of trade. It is important to highlight these figures as they form an 
additional layer of facts to support the meaningful work done by the Secretariat. Importantly, the 
pandemic contributed to an upsurge in the Mode 1 cross -border delivery of certain services via digital 
platforms, including health care and education services. Therefore, as we think of efforts to further 
integrate developing countries into the post  COVID -19 economy, we should focus on expanding 
broadb and coverage, improving affordability of internet services and upgrading of information 
technology (IT) skills of the workforce to take advantage of the new commercial opportunities in a 
more digital world. This recommendation applies especially for MSMEs.  In terms of next steps, we 
need to think more deliberately on how we can give real life to the small economies dimension of 
the WTO 's work. In this vein, we continue to emphasize that we need to test the letter and spirit of 
the Nairobi Ministerial Decisi on of 2015 on SVEs in all areas of the WTO 's work. Beyond this, we 
must also consider issues such as global supply chains, food security, economic diversification, digital 
transformation, green industrialization and many other areas, in terms of how we can  provide 
pathways for SVEs and other small economies to integrate more fully into the global economy. We 
made some preliminary observations on the background note at the General Council earlier this 
month. We will not repeat those here but would also like for those observations to feature in the 
reporting on this meeting.1  
22. The representative of Cuba delivered the following statement:  
23. We thank the Secretariat for the background note prepared pursuant to the Ministerial 
Decision on the Work Programme on Sm all Economies. Today, SVEs face challenges resulting from 
climate change, natural disasters and other global crises that make us more vulnerable. We continue 
to face challenges that hinder our ability to integrate fully into the multilateral trading system . Over 
the past three years, the effects of the COVID 19 pandemic added to our existing problems. The 
priority of my country's Government was to protect the population and it did not spare the few 
resources we had to save lives. Our scientists created thre e vaccines that enabled the country to 
establish a new normal more swiftly, despite the complex situation. Like the rest of the world, Cuba 
has felt the pandemic's adverse effects on its trade. As an open economy and a net importer of food, 
it has been ser iously affected by the increase in commodity prices. Similarly, there was a significant 
impact on its services, particularly those associated with the tourism sector, which is now recovering 
but has not yet reached the figures recorded in 2019. With the re covery from the pandemic 
 
1 The statement by Antigua and Barbuda at the General Council meeting of 6 -7 March 2023 is 
reproduced in Annex 1 of this Note.  WT/COMTD/SE/M/44  
 
- 8 - 
 
  practically in full swing, we were struck by Hurricane Ian, which caused damage in four of the 
country's provinces – mainly to agriculture, the communications infrastructure, the electrical grid 
and the housing stock. SVEs, especia lly small island countries, are the most affected by extreme 
weather events – which are becoming increasingly frequent and damaging – and by other climate 
change impacts such as droughts, floods and soil salinization. For Cuba, all of this is compounded 
by the unprecedented tightening of the strict economic, commercial and financial blockade imposed 
by the United States, which is the main obstacle to the progress of our economy and to our 
development. The blockade makes it difficult for trade to function no rmally in my country, not to 
mention the damage to third party countries that wish to trade with Cuba. All of this is in flagrant 
violation of the rules established by the WTO. The measures and actions applied against Cuba and 
rejected by the vast majority  of the international community are a violation of international law and 
trade rules and constitute an act of aggression on the sovereignty of the Members of this 
Organization. As if that were not enough, the United States claims the right to include Cuba in a 
spurious and unilateral list of countries that allegedly sponsor terrorism, which makes it extremely 
difficult for us to engage in financial and business transactions and to access credit.  
24. Against this complex backdrop, Cuba faces a great challenge i n promoting the country's 
recovery, achieving sustainable development and thereby improving the well being of its population. 
We are drawing up strategies to respond to, recover from and build resilience to natural disasters 
and are adopting measures to mi tigate the effects of climate change. We are making progress in 
digitalization processes and are encouraging the application of science and technology in the various 
sectors. We are implementing the National Plan for Sustainable Development up to 2030, whi ch is 
fully aligned with the Sustainable Development Goals. However, we live in a globalized world, and 
our individual efforts as SVEs are not enough to integrate fully into the multilateral trading system. 
We reaffirm the need to apply the S&D provisions contained in multilateral trade agreements and 
related Ministerial Decisions so that we, as developing countries, can achieve economic development 
and improve the well being of our peoples. We agree with El Salvador and others on the direction of 
future wo rk. 
25. The representative of Russian Federation  delivered the following statement:  
26. Thank you for your leadership in our work in the CTD. We also thank the Secretariat for this 
presentation, and for preparing the background note. We share the view that rising commodity 
prices, inflation, and supply chains disruptions heavily influence small economies. Taking this into 
account we are making every possible effort to help the affected countries and are engaged 
constructively in the discussions. However, we totally  disagree with the reasoning behind the global 
inflation, in particular that it has been caused by the conflict in Ukraine. I refer to paragraphs 1.19 
and 4.31 of the Secretariat note and to the presentation by the Secretariat today. As my Ambassador 
said at the last General Council meeting, the main reasons for the world inflation are the excessive 
reserve money printing in recent years and the short -sighted policy of the leading central banks. 
These are the main reasons, but they were not mentioned by the  Secretariat. The most devastating 
consequences also come from the unlawful unilateral restrictions against my country, and not from 
the conflict itself. These restrictions violate WTO rules and negatively affect food security, supply 
chains and commodity markets, among others. The Secretariat note is also missing out on other 
important factors impacting on small economies, such as intensifying protectionism and subsidy 
wars, which additionally widen the competitiveness gap. For example, the race to subsidi ze green 
energy or relocate the production of semi -conductors change global competition dramatically. 
Another factor is the flourishing of most -favoured -nation (MFN) -inconsistent trade deals. These clubs 
of like -minded Members leave small economies behind in terms of development prospects. Finally, 
in our view, the Secretariat note is neither accurate nor comprehensive, and requires improvement. 
Unless we grasp the root of the problem, there is no way of finding the solution. Thus, we call upon 
the Secretar iat to make the appropriate adjustments in the note.  
27. The representative of Mauritius  delivered the following statement:  
28. Mauritius welcomes the holding of this Dedicated Session on Small Economies. Small 
economies are already exposed to a number of inherent  constraints such as geographical isolation, 
small domestic market, lack of comparative advantage, exposure to external economic shocks and 
limited resources endowment, amongst others. The pandemic and the geopolitical instability have 
further aggravated t he situation of small economies. The report notes that core inflation in Mauritius 
has been rising steadily from 2.3% in 2016 to 11.9% in October 2022. This is largely imported 
inflation. The global climate in 2022 has not been favourable for FDI flows. Th e geopolitical tensions, WT/COMTD/SE/M/44  
 
- 9 - 
 
  high inflationary environment, and a series of interest rate hikes in advanced economies have 
brought in uncertainty and downward pressure on cross -border investments in 2022. SVEs receive 
only a small fraction of global FDI flows – only 1.4% on average in the three years preceding the 
pandemic. In 2020, FDI in Mauritius contracted by 21% and fell further in 2021. It is becoming 
increasingly difficult for small developing countries to compete on equal terms with bigger and better 
endowed countries in view of their inherent constraints. While several SVEs have diversified their 
economies into trade in services, they are unable to optimize exports in services. As per the report, 
Mauritius encountered a drop of more than 50% in its expo rts of services as a result of the COVID -19 
pandemic. Moreover, the global economic disruptions have also led to a maritime crisis whereby 
shipping lines are skipping port calls, mostly in SIDS such as Mauritius. The stacking of containers 
in major ports h as led to irregularity of supply and longer time periods to source raw materials or to 
export goods. These skipped port calls have also led to a rise in freight costs and less opportunities 
for small developing countries to ship their exports. The report r ecommends that, as digitalization 
continues to advance globally, small economies need to take steps to ensure inclusive digital 
development within their own countries, adopt frontier technologies, and invest in reliable 
ICT infrastructure. It also encourag es Members to upgrade the labour force through investments in 
human capital which could strengthen the position of small economies in global value chains. We 
need inclusiveness. However, to implement these recommendations, small economies would require 
investment, technical expertise and support. It should be highlighted that, in Mauritius, the legal 
framework on logistics services and electronic transactions as well as consumer protection requires 
adjustment to better mirror best practices, and to also ens ure efficient cross -border trade between 
small countries and trade partners.  
29. The MC12 Ministerial Decision on the Work Programme on Small Economies is a testimony 
that the concerns of small economies to integrate in the world economy through trade and 
development is an unfinished business and that the Membership still has to address the issue. In 
view of the above challenges, Mauritius proposes the following which should form part of the future 
work on SVEs: (i) To include a standing agenda item in all rele vant WTO Committees to cater for 
the post -pandemic response work to complement the MC12 Ministerial Declaration on the 
WTO response to the COVID -19 pandemic; (ii) WTO Members to agree on a services waiver for small 
economies by extending preferences to sma ll economies' services and service suppliers, akin to the 
LDC waiver; (iii)  the WTO to work with other relevant international institutions towards ensuring 
regular shipping activities in small economies and to mitigate extraordinary maritime costs; (iv) the 
WTO Trade Facilitation Agreement Facility should coordinate with the technical and financial 
institutions provided by donors to allow small countries to implement the Trade Facilitation 
Agreement within the deadlines that they have notified; (v) WTO Memb ers to consider relevant 
flexibilities including subsidies falling under Article 3 of the Agreement on Subsidies and 
Countervailing Measures to enable small economies to support the development of their economies, 
attract investment and boost exports; (vi)  to extend the benefits of Article 66.2 of the 
TRIPS  Agreement which provides for incentives to enterprises for purposes of promoting and 
encouraging technology transfer to small economies with a view to enabling them to develop more 
comprehensive economie s with a strong technological basis; (vii) to compensate for the lack of 
resources and raw materials, small economies be allowed to source production inputs and cumulate 
rules of origin for exports under preferential arrangements such as Generalized System  of 
Preferences schemes, the African Growth and Opportunity Act, as well as under free trade 
agreements from all sources, provided that the value addition is at least 25%; (viii) most small 
economies are also net food importing developing countries (NFIDCs ) and net importers of raw 
materials, and are therefore heavily impacted by export restrictions on these products and 
commodities. Export restriction measures taken by Members should not apply in a negative way 
against small economies; (ix) we welcome an e arly conclusion to the negotiations on paragraph  8 
of the MC12 Declaration on emergency response to food security; and (x) we welcome positive 
engagement of the Membership on S&D, and particularly on the ten Agreement -Specific Proposals 
as submitted by the  G90 in the CTD in Special Session.  
30. The representative of Cabo Verde  delivered the following statement:  
31. I would like to start by thanking the Secretariat for the document presented today. Cabo Verde 
is a small island state with a small economy and a lack of natural resources other than the energy 
and creativity of its people. Persistent droughts, geographic fragmentation of territory, high cost of 
inter-island transportation, a predominantly service -based economy, and high vulnerability to 
external shocks are often the features used to describe my country. However, political stability, 
public administration, standards and tourism represent great potential for the country in terms of WT/COMTD/SE/M/44  
 
- 10 - 
 
  investment. Over 46 years, Cabo Verde has been able to leverage its political stability and credibility 
to attract international support and investment. The lockdowns and other COV ID-19 containment 
measures stopped tourism and transport activities and significantly affected the overall economic 
performance, leading the country to the largest economic contraction on record. Tourism is the 
sector that continues to attract the highest level of investment. The development of sustainable 
tourism must be the catalyst for the development of other economic sectors. Diversification in the 
tourism sector includes products and infrastructure for tourism markets and promoting the linkage 
of tour ism with the blue economy, transport and logistics, the industrial and digital economy, 
domestic production in agriculture, and fisheries. Investment in the digital economy is considered 
crucial. The transformation of the country into a maritime platform f or the supply of services is 
another key priority to take advantage of the country's strategic location in relation to shipping 
routes and proximity to international markets. Digitalization is a sector that we would like to discuss 
in these meetings. We wo uld like to see how the WTO can accompany Cabo Verde to achieve its 
goals. Cabo Verde will engage constructively on these matters.  
32. The representative of Ukraine  delivered the following statement:  
33. I would like to thank the Secretariat for the analysis. This report reflects the impact of Russia's 
war on small economies. We encourage the Secretariat to further monitor the impact of Russia's 
military aggression on international trade and food security.  Russia's war on Ukraine has become 
one of the main causes of a global food crisis that could bring serious political and economic 
consequences for the whole world and especially for LDCs. The war has multiple implications for 
global agricultural markets t hrough the channels of trade, production and prices, casting a shadow 
over the state of food security and nutrition for many countries. Russia is solely responsible for this 
crisis. Russia continues to demonstrate a flagrant disregard for international law  and the rules -based 
multilateral trading system and does not stop in its acts of military aggression against Ukraine and 
Ukrainians. There was a lot of evidence that Russia was stealing grain from Ukraine to sell it for 
profit. Let me stress that, absent this military action, this infrastructure would still be working. 
Absent this military action, cargo ships would be transiting the Black Sea. Absent this military action, 
world food prices would reflect normal market conditions. We would also like to note that, at the end 
of last year, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy of Ukraine launched a humanitarian food programme 
called "Grain from Ukraine". Under this programme, Ukrainian grain will be delivered to countries in 
Africa and Asia that are facing malnutrition  and extreme hunger problems. The goal is to provide 
grain to at least five million people by the end of this spring. The recipients of Ukrainian grain within 
the framework of this humanitarian programme will be countries suffering from food shortages. Thi s 
year, we plan to send at least 60 ships from Ukrainian ports to countries most affected by the food 
crisis and that are in need of urgent aid. I would also like to draw Members' attention to the attempt 
of Russia to call their full -scale military invasio n of Ukraine a conflict in Ukraine. We call upon all 
Members and the Secretariat to use truthful and internationally recognized terminology.  
34. The representative of the European Union  delivered the following statement:  
35. The European Union welcomes the Secret ariat's background note. It provides a rich source of 
data and trends during the COVID -19 period and the preceding decade. There are interesting 
references to challenges and opportunities in the post COVID -19 recovery phase. This shows that 
the Secretariat  can respond to requests of the Membership if it is given the time and resources to 
do so. We appreciate that today 's meeting is only the first one on the topics addressed by the 
background note. I would like to take a little bit of time to make what are i nevitably preliminary 
comments that cannot do full justice to the richness of the analysis or the complexity of the issues. 
Behind the general trends, one is struck by the variety of impacts in different countries and sectors. 
In general, goods trade and s ervices trade seem to have had their own slightly different dynamics. 
The variety of impacts reflects the diversity of the SVE Group. Footnote 2 shows that the SVE Group 
has 32 WTO Members and one Observer. All 33 countries have in common a low share of wo rld 
goods trade. That low share, which is reflected in the statistics of world trade and investment, is not 
in and of itself an indicator of bad performance. Let me try to unpack some of the issues – first in 
goods trade, then in services trade, and lastly  on the way forward in our discussion. In the area of 
trade in goods, the European Commission has itself done some analysis on the integration of 
developing countries into the world economy, focusing on the pre -COVID -19 era. We based our 
analysis on a set of indicators measuring the quantitative performance of countries' goods exports 
with respect to the respective shares in world exports, as well as the quality or composition of these 
exports. A social dimension was added by considering per capita income a nd poverty indicators. Let 
me briefly mention some findings that seem relevant to the debate. Our analysis reflects stark WT/COMTD/SE/M/44  
 
- 11 - 
 
  differences between different SVEs. SVEs are over -represented in the category of countries that are 
relatively poorly integrated into the world economy and have seen their goods trade performance 
worsen. Some managed to benefit from globalization and integration into the world economy, while 
others were in between both categories. The European Commission is refining its analysis, which 
does not cover services. Services trade is a different story, and equally deserving of closer scrutiny, 
if not more deserving to the extent that there may be more opportunities there. That is how I read 
the final section of the background note. As the Ambas sador of Barbados said on behalf of CARICOM, 
let's not forget the linkages between the goods and services sectors, which are also important. It is 
my impression, and perhaps suggestion, that the opportunities in services trade – some of which 
are highlight ed in the background note – deserve closer scrutiny and discussion.  
36. Turning to the way forward, I would like to add to the suggestions made by other delegations 
including Barbados, El Salvador, Fiji, Mauritius and Cabo Verde. These would require further s crutiny. 
Let me pause here to say that the background note is rich on the challenges facing SVEs – both 
structural ones as well as the strong environmental and inflationary pressures, including the impacts 
of the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine. We reject any criticism of the Secretariat's 
coverage of these impacts. We also reject efforts to blame the consequences of Russia 's aggression 
on the reactions that it provoked – especially when the countermeasures taken, for instance by the 
European Unio n, exempt agricultural and fertilizer exports that developing countries need. We 
disagree with Russia 's suggestion that the Secretariat's background note needs changing, and 
request that we continue engaging on the very real issues that it addresses. Many of the SVEs' 
challenges reflect those of LDCs and low -income countries. The question I have is: "to what extent 
are the SVEs' opportunities equally relevant to LDCs and low -income countries?". In other words: 
"to what extent are the lessons or conclusions that can be drawn from the Secretariat 's analysis also 
applicable to those other developing countries"? Conversely, "to what extent do SVEs as a group 
have distinct and different opportunities?". Insofar as the answer to such questions reflects the 
diversi ty of the SVE Group, it could be interesting to use another meeting of this Dedicated Session 
to look at the experiences of individual SVE Group members that have distinct profiles – for instance, 
a SIDS profile versus a non -island profile. We could also i nvite a developing country from outside 
the SVE Group that has similar challenges and experiences. The European Union is open to inviting 
other experts to the debate, to the extent that this complements the excellent work already done 
by the WTO Secretaria t. Similar invitations could be extended to private sector representatives with 
relevant experience in dealing with the challenges and opportunities of the post COVID -19 recovery 
in SVEs.  
37. The representative of the United States  delivered the following stat ement:  
38. We would like to take this opportunity to thank the Secretariat for the paper. It is 
comprehensive and certainly provides a very useful analysis of the economic shocks created by the 
pandemic, the conflict and other crises, as well as the uneven pat h to recovery ahead. It would be 
helpful if the Secretariat can share the PowerPoint presentation with Members. We look forward to 
continued engagement on this subject. On the way forward, a lot of suggestions have already been 
made. It is useful to have t hese discussions. We recognize that, during the pandemic, supply chain 
disruptions, paired with inflation in food and energy markets, brought new challenges to the group 
of small economies. I think it would be fair to say that all Members have invested in economic growth 
through engagement in the WTO. We greatly value the contributions of this Dedicated Session on 
issues of inclusivity and resilience. Looking forward, we encourage Members to continue sharing 
successful examples of economic diversification a nd adaptation in response to the pandemic and 
other crises. The research paper makes an important point that small economies are a diverse group 
of countries. Most have small domestic markets, limited resource bases, are highly vulnerable to 
natural disast ers, and have an exposed fragility element that the pandemic has exacerbated. We 
took note of this important point. The United States is committed to contribute to experience sharing 
and highlighting humanitarian cargo relief work to address vulnerabilitie s to natural disasters and 
the role that cross -border trade can play in mitigating such vulnerabilities, specifically for small 
economies. Another interesting topic for discussion that the paper refers to is digitization and the 
role it can play in promoti ng small economies' integration into regional and global value chains. 
Starting with disaster preparedness and digitization, we are open to engaging with the group of 
small economies and contributing to operationalizing your Work Programme. Like my colleag ue from 
the European Union, I would note that the reference to the conflict is important and support it staying 
there. The impact of it cannot be ignored. We look forward to working and engaging on the issues 
that have been highlighted.  WT/COMTD/SE/M/44  
 
- 12 - 
 
  39. The representative of China  delivered the following statement:  
40. As the MC12 Outcome Document instructs, work should be undertaken on "integrating small 
economies into the post COVID -19 economy: effects of the pandemic, challenges, and 
opportunities". It is highly appreciated that the Secretariat released the background note, which is 
a very in -depth statistical paper. It comprehensively depicts how the COVID -19 pandemic has 
affected the economies and trade of small economies. On the one hand, we see challenges because 
of infla tion and food security. On the other hand, we see that there are opportunities in areas such 
as resource allocation, attracting FDI and digitalization. We also see the necessity to take concrete 
actions under the WTO framework to help SVEs improve their in frastructure and strengthen 
capacity -building so as to enhance their resilience to future pandemics and natural disasters. Against 
this background, calibrating the right mix of trade talks to boost post -pandemic recovery is 
important. China always pays muc h attention to the challenges facing SVEs. With paragraph  35 of 
the Doha Ministerial Declaration, paragraph 45 of the Hong Kong Ministerial Declaration and other 
mandates, China would like to actively participate in the Small Economies Work Programme. We 
encourage more discussions in the CTD, the General Council and other WTO bodies, for the fuller 
integration of SVEs in the multilateral system and post COVID -19 global value chains. For the next 
step, we could focus on how and what to potentially update in the Small Economies Work Programme 
at the Thirteenth WTO Ministerial Conference (MC13). This note gives us a very good basis for 
discussion. As Fiji, Barbados and other Members have said, opportunities and challenges are 
intertwined. For example, digitaliz ation and the utilization of digital devices increased during the 
pandemic, but e -commerce platforms are not completely built up in the SVEs. Like the Ambassador 
of El Salvador said, we could have some thematic sessions and invite stakeholders to share 
experiences and lessons based on case studies. This will lead to a further understanding what are 
the more tailor -made solutions that the WTO could provide. Besides the topic of digitalization, 
sessions relating to global supply chains, food security and gree n industrialization could also be held.  
41. The representative of the United Kingdom  delivered the following statement:  
42. We welcome this report and thank the Secretariat for the work that has gone into its 
publication. The compounding crises that we have witne ssed over recent years have had profound 
impacts upon all developing countries. However, SVEs have unique fragilities which can make them 
especially vulnerable to external shocks. As this report makes clear, SVEs felt the impact of the 
pandemic particularl y acutely. In value terms, SVEs' merchandise exports fell by 10.7%. Imports 
contracted by 20.3%. These declines were sharper than in the rest of the world, where the value of 
merchandise trade fell on average by 7.3%. The UK 's review of SIDS found that, ac cording to 
United  Nations (UN) organizations, SIDS are the most trade dependent group of countries. Trade 
accounts for over 71% of small island economies' GDP, compared to 50% for LDCs. It is no surprise 
that the World Bank 's January Economic Outlook indic ated that the COVID -19 pandemic 
disproportionately affected small states, where output contracted by more than 11%. This was 
seven  times as much as in other emerging markets and developing economies. Whilst not all SVEs 
are SIDS, and vice -versa, there is c rossover between these two groupings, and overlap in their 
challenges. We are proud to draw attention to the UK 's recently published SIDS Strategy which sets 
out a multifaceted approach towards both increasing prosperity and mitigating future crises. Centr al 
to the UK 's approach is promoting economic diversification, as well as multilateral modernization to 
improve measures of success and advocate for simplified procedures. Both are critical for small and 
vulnerable states. The Secretariat's paper sets out some useful suggestions around digitalization 
driving diversification. We would suggest also looking beyond the digital sector to identify the most 
relevant opportunities available to the individual SVE.  
43. As the paper acknowledges, the SVEs are a diverse g roup of countries located in different 
regions and with different resource endowments. Ultimately, we need to recogni ze that responses 
should be tailored to the specific needs of Members and their fragilities.  We would like to reiterate 
our thanks to the S ecretariat for this paper . We are keen to work with the SVE Group and others on 
the next steps following this report.  We welcome the idea of Dedicated Sessions looking at  the 
experience s of SVEs and suggest opening these sessions to hear donors' experience s and how they 
can provide support. In response to the comments from the Russian Federation, my delegation 
believes that the report is a strong one. It particularly draws attention to  the impacts of food inflation 
on the poorest and notes the potential bac ksliding that can be caused by food insecurity . We need 
to ensure that the causes of food inflation are captured so that the next steps and the solutions will 
be accurate . As a  more practical point, re-addressing the report would delay the next steps. We 
believe that this work should be taken forward as soon as possible.  To address the implication that WT/COMTD/SE/M/44  
 
- 13 - 
 
  sanctions are impacting food security, the United Kingdom's  sanctions include clear and obvious 
mitigations to allow Russian food exports. These include avai lable general licences for companies or 
financial institutions to enable anything to be done in connection with the production or distribution 
of food for the benefit of the civilian population of a country . We have seen evidence of the impact 
of the Russi an invasion on food security and we call on the Russian Federation to end its illegal 
invasion of Ukraine.  
44. The representative of Trinidad and Tobago  delivered the following statement:  
45. We align with the CARICOM Group and the SVE Group statements. My delegat ion also wishes 
to reiterate in this particular context what we affirmed previously in the General Council regarding 
the work of the Secretariat on the background note that is the subject of our discussion today. 
Mindful of the constraints faced, we take t his opportunity to recognize and express appreciation for 
the detailed work of the Secretariat in producing the background note. From our perspective, it is a 
timely and useful resource that we hope will inform our discussions among the Membership here in 
Geneva by deepening our awareness and understanding of how the particular challenges relating to 
the effective integration of SVEs into the multilateral trading system were further compounded in 
the context of the pandemic. The background note provides sta tistical details on our small economies 
that shed light on the impact of the pandemic, as well as the challenges that have arisen in the 
post-pandemic context of intersecting, multi -dimensional crises. It is hoped that pertinent elements 
could be brought t o bear in our deliberations in this house in the lead -up to MC13 and beyond. For 
Trinidad and Tobago, the pandemic brought new impetus to longstanding efforts relating to economic 
and export diversification. Over the years, leadership has deployed various approaches to reducing 
heavy reliance on energy revenue as the main contributor to GDP, with limited success. The 
background note indicates that, in 2021, commodity exports accounted for 24.5% of our GDP in 
Trinidad and Tobago and 68.1% of our total mercha ndise exports. As such, the caution expressed 
in the background note relating to commodity dependence and reliance on extractive industries has 
resonance for this delegation, not least from the perspective of environmental protection. On the 
impact of the pandemic on policy direction, it bears highlighting that greater emphasis has been 
placed on the non -energy manufacturing sector over the last few years. There was a 46% increase 
between 2020 and 2022 in the contribution of the non -energy manufacturing sec tor to national 
revenue. In addition, concerted efforts are under way, aimed at doubling the value of Trinidad and 
Tobago 's non -energy merchandise exports from 3.5 billion Trinidad and Tobago dollars in 2020 to 
7 billion in 2025.  
46. We welcome the spotlight the background note places on those challenges that emanate from 
our particular distinguishing characteristics as SVEs – namely, a combination of factors including 
small size, small domestic markets, remoteness and susceptibility to the negative impacts of climate 
change and natural disasters. A number of the observations made in the note are of concern, given 
the enabling role that trade is meant to play in our pursuit of sustainable development. These include 
minimal participation of SVEs in glo bal merchandise trade; very limited contribution to global 
services exports; heavy reliance on primary commodities for merchandise exports; small number of 
trading partners; limited integration into global and regional value chains; minimal contribution to  
global exports of digitally delivered services; challenges relating to the attraction of FDI; and food 
insecurity in SVEs, several of which are NFIDCs. These observations point to the fact that economies 
such as ours are not optimally positioned to reap t he benefits of international trade in our pursuit of 
development. The question that then arises is: "how can support for SVEs be strengthened so as to 
deepen our integration into the multilateral trading system and make that integration more 
effective?". W e note the emphasis in the background note on the potential of digitalization as it 
relates to integration into the global economy and boosting our competitiveness, as well as the 
recognition therein that SVEs lag far behind more advanced economies in this  regard, including as 
this relates to digitally delivered services. We also note the observations relating to the imperative 
for inclusive digital access and development, and the embracing of frontier technologies. Finally, we 
wish to recall Ministers ' affirmation in the Nairobi Ministerial Declaration in December 2015 regarding 
the 'commitment to continue to address in every area of WTO work, in a substantive and meaningful 
manner, the needs of SVEs and to favourably consider the adoption of such measures as would 
facilitate their fuller integration into the multilateral trading system. Ministers also committed to take 
into account the needs of SVEs in all areas of negotiations, without creating a sub -category of 
WTO Members. It is hoped that, through these  Dedicated Discussions, in the various Committees 
and in our negotiations in the lead -up to MC13 and beyond, the needs of SVEs will in fact be taken 
into account and favourable consideration will be given to measures that would strengthen our 
integration i nto the multilateral trading system.  WT/COMTD/SE/M/44  
 
- 14 - 
 
  47. The representative of Canada  delivered the following statement:  
48. Canada thanks the Secretariat for its paper on integrating SVEs into the post COVID -19 
economy. We think the paper does a good job at providing an overview  of how various economic 
indicators have changed before, during and after the COVID -19 pandemic. The paper clearly notes 
that, while the impact of the pandemic on various SVEs was large – especially for economies 
dependent on tourism and imports of commodi ties – the effects have been different across SVEs. 
Most are in the process of returning to pre -pandemic levels. We would have liked to have seen a 
clearer link, however, between the facts and figures presented in the first few sections of the paper 
and th e last section on challenges and opportunities. For example, while remoteness and high 
transportation costs were identified as one of the problems SVEs have in common, there is little 
discussion of this in the last section on challenges and opportunities. We also would have liked to 
have seen a more detailed discussion on the drivers and analytical frameworks used to make the 
conclusions. For example, the paper mentions that readiness to adopt new digital technologies 
depends on the level of industrial capa city for using, adopting and adapting to technologies, but 
doesn 't expand on these ideas nor fully address these in the conclusions. The paper also concludes 
with some thoughts on investments in human capital but could develop these ideas more fully. There  
is a brief mention about the potential negative effects of technology on labour but doesn 't say more 
on how technology can have beneficial effects on labour, such as increasing productivity and wages. 
As a final example, while the report rightly suggests that SVEs diversify their tourism sectors, the 
report stays silent on the importance of going beyond tourism to invest in sectors that can have 
stronger innovative spillovers to other sectors – such as manufacturing – that would better ensure 
deeper, more sustainable economic growth and development. Canada would welcome further 
discussions on these issues, and to go deeper into the analytical frameworks and the driving factors 
behind some of the outcomes. Finally, I would like to echo the comments made by m any of my 
colleagues regarding Russia 's illegal invasion of Ukraine. The consequences of Russia's actions 
extend well beyond Ukraine's borders. Effects of the invasion are being felt everywhere, with rising 
inflation, increasing supply chain instability, a nd food and energy insecurity. Rain does not fall on 
one roof alone. The global community needs to stand united against violations of the UN Charter 
and attempted annexations. If we do not respond to the invasion, it erodes globally accepted rules. 
It is in our collective interest to ensure larger powers do not redraw borders at whim.  
49. The representative of Fiji on behalf of the Pacific Group, delivered the following statement:  
50. The Pacific Group wishes to express its appreciation to you for calling this mee ting to consider 
the findings of the WTO Secretariat note on the topic of "integrating small economies into the 
post-COVID -19 economy: effects of the pandemic, challenges and opportunities". In the context of 
the Pacific region, it is well known and persis tently emphasized in studies and reports that the Pacific 
is made up of SIDS that are geographically dispersed with relatively small populations that are far 
from major international markets. This is reinforced by the Secretariat's note which takes account  
of the remote location of many SVEs. As noted in the report, many SVEs are highly dependent on 
tourism, both for job creation and to earn foreign currency to finance imports. This is very much the 
case of many Pacific Island countries, many of which suffe red greatly during the COVID -19 pandemic 
with the collapse of tourism markets. The years of COVID -19 brought about an unprecedented zero 
level in tourism earnings and the number of tourists as governments sought to protect the health of 
populations from th e immediate global health emergency that was COVID -19. Further, the Pacific 
leaders have been clear in reiterating that climate change is the single greatest existential threat 
facing the Blue Pacific. Pacific members must also continually adapt to the evo lving global challenges 
posed by COVID -19, as well as to the food insecurity and energy crisis. These challenges further 
exacerbate our existing vulnerabilities and dependencies. The Pacific Group, whose share of global 
trade averages 0.04%, remains in the  margins of the global trading system. This is the same for all 
SVEs, which have a miniscule share in total global trade. We recognize the role that trade can play 
to alleviate the pressure from a range of social, economic and development challenges. There fore, 
we would like to explore how the WTO can provide flexibilities and equitable rules that will enhance 
our trade and facilitate our integration into the global trading system. We support the suggestion 
for experience -sharing sessions and for inviting r elevant international organizations to contribute to 
our work of considering opportunities in the post COVID -19 context, while taking into account the 
impacts of climate change and natural disasters. The recommendations by delegations are also 
supported by  the Pacific. In our view, the guidance list and the way forward should not be exclusive. 
Most importantly, we should build on the recommendations of this report and others made today, 
as well as the recommendations that will eventually emerge from the exp erience -sharing sessions 
to be held. These should be utilized to frame tangible responses to the trade -related issues identified WT/COMTD/SE/M/44  
 
- 15 - 
 
  for the fuller integration of SVEs into the multilateral trading system, in line with paragraph 35 of 
the Doha mandate. The Pac ific Group remains committed to engage actively and constructively in 
the forthcoming discussions.  
51. The representative of Russian Federation  delivered the following statement:  
52. I am forced to reply to the previous interventions. Russia strongly rejects the u nfounded 
allegations that were voiced. These allegations can be believed only if one forgets the eight years 
that preceded our special military operations. We urge all Members to refrain from the politicization 
and disruption of the WTO's work. The Members  that blame Russia for the food crisis have not only 
put severe constraints on the work of Russian agro -banks and shipping companies that supply our 
fertilizers and food around the world, but have also hampered the supply of agricultural machinery 
and spar e parts to my country. To allow Ukrainian food exports we have made the UN -led Black Sea 
Grain Deal. This agreement also covers the unblocking of Russian agricultural exports. However, 
once again, the developed WTO Members have not fulfilled their obligati ons. Our companies continue 
to experience discrimination and world markets receive less food and fertilizers. For its part, Russia 
contributed to global food security by providing humanitarian assistance to the countries in need. 
Even the free -of-charge tr ansfer of Russian fertilizers to the poorest countries is being carried out 
with great difficulty and delays due to unilateral restrictions against my country. Attempts to accuse 
Russia of the global energy and food crisis are unfounded. Longstanding diffi culties in ensuring 
energy and food security have been part of the macroeconomic crisis over the years. I would like to 
repeat that soaring inflation and booming commodity prices are a result of the irresponsible financial 
policy and unilateral economic re strictions against my country.  
53. The Chairperson  invited the representative of the ERSD to respond to the interventions by 
delegations.  
54. The representative of the ERSD  said that the background note contained the statistical analysis 
that was requested by Me mbers. The purpose of the paper was to stimulate discussion, based on 
facts, of the most important issues for SVEs to ensure their appropriate participation in international 
trade. The paper was filled with details and was produced under very challenging c ircumstances. 
Like SVEs, the Secretariat also faced challenges in terms of resources. As was mentioned at the last 
meeting of the Dedicated Session, there was only a small team within the Secretariat producing 
these types of reports, while also carrying ou t other work and responding to other requests. 
Responding to the comments by Canada, she indicated that additional topics could have been tackled 
by the Secretariat if more resources had been available. These topics could perhaps be touched upon 
by Members  in future meetings of the Dedicated Session. Nevertheless, she believed that the 
background note dealt with the main issues that were emerging for SVEs. Turning to the comments 
by the Russian Federation, she said that it was made clear in the paper that i nflation started in 2021, 
due to supply chain disruptions and other pandemic -related factors. However, the paper also 
provided evidence of a spike in commodity prices at the onset of the war in Ukraine. Information on 
commodity prices from the FAO and the World Bank was provided, which showed that the invasion 
of Ukraine had led to a further increase in commodity prices. This commodity price increase 
continued in 2022 and was still present. The facts also showed, for example, that the volume of 
wheat had de clined by 30% due to the lack of arable land. The report was based on facts, and this 
was what the facts said.  
55. The Chairperson  indicated that she wished to once again express appreciation to the 
Secretariat for the report. The substantive nature of the re port would allow Members to dig further 
into the areas covered, possibly by having thematic discussions as had been suggested by 
El Salvador. The report was of additional value given the resource constraints faced by the 
Secretariat. The presentation by th e Secretariat would be made available on the website for the 
meeting.  
56. The representative of the ERSD  noted that there had been a request for an annual update of 
the report. If the necessary resources were provided, the Secretariat would be happy to update the 
report.  
57. The Chairperson  said that a good discussion had taken place at the present meeting. Members 
could look all the way back to the Geneva Ministerial Declaration of 1998 for the first reference to 
small economies in a WTO Ministerial Declaration. S ubsequently, in paragraph 35 of the 2001 Doha WT/COMTD/SE/M/44  
 
- 16 - 
 
  Ministerial Declaration, Ministers agreed to the establishment of the Work Programme on Small 
Economies to frame responses to the trade -related issues identified for the fuller integration of SVEs 
into the mult ilateral trading system. In the Hong Kong Ministerial Declaration of 2005, Ministers 
reaffirmed their commitment to the Work Programme on Small Economies. Since the 
Eighth  WTO Ministerial Conference in 2011, stand -alone Ministerial Decisions on the Work 
Programme on Small Economies had been taken at each WTO Ministerial Conference. She recognized 
that there had been a lot of good work done over the years on the basis of Ministerial mandates. 
Proposals had been made by the proponents of the Work Programme on  Small Economies, 
Secretariat documents had been prepared, and useful discussions had taken place in the Dedicated 
Session and in other WTO bodies on the interests and concerns of small economies. Moving forward, 
she noted that Members were agreeable to ha ve experience -sharing presentations and to hear from 
relevant agencies. As had been suggested, this could be done through thematic sessions, based on 
the main sections of the Secretariat background note. There had also been a suggestion to take the 
dialogu e to other relevant Committees. She believed that the overall focus of the discussions should 
be on recognizing the vulnerability of small economies and exploring what the WTO and other 
institutions could do to help these economies. She hoped that these co nclusions would be useful  for 
the new CTD Chair in taking the work forward.  
58. The Dedicated Session took note  of all interventions.  
C. OTHER BUSINESS  
59. No matter was raised under "Other Business".  
60. The meeting was adjourned .  
 
 
_______________  
 
  
  WT/COMTD/SE/M/44  
 
- 17 - 
 
  ANNEX 1  
 
Statement by Antigua and Barbuda on behalf of the OECS WTO Members under agenda item 3 of 
the General Council meeting of 6 -7 March 20232 
 
We align with the statements by Guatemala on behalf of the SVE Group and by CARICOM. Many 
thanks to the Chair of the CTD for her report on the progress of the Secretariat's background note 
contained in document WT/COMTD/SE/W/45. We were demandeurs of such a document and thank 
the Secretariat for its expert work on this. The results presented in the background note make f or 
sobering reading and confirm much of what we have been saying over the years. Some of our 
observations from the background note include the following: (i) since its peak in 2011, 
SVE merchandise exports have slowed; (ii) trade tensions, especially those  between and amongst 
some of the world 's largest trading nations, have dampened volume export growth in SVEs; 
(iii) SVEs' participation in global merchandise trade remains below 1%; (iv) SVEs' merchandise trade 
is dominated by a few players, with trade hig hly concentrated among ten SVEs, which accounted for 
over 80% of total exports in 2019; and (v) the trade of SVEs is also concentrated between a few 
countries, with the bulk of trade taking place with the United States, the European Union and China. 
Now, i f I may make some of our own observations outside of the background note: (i) while there 
has been some rapid services growth, and SVEs are generally net services exporters, it is important 
to note that in the OECS, our services surplus is typically not su fficient to compensate for our deficit 
in merchandise trade; (ii) in 2020, every OECS WTO Member experienced a drastic decline in their 
services exports. For the bloc as a whole, services exports in 2020 declined by 51%. This is an 
illustration of how acut ely vulnerable we are to exogenous shocks; and (iii) it is also important to 
note that in 2021, travel and transport services, primarily linked to the tourism sector, accounted 
for nearly 75% of OECS services exports. This mirrors the same sectoral concent ration of economic 
activity which is prevalent in our goods trade. I can make many other observations, but our main 
takeaway is that much more remains to be done to further integrate SVEs into the global trading 
system. It is for this reason that we contin ue to emphasize the letter of the Nairobi Ministerial 
Decision of 2015 in terms of giving favourable consideration to the needs of SVEs in every area of 
the WTO's work. We invite the Membership to reflect further, especially given the additional factual 
information before us, on how we can give fuller effect to the Nairobi Decision on SVEs.  
 
 
__________  
 
2 The statement is reflected in this Note in response to the request by the delegation of Antigua and 
Barbuda.