RESTRICTEDWORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONWT/COMTD/LDC/M/26
3 January 2002
(02-0012)
Sub-Committee on Least-Developed Countries
Twenty-Sixth Session
NOTE ON THE MEETING OF 15 OCTOBER 2001
Chair: Ambassador Simon Fuller (United Kingdom)
A. ADOPTION OF AGENDA
1. The Sub-Committee adopted the proposed agenda contained in document WTO/AIR/1631.
B. REQUEST FOR OBSERVER STATUS
2. The Chairman recalled that Members had agreed at the 25th Session of the Committee on
Trade and Development (CTD) to invite ad hoc  observers from intergovernmental organisations, as
listed in document WT/COMTD/W/22/Rev.5, to observe meetings of the CTD and the Sub-
Committee on a meeting-by-meeting basis.  He proposed that, the Sub-Committee invite the agreed
intergovernmental organisations to participate at the 26th Session and at the next formal meeting.
3. It was so agreed.
C. FOLLOW-UP TO THE HIGH-LEVEL MEETING ON LEAST-DEVELOPED COUNTRIES
(i) Integrated Framework Status Report
4. The Chairman reported on the on-going implementation of the Integrated Framework Pilot
Scheme.  He informed the Sub-Committee that donors, the agencies and LDCs themselves had
worked to implement the IF Pilot Scheme. Tw o meetings of the Inter-Agency Working Group
(IAWG), had been held on 6-7 September 2001, in Washington D.C, and on 11 October 2001, in
Geneva. Also, the Steering Committee had met on 12 October 2001. He invited Ambassador Iversen
(Denmark), to report on the results of the Third Meeting of the Integrated Framework Steering
Committee (IFSC), held in Geneva.
5. Ambassador Iversen (Denmark), as Chairman of  the IFSC, said that at the meeting on 12
October 2001, progress made on the IF had been reported. There were two sets of countries at this
stage. Countries in the first group were Cambodia,  Madagascar, and Mauritania, where the IF Pilot
Scheme had been first introduced. The IAWG and the World Bank had reported on progress with the
first phase of the IF Pilot Scheme. Some lessons had emerged.  First, the calendar of three months for
completing the diagnostic studies was insufficient.  A longer time-frame would be required, which
would be no less than six months. The longer time required, accounted for the delay, and implied thatthe reports for the three Pilot countries had not yet been circulated. The World Bank had assured the
IFSC that the reports would be circulated shortly. Second, he said that better coordination was needed
among the agencies, the LDCs and the donor community. The situation was not serious, as the
beneficiary countries had reported their satisfaction with progress to date and were aware of the need
to secure a balance between the micro and macro aspects of the framework. The next step would befor the trade diagnostic studies to be circulated, reviewed with all the stakeholders, and the results fed
into the World Bank Consultative Group or UNDP Round Table Meetings.WT/COMTD/LDC/M/26
Page 2
6. The second group of countries were those LDCs that had requested to be included in the IF
Pilot Scheme. Ambassador Iversen stated that with US$ 6.2 million pledged to the IF Trust Fund
(IFTF), the IF could be extended to a further 11 countries over the next year. The World Bank had
evaluated the requests and found these countries to be eligible for inclusion in the IF. The Bank had
also suggested sequencing the extension of the Pilot Scheme in this group of countries, beginningwith Eritrea, Lesotho, Malawi, Senegal and Yeme n, to be followed later by Burundi, Djibouti,
Ethiopia, Guinea, Mali and Nepal. The sequencing and timing of missions reflected the agreed factors
for including countries in the Pilot Scheme, including the readiness of the World Bank country teams
to proceed with the process in the World Bank-led Pilot Scheme. He noted that some donors had
expressed concern on the extension of the IF to the next set of countries without the circulation of the
written reports from the first three Pilot LDCs. However, it was agreed to proceed with the extension
on the basis of the working hypothesis that the process would be kept under close scrutiny. It had been
agreed that the next meeting of the IFSC would be  held in late December 2001 or in the first three
weeks of January 2002 to take stock of the results.
7. Ambassador Iversen said that the International Trade Centre (ITC), on behalf of the core
agencies, had reported at the IFSC on the results of consultations with the five LDCs: Bangladesh,
The Gambia, Haiti, Tanzania and Uganda. These LDCs had held stand-alone Round Tables under the"old" IF and were to receive assistance under the IFTF up to the value of US$ 300,000. On the basis
of the consultations, concrete proposals had been pu t forward for the consideration of the IFSC. These
proposals were endorsed by the Steering Committee with a few amendments.
8. He reported that the IFSC had agreed to hold  an IF Joint Seminar. This would follow-up on
the successful seminar held in January 2001. The seminar would share with all stakeholders thelessons learnt and next steps for the IF. The dates of the seminar had been set for 25–27 February
2002.  The need to secure funds for the participation of LDC representatives at the seminar was
mentioned.
9. Ambassador Iversen stated that the issue of financing for the IF process was also raised. Apart
from the trade integration reports, there was need for programme/project assistance as in the case ofthe five LDCs that had held Round Tables. He urged the donor community to address the issue and
suggested that this could be done at the Fourth WTO Ministerial Conference. There was also an
exchange of views on the Report to be presented by the Director-General to the Ministerial
Conference contained in the document WT/IFSC/W/6.
10. The Chairman thanked Ambassador Iversen for his status report on progress under the IF.
While acknowledging the initial difficulties, he noted the support and momentum generated.
11. The representative of Burundi thanked Ambassador Iversen for his report. He said that the
World Bank, at the IFSC, had informed his delegation that the IF would be extended. He sought
clarification on the availability of adequate funds for the continuation and extension of the IF
programme to its second phase.
12. The representative of India thanked the Chairman of the IFSC for his report and stated that
the slow progress reported with respect to the th ree Pilot LDCs was disappointing. Although it was
recognized that the three months projected for completing the Pilot phase process in each LDC was
tight, he, nevertheless, sought clarification on the nature and reasons for the delay in the progress with
the IF Pilot Scheme. With reference to the US$ 6.2 million in the IF Trust Fund, he requested
clarification on whether it was sufficient or whether a shortfall was expected.
13. The representative of Bangladesh said that a project in the leather sector had been selected by
his authorities, in consultation with the IAWG, for funding in the IF Pilot Phase programme. He stated
that this was the project for which his delegation sought financing, and for which it had requested
resource allocation.WT/COMTD/LDC/M/26
Page 3
14. The representative of Djibouti thanked Ambassador Iversen for his report. He supported
Burundi in expressing concern on the availability of resources for the second phase of the IF. He
sought clarification on how the funds would be apportioned in the second phase.
15. The representative of the European Communities thanked Ambassador Iversen for his report.
As the EC and its Member states, had funded and suppo rted the IF process, it was monitoring progress
closely and was also eager for results. He said that from the documents received it was clear that the
IF was a complex enterprise. His delegation would not seek to further push the World Bank or others
at this point as it could lower the quality of the exercise. The process involved many players and even
six months was a good target. He counselled patience and said that there were positive developments
in building country ownership and that ma instreaming efforts in LDCs took time.
16. The representative of Zambia sought clarification on the WTO document reference for the
Report by the Director-General as he had specific comments to make under agenda item C (iii).
17. Ambassador Iversen (Denmark) in response to the questions by Burundi and Djibouti said
that sufficient funds were available. The UNDP, as the Trustee of the IFTF, had confirmed the
availability of resources.  Further contributions and inflows could be expected based on progress with
the IF. The speed of the disbursement of resources, at this early stage of IF implementation, was in
line with financial procedures in other international organizations. It would take account of plans for2002 and 2003. The allocation of resources had been set at approximately US$ 300,000 per country.
Apart from the IFTF, he noted that the World Bank and other agencies were also committing their
own resources to the process. In response to the question from Bangladesh, he confirmed that the
leather project had been chosen and that to his knowledge no difficulties were foreseen. On the query
regarding the delay in the implementation of the IF, he  said that the three months originally envisaged
were not sufficient to undertake the fairly complex IF process. Lastly, he added that the progress
made on the IF had been reported by the Director-General in the document WT/IFSC/W/6, which was
a factual report that would be taken up later in the agenda of the meeting.
18. Mr Osakwe, Director Technical Cooperation Division responded to the representative of
Zambia on the documentation for Agenda Item C (iii). He clarified that the document
WT/COMTD/LDC/W/22 was a WTO report by the Director-General on the Follow-up to the High
Level Meeting (HLM) of October 1997. The report was pursuant to a mandate established at the HLM
and dealt with the IF, market access for LDCs, LDCs' Accessions, Trade Policy Reviews, and
Information Technology for LDCs. The second report by the Director-General was on the
implementation of the IF Pilot Scheme (WT/IFSC/W/6 ). This particular report (WT/IFSC/W/6) was a
not exclusive to the WTO, but a report by the Director-General on behalf of the six agencies. It had
been cleared by the core agencies and the IFSC at its meeting on 12 October 2001.
19. The representative of Zambia said that it would like to make comments on WT/IFSC/W/6 and
not WT/COMTD/LDC/W/22.
20. The Chairman proposed that the Sub-Committee take note of the report by Ambassador
Iversen and the comments made on the implementation of the IF. He noted that the IFSC would meet
again towards the end of the year and proposed that the sub-item be retained on the agenda for thenext meeting of the Sub-Committee.
21. It was so agreed.
(ii) Recent Improvements in Market Access for Least-Developed Countries
22. The Chairman said that the market access survey (WT/LDC/SWG/IF /14/Rev.1 & Add.1) was
considered by the Sub-Committee earlier in 2001, and had shown significant improvements in market
access opportunities for LDCs. The European Communities had in February 2001, announced theWT/COMTD/LDC/M/26
Page 4
Everything But Arms (EBA) initiative, specifically in favour of LDCs. This measure had been
notified to the CTD, at its 35th session, on 8 October 2001. Following the reporting procedures agreed
to by Members,1 the notification had been forwarded by the CTD, to the Sub-Committee, for
substantive discussions. He invited the representative of the European Communities to present the
measure notified in document WT/COMTD/N/4/Add.2.
23. The representative of the European Communities stated that though the EBA scheme had only
recently been formally notified it had been discussed in the Sub-Committee previously.2 His
delegation had notified the measure to fulfill its obligations under the various agreements. While not
seeking to engage in additional discussions, the texts with details of the measure were available for
Members that sought further information. He said th at this measure was a big step forward and urged
other Members to consider similar steps towards the objective of "duty and quota free" access for all
products exported by LDCs.
24. The representative of Bangladesh thanked development partners for the improved access. He
stressed that his delegation was seeking meaningful market access. In paragraph 33 of the document
WT/LDC/SWG/IF/14/Rev.1, there were  recommendations for further improvements in market access
and he urged further progress in this direction. He sought clarification on the notification of Japan,
WT/COMTD/N/2/Add.10, that was discussed at the last (25th) session of the Sub-Committee. He
wanted to know, in particular, whether the pr oducts: HS Codes 4203, 6401, 6406, were included in
the coverage of the measure notified by Japan? Bangladesh also requested Japan to relax the rules of
origin in HS Chapters 61 and 64. He also cited a report by UNCTAD that indicated that Bangladesh
was not a beneficiary of the New Zealand and Czec hoslovakia GSP schemes. He sought clarification
on this issue.
25. The representative of Djibouti said that preferential access for LDCs had been eroded over the
last 10 years. Improvements in access for LDCs were, therefore, limited in light of the erosion of
preferences.
26. The representative of Japan expressed appreciation for the concerns raised by Bangladesh.
While unable to answer the specific points raised at the meeting, his delegation was willing to respond
to the questions shortly. Though there were no further improvements to report since the last session of
the Sub-Committee, in July 2001, Japan was studying the possibility of further measures.
27. The representative of New Zealand said that her delegation had notified3 market access
measures in favour of LDCs to the WTO. While unable to answer the specific point raised by
Bangladesh at the meeting her delegation was willing to respond shortly.
28. The representative of Senegal thanked Members that had granted trade preferences to LDCs
since the High Level Meeting in 1997, and at the recent LDC-III Conference. First, he noted that
many notifications of preferential access in favour of LDCs referred to the list of LDCs that ipso facto
excluded Senegal that had been re-classified as an LDC in 2001. He said that Senegal was preparing a
communication to this effect. He said that the records of the Sub-Committee meeting should draw the
attention of trading partners to this anomaly. Members making such notifications or announcements
of market access in the future were requested to bear Senegal's status in mind. Second, he said thatmarket access could be meaningful and effective if origin requirements were reformed and improved.
He requested that the matters raised be addressed and the issue of market access for LDCs be retained
on the agenda for the next meeting of the Sub-Committee.
                                                     
1 Paragraph 59 of WT/COMTD/LDC/M/24. These repor ting procedures were agreed to by Members at
the 32nd session of the CTD (WT/COMTD/M/32) and the CTG meeting on 14 March 2001 (G/C/M/47).
2 WT/COMTD/LDC/M/21 paragraph 58 announcing the EBA proposal.
3 Notification contained in document WT/GC/36 and WT/COMTD/27.WT/COMTD/LDC/M/26
Page 5
29. The Chairman stated that Members were inform ed that Senegal had joined the list of LDCs.
In this connection, he noted that the EU's "Everything but Arms" initiative, applied to the list of 49
LDCs of which Senegal was one.
30. The representative of Burundi endorsed the comments made by LDCs on improvements in the
conditions of market access. He added that the inte gration of LDCs in the multilateral trading system
would also require building capacity within the co ntext of the IF. However, thus far, not much
progress had been achieved. Therefore the productive capacities of LDCs in terms of quantity and
quality was weak. He proposed that the developed countries, which opened their markets to the
products of LDCs, also make efforts to assist LD Cs to improve their production capacities. He called
on the appropriate bodies, including the WTO, OECD  and UNCTAD to assist LDCs in this exercise.
Lastly, he stated that the comparison of improvements in market access would be facilitated by
statistics on which to base these assessments.
31. The representative of Zambia called for improvements in market access. The approach needed
was a "Triangular Approach", where bound market access, together with simplified Rules of Origin
and less stringent application of SPS measures would make market access for LDCs more meaningful.
32. The representative of Bangladesh shared the assessment of Burundi on the need for papers
and statistics to assess market access improvements since 1997. A paper prepared by UNCTAD
"Improving Market Access for LDCs" (UNCTAD/DITC/TNCD/4) contained an assessment of the
impact of improved market access for LDCs by development partners. The annex of this paper
presented utilization rates of preferential access to LDCs in 1998. In Canada, the rate was 6.3%, in the
European Union it was 33.4% though the product coverage of the GSP scheme was 99.2%, in Japan
the rate was 29.9%, and in the US the rate was 41.1%. The Note prepared by the Secretariat(WT/LDC/SWG/IF/14/Rev.1 and Add.1) was also a good basis for assessing improvements in market
access conditions for LDCs. Even though the Trade/GDP ratio in LDCs had increased over the last
decade, LDCs share in world trade had decreased. He said that with successive rounds of tariff and
trade negotiations the value of preferences had also fallen. There was a need for meaningful market
access that improved the utilization and value of preferences.
33. The representative of Zambia said that the comments of Bangladesh were pertinent. He
suggested that development partners reflect and respond to the comments made.
34. The Chairman proposed that the Sub-Committee take note  of the comments made and retain
this item on the agenda for the next meeting. He suggested that at the next meeting responses should
be invited from preference-giving countries. He also suggested that the Sub-Committee takes note of
the EBA initiative, and report back to the CTD, on the discussions held. Finally, he urged otherMembers to update their notifications, where appropriate, so as to enable the Secretariat to monitorthe improvements in market access for LDCs.
35. It was so agreed.
(iii) Follow-up to the High Level Meeting: Report by the Director-General to the Fourth WTO
Ministerial Conference
36. The Chairman said that the Director-General had prepared a report on the Follow-up to the
High Level Meeting (HLM) contained in the document WT/COMTD/LDC/W/22. The report was a
requirement and contained updated information on market access for LDCs, the IF, Information
Technology for development projects, accessions, and Trade Policy Reviews (TPRs) of LDCs. It was
circulated to Members of the Sub-Committee for information. In addition, the preliminary results of
the IF Pilot Scheme were also being reported to Ministers at the Fourth WTO Ministerial Conference.This report by the Director-General had been noted  by the IFSC at its meeting on Friday, 12 October,WT/COMTD/LDC/M/26
Page 6
and had been referred to in document WT/IFSC /W/6. The two reports contained in documents
WT/COMTD/LDC/W/22 and WT/IFSC/W/6 were complementary.
37. The representative of Haiti said that the document WT/COMTD/LDC/W/22 reflected work in
the WTO on issues of importance to LDCs. In addition to market access, strengthening production
capacity was needed. The EBA initiative was commendable and he urged other development partnersto also provide access, including through simplificati on of origin requirements. With regard to TPRs,
with the financial and technical support of the WTO, a TPR had been scheduled for Haiti. He thanked
the Secretariat for the support and reaffirmed the commitment of his government to the TPR exercise.
The lack of adequate information technology was also highlighted. He suggested that the WTO
Reference Centres be followed up on by further programme components.  Work done in the WTO
could be complemented by work in other agencies.
38. The representative of the European Communities said that for coherence, market access
measures announced at the LDC-III Conference could have been mentioned in the report. The issue of
simplification of rules of origin had also been raised  at LDC-III.  He suggested that it could be useful
to refer to work and commitments at other fora.
39. The representative of  Bangladesh agreed with the comments of the EC and said that
information on the Short Trade Policy Course for LDCs  could also have been referred to in the report.
On market access, paragraph 7 of WT/COMTD/LDC/W/22 could have included some elements from
paragraph 33 of document WT/LDC/SWG/IF/14/Rev.1. He said that in addition to market access, the
supply-side constraints were to be covered under the IF programme.
40. The representative of Zambia stated that it had only prepared comments on document
WT/IFSC/W/6, and had not had the opportunity to study the document WT/COMTD/LDC/W/22.
41. The Chairman said that WT/IFSC/W/6 was an inter-agency report that had already been
endorsed by the IFSC on 12 October 2001. Comments on either of the two documents would be
reflected in the records of the Sub-Committee.
42. Mr Osakwe, Director Technical Cooperation Divi sion said that as Bangladesh had suggested,
relevant paragraphs from WT/LDC/SWG/IF/14/Rev.1 ha d been referred to in footnote 7 of document
WT/COMTD/LDC/W/22. In response to the comments of Zambia, he said that the report contained in
document WT/IFSC/W/6 was an inter-agency report that did not fall within the jurisdiction of any one
agency alone, including the WTO. The document had been cleared with the other five core agencies.
The IFSC had taken note of the report on 12 October 2001. The report WT/COMTD/LDC/W/22 was
prepared pursuant to the practice that the Secretariat had maintained for the Geneva and Seattle
Ministerial meetings. It was a factual report that built cumulatively on the results since the HLM.
Members comments on the reports, would be noted, and the Secretariat and Members would beguided by the statements made. The Chairman in his interaction with the Director-General could also
convey the essence of the views expressed.
43. The representative of Zambia said that the notes that he had prepared were substantive and
not meant to be merely noted. This made his statement inconsistent with the format.
44. The Sub-Committee took note of the reports and the statements made.
D. THE THIRD UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE ON LEAST-DEVELOPED
COUNTRIES, BRUSSELS, 14 –20 MAY 2001
45. The Chairman said that the European Communities, as hosts to the Third UN Conference on
LDCs (LDC-III) held in Brussels, had circulated the texts of the Brussels Declaration and Plan of
Action, contained in the documents WT/COMTD/LDC/9  and 10. He recalled that at the last session ofWT/COMTD/LDC/M/26
Page 7
the Sub-Committee, the representative of UNCTAD, as Executive Secretary to the Conference, had
also briefed Members on the results of LDC-III and the need for follow-up on the implementation of
the Plan of Action. At the 48th Session of the Trade and Development Board in UNCTAD, the WTO
Secretariat had made a presentation on "Measures taken at the WTO towards the implementation of
the Programme of Action for LDCs: 2001-10." WTO Members had provided six "deliverables", to thethematic session on Trade at LDC-III, and future work could build on these contributions. In the
drafting of the Ministerial Declaration for Doha, there was specific reference to the trade-related
elements of the Brussels Declaration and Plan of Action. He also recalled that Members had
suggested that efforts be made to integrate relevant elements of the LDC-III Programme of Action
into a work programme for the Sub-Committee. At the 25
th session, the Sub-Committee had mandated
the Chairman to consult with the Secretariat and pu t forward specific proposals to  reflect the trade-
related elements of the Brussels Documents into the work of the WTO, in particular, that of the Sub-Committee. In this regard, the WTO Secretariat had provided a draft work-programme, circulated as
Job 7510, for the Sub-Committee's consideration.
46. In the absence of comments on the draft work programme that had been circulated, the
Chairman proposed that the Sub-Committee retain the item for substantive discussion at the next
session.
47. It was so agreed.
48. The representative of UNIDO reported on the follow-up actions that it had taken following
the Brussels Conference. It had taken steps to develop production capacity and facilitate trade. A
large-scale programme on ‘ Enabling LDCs to participate in International Trade ’, had been presented
in Brussels at the Thematic Session on Internatio nal Trade, Commodities and Services. This initiative
aimed to facilitate LDCs' trade participation and enhance export competitiveness through the
upgrading of quality and accreditation infrastructure, product certification, and the introduction of
quality management systems at the industry level. It was based on a comprehensive approach to trade
facilitation at the sub-regional level, focusing on sectors of high export potential, particularly food
products, textile and leather. In the framework of this initiative, the European Union had funded a12.5 million Euro regional programme for the UEMOA countries in West Africa, 7 of which were
LDCs viz. Benin, Burkina Faso, Guinea-Bissau, Ma li, Niger, Senegal and Togo. Implementation of
the programme had started and would spread over a period of three years. ITC would participate in
the programme. Parallel to the UEMOA progra mme, UNIDO had started consultations with SADC
countries for a similar programme in which WTO would be an active partner to deliver advisory
services related to the TBT Agreement. UNIDO had also received funding from Germany to prepare a
programme for trade facilitation for LDCs from  the ECOWAS region.  As a result of LDC -III and the
programme development undertaken, momentum had been generated to reach out and involve other
agencies in the field of trade facilitation. The Dire ctor General of UNIDO, as Chair of the High-Level
Committee on Programmes, had invited other agencies, such as UNCTAD, ITC, WHO, FAO, and
WTO, to  join in developing an inter-agency a pproach to trade facilitation. The efforts that UNIDO
had undertaken to support African LDCs to strengthen their trade-related productive and institutionalcapacities, underlined the logic for a closer relationship between UNIDO and the Integrated
Framework, in particular at the field and operat ional levels. He stated that UNIDO was committed and
remained available to identify ways for coordinatio n and collaboration with the WTO Secretariat and
the other IF core agencies.
49. The representatives of Bangladesh, Zambia
, Canada , and Djibouti  thanked UNIDO for its
statement. Zambia suggested that UNIDO be included as a core agency under the IF. Canada said that
the full review of the IF was scheduled in the coming months and that this would offer the opportunity
to look at inclusion of other agencies in the IF.WT/COMTD/LDC/M/26
Page 8
E. LEAST DEVELOPED COUNTRIES' PREPARATIONS FOR THE FOURTH WTO
MINISTERIAL CONFERENCE, 9 –13 NOVEMBER, 2001
(i) LDCs' Ministerial Meeting, Zanzibar, Tanzania, 24 July 2001: Report by LDCs' Coordinator
50. The Chairman said that preparations for the Fourth WTO Ministerial Conference had
intensified.  The LDCs were also actively involved in the preparatory exercise. LDCs' Ministers had
met in Zanzibar, Tanzania, in July 2001, to prepare for the Ministerial Conference. The Zanzibar
Declaration had been circulated in document WT/L/409. He invited LDCs, in the absence of
Ambassador Mchumo (Tanzania), Co-ordinator, WTO LDCs' Consultative Group, to report on the
Zanzibar Ministerial Meeting, and give views on further support that WTO Members, in the Sub-
Committee, could offer to LDCs for the WTO Ministerial.
51. The representative of Bangladesh thanked the WTO and UNCTAD Secretariat for the
assistance they had provided at the Zanzibar meeting. The Zanzibar Declaration had brought out two
key elements: the need to increase LDCs' trade opportunities in world markets; and, the need to
address LDCs' capacity constraints. To address these issues, LDC Ministers had  expressed their
common position in the Zanzibar Declaration.  Their position had been forwarded to the WTO
General Council. The LDCs' development agenda c ontained in Annex 1 of the Zanzibar Declaration
outlined Negotiating Objectives and Proposals for the Fourth WTO Ministerial Conference. Itfocussed on special and differential treatment (S&D) provisions, implementation issues, ongoing
negotiations and the mandated reviews. Market access was also a key concern and development
partners were urged to give “duty and quota free” access on a predictable basis with more relaxed and
flexible rules of origin that would match LDCs’ industrial capacity. Concern was expressed on the
inclusion of "new issues" given the limited capacity of LDCs to negotiate. He hoped that Memberswould focus on issues and concerns of importa nce to LDCs at the Ministerial Conference.
52. The representative of Haiti said that the inclus ion of this item in the work programme and the
agenda of the Sub-Committee reflected the importance attached to the Zanzibar Declaration. The
translation and wide circulation of the document had made it possible for all WTO Members to
appreciate the contribution of LDCs in the ongoing negotiations. Ambassador Mchumo, on behalf ofthe LDCs had presented their position to the General Council and had underlined the importance of
implementation issues for LDCs. Bangladesh had also expressed the views of LDCs on the "new
issues", where clear guidelines had been given by Ministers.  He said that LDCs were not expressing
individual positions but rather  a collective view as contained in document WT/L/409.
53. The representative of Burundi thanked the WTO and UNCTAD Secretariat for the assistance
provided at the Zanzibar meeting. The concerns expressed and position presented by LDCs had
remained constant. Global, comprehensive and harmonized market access together with capacitybuilding were needed so that LDCs could export both in terms of quantity and quality. He urged
Members to take full account of the issues and concerns expressed by LDCs as a group not just in
connection with Doha but in the context of their membership in the WTO.
54. The representative of Guinea said that her delegation had actively participated at the Zanzibar
meeting. She supported the statement made by Tanzania, on behalf of the LDCs, at the General
Council meeting on 30 July 2001, and the statements made earlier by Bangladesh, Haiti and Burundi
at the Sub-Committee. In Zanzibar, the meeting ha d yielded two documents, a political declaration
and a document delineating the negotiating aims and objectives of LDCs. Priority had been given to
market access, S&D treatment, and the strengthening of capacities in the context of WTO
Agreements. She urged development partners to reflect and take into consideration these issues. Onother matters raised in the Sub-Committee, she said that her delegation welcomed being part of the
second phase of the IF Pilot Scheme as adopted at the Steering Committee on 12 October 2001. She
also thanked Members that had given preferential market access to LDCs including those that hadWT/COMTD/LDC/M/26
Page 9
made announcements at LDC-III. She also thanked the WTO and the UNCTAD Secretariats for their
assistance to LDCs at the Zanzibar and other meetings, preparatory for the Doha Ministerial Meeting.
55. The representative of Zambia endorsed the statements made under this agenda item.
56. The representative of Canada thanked LDCs for the Zanzibar Declaration and the statements
made that reflected a collective view on a number of important issues.
57. The Chairman said that the subjects raised under this item were relevant and proposed that the
next meeting reflect an agenda item that would build on the discussions.
58. It was so agreed.
(ii) Logistic Support for Participation of LDCs' at the Fourth WTO Ministerial Conference:
Report by the Secretariat
59. The Chairman invited Mr. Chabert, Director, Administration and General Services Division
(AGSD), to provide further information on the logist ic support to LDCs for their participation at the
Fourth WTO Ministerial Conference.
60. Mr. Chabert, Director, Administration and General Services Division said that the
participation of three delegates from each LDC to include the Minister/Head of Delegation and two
accompanying officials was being facilitated. The authorities in Qatar had indicated that they would
pay the hotel charges, and provide LDCs' participants  the equivalent of half the per diem allowance
for Doha. For travel expenses for the participants from all the 49 LDCs, the WTO Secretariat had
established a special Trust Fund with a budget of Swiss Francs 700,000. This budget had been
calculated on the basis of a Business Class ticket for the minister and two economy class tickets for
the accompanying persons. He informed the S ub-Committee that the WTO had received pledges of
Swiss Francs 700,000 but only Swiss Francs 300,000 had been disbursed. He urged all Members thathad made the pledges to provide the funds at the earliest. Reservation of air tickets had been made but
the tickets could not be dispatched to capitals till the funds were fully paid up. Officials from Qatar
had also provided relevant information to Members at a briefing on Thursday, 11 October 2001.
61. The Sub-Committee took note of the statement made.
F. REORGANIZATION OF WTO TECHNICAL COOPERATION: STATUS REPORT BY
THE SECRETARIAT
62. The Chairman recalled that Deputy Director-General, Mr. Ravier, at the last session of the
Sub-Committee, had reported to Members on the re-o rganization of WTO technical cooperation,  put
in place by the Director-General. Some Members had requested for a report outlining the changes and
the new strategy for technical assistance. In response, the document WT/COMTD/W/90 and Add.1
had been presented to the CTD at its 35th Session. Members commented and had made suggestions.
The CTD had taken note of the New Strategy and had mandated the Secretariat to proceed with itsimplementation. He invited Mr. Chiedu Osakwe, Dire ctor, Technical Cooperation Division, to brief
the Sub-Committee on the strategy and any impact on LDCs.
63. Mr. Chiedu Osakwe, Director, Technical Cooperation Division said that on 8 October 2001,
the CTD had taken note of the new strategy contained in WT/COMTD/W/90 and had authorized the
Secretariat to proceed with its implementation. At the CTD meeting, 16 Members had commented.These comments would guide the Secretariat in the implementation of the New Strategy. Firstly,
Members sought a statement on implementation in the periodic annual review of the Strategy.
Secondly,  one developing country and an LDC had said that they would judge the success of the New
Strategy by the extent to which it would enable them  to increase their share of world trade. On thisWT/COMTD/LDC/M/26
Page 10
particular point, he noted that the Secretariat had indicated that increase in shares of world trade
would also be related to the extent to which trade was mainstreamed and was an integral part of
national plans for economic development and strategies for poverty reduction, and to further trade
liberalization. Two views were expressed on mainstreaming some had said that it should be based on
country ownership of national development plans and the priorities contained in them. A related viewwas that agencies working in close collaboration with donors and together with the beneficiary
countries should work to achieve the objectives of mainstreaming. Thirdly, there was a call to
explicitly involve bilateral donors in the delivery of WTO trade-related technical assistance. In the
IFSC, bilateral donors were involved in the delivery of technical assistance to LDCs, and it was hoped
that this could be a model to be enhanced and extended. In this regard, he noted that since the review
of the IF, the Director-General had convened meetings of WTO Members who were also members of
the DAC/OECD. Fourthly, the need was expressed fo r improved co-ordination at various levels. The
delivery of technical assistance in co-ordination with Regional Trading Arrangements (RTAs) should
be actively pursued, and improved where this was already underway.   Fifthly, many delegations
called for predictability in funding to enable the implementation of the New Strategy.  They stressed
that implementation would be partly dependent on availability of resources and the strengthening of
the Secretariat. Sixthly, some delegations stressed the importance of relating the core elements of theNew Strategy, as outlined in paragraph 8, with the various approaches that had been identified in
paragraph 3. Seventhly, there was a call to reconcile the JITAP programme and the IF. The
Secretariat, in response, had noted that this was largely a matter for members.
64. Finally, the Director, Technical Cooperation Division, informed the Sub-Committee that a
new format for the technical assistance Annual Plans had been established, as contained in Add.1 ofWT/COMTD/W/90.
65. The representative of Djibouti thanked Mr. Osakwe for his presentation on the reorganization
and the New Strategy for WTO technical cooperation. He said that its purpose would be to better
integrate the LDCs into the international trading system by taking account of their development
capacities. There was a need to strengthen the Secretariat's capacity to implement the strategy.
66. The representative of Zambia thanked Mr. Osakwe for the report. He said that in the CTD,
Zambia had made a statement, which needed to be taken into account.  He would like the statement to
be reflected appropriately in the minutes of the meeting. A non-paper had subsequently also been
forwarded to the Chairman of the CTD for circul ation to Members so as to further enhance the
process.
67. The representative of India thanked Mr. Osakwe for his report. In the recently concluded
Council for Trade in Services (CTS) Special Session, Members had been requested, by mid
November 2001, to submit plans for their individual technical assistance needs in 2002. He sought
clarification on whether the technical assistance strategy was integrated on a Secretariat-wide basis or
was being dealt with separately in the Divisions themselves.
68. Mr Chiedu Osakwe confirmed that inputs into the TA Plan for 2002 were coordinated on a
Secretariat-wide basis.  Inputs were being drawn from  individual requests by delegations based on
their national needs, and  mandates arising from stand-alone decisions in Committees or WTO bodies
like the CTS, the Customs Valuations Committee, etc. He added that the Trade in Services Division
and the Technical Cooperation Division, were in coordination on several issues, including a Seminar
on the Movement of Natural Persons that would be organized in 2002.
69. The Chairman thanked Mr. Osakwe for his report and proposed that the Sub-Committee takes
note of the statements made under this item.
70. It was so agreed.WT/COMTD/LDC/M/26
Page 11
71. The Chairman on a related topic, recalled that at the last session of the Sub-Committee,
Members had requested the Secretariat for a written report on the WTO-WIPO Joint Initiative on
Technical Cooperation for LDCs to supplement the oral report made at that meeting.  The document
WT/COMTD/LDC/W/21 was prepared in response to the request. He proposed that the Sub-
Committee take note of the Secretariat report.
72. It was so agreed.
G. DRAFT WORK PROGRAMME OF THE SUB-COMMITTEE FOR 2002
73. The Chairman invited Members to consider the draft Work Programme of the Sub-Committee
for 2002.  The 2001 Annual Report of the CTD and Sub-Committee, in document WT/COMTD/33,
was adopted by the CTD at its meeting on 8 October 2001. He drew attention to Section III of the
Annual Report that pertained to the activities of the Sub-Committee. On the work ahead, a draft work
programme for the Sub-Committee, for the year 2002, had been circulated by the Secretariat.4  H e
invited Mr. Osakwe, Director, Technical Cooperation Division, to introduce the draft.
74. Mr. Osakwe, Director, Technical Cooperation Division said that three formal meetings of the
Sub-Committee were proposed in the draft work programme for 2002, without prejudice to informal
consultations that could take place. The proposed dates for the formal meetings, in 2002, were 28
February, 27 May and 21 October. Based on earlier guidance by the Sub-Committee, the meetingshad been scheduled back-to-back with other events at the WTO so as to enable LDC delegates from
capitals to participate at meetings. He said that an IF  "mainstreaming" seminar had been scheduled
from 25 to 27 February 2002, as a follow-up to the  first inter-agency seminar on trade
mainstreaming , held in January 2001. This seminar was timely as there was a need to review the IF:
(i) in its entirety; (ii) in its Pilot Phase; (iii) to reconcile the JITAP and the IF; and (iv) to  explore thepossibility of the IF as a model that could be applicable to other countries.  Also in the draft work
programme, two regional seminars had been listed for LDCs. These were being organized pursuant to
the Joint WIPO-WTO initiative to assist LDCs meet their TRIPs obligations. The specific dates for
the regional seminars were yet to be confirmed. Finally, to further intertwine  WTO trade policy
reviews and  the delivery of WTO technical assistance, a WTO seminar, to be jointly organized by theTrade Policy Review Division and the Technical Cooperation Division, was planned in May 2002, on
TPRs and Technical Assistance. This would not just be limited to LDCs but would be a WTO-wide
seminar over the period of a day or a day and a half. He said that the draft programme would be
finalized and issued following comments to be made at the Sub-Committee.
75. The representative of Canada thanked the Secretariat for the draft work programme and the
attempt to link various WTO activities. She noted that the Geneva week had been mentioned and was
an important event for the LDC Members of the WTO. She suggested that the proposed session of theSub-Committee scheduled in October 2002 be held back -to-back with the Geneva week. If the dates
of the Geneva week in 2002 did change, as was the case in 2001, she proposed that the dates of the
LDC Sub-Committee could also be changed at the same time.
76. The representative of India thanked the Secretariat for the draft circulated. It would consult
with its capital on the draft.  However, it would offer preliminary comments. With regard to the IF
review mentioned in the draft agenda for the IF Joint Seminar, scheduled for 25-27 February 2002. He
sought clarification  as to whether the review was likely to be undertaken by the IAWG, and if so, was
there a time schedule so that the results of the seminar could provide inputs for such a review? He
agreed that the WTO seminar on TPRs and Technical Assistance was important for all Members.
77. The representative of Zambia thanked the Secretariat for the draft programme. In response to
the principle of ownership, his delegation had prepared a non-paper on a proposed work programme
                                                     
4 Circulated as document WT/COMTD/LDC/W/23 following the Sub-Committee meeting.WT/COMTD/LDC/M/26
Page 12
that would be transmitted to the Chairman. The LDC perspective was based on the Terms of
Reference of the Sub-Committee (WT/COMTD/2). Items had also been proposed for the work
programme based on the Brussels Programme of Ac tion and the Zanzibar Declaration agreed upon by
LDCs' Trade Ministers. Highlights of the proposal included market access, S&D, implementation of
the Marrakesh Ministerial Declarations in Favour of LDCs, Transfer of Technology, TRIPS,Agreement on Subsidies, TRIMS, Technical Coope ration, LDCs Accession and Follow-up to LDC-
III. He requested that these points be considered and regretted the non-availability of the paper that
would be circulated to Members shortly
5 for consideration at the next meeting of the Sub-Committee.
78. The representative of the European Commun ities thanked the Secretariat for the coherent
draft work programme. As in other Committees, with the WTO Ministerial Conference ahead, the
work programmes were being adopted pending the future work programme of the Organization. He
proposed that the same procedure be followed in the Sub-Committee.
79. The representative of Haiti thanked the Secretariat for the presentation of the draft work
programme for 2002. He agreed with the EC that it should be accepted as an indicative programme
that could be remodelled depending on the mandates arising from the Fourth Ministerial. He noted
that there were 8 important activities included in the work programme and this would enable his
delegation to prepare for them in advance. Often in meetings, the circulation of documents wasdelayed and the papers were not translated. In WT/COMTD/W/90, the organizational chart of the
Technical Cooperation Division indicated that there were several responsibilities for staff Members.
He said that it should be possible to endow the Division with staff so that the work could be done in a
timely manner and the meetings would receive translated documents. He said that it would require an
additional effort at the WTO Budget Committee to provide qualified staff and that it was important toresolve this problem.
80. The Chairman said that the programme of work could evolve and be adapted in response to
changes in demand. He proposed that the draft programme be adopted on this basis.
81. The representative of Zambia said that his understanding of the procedure for adoption of the
work programme was that the proposal would be st udied, delegations would make contributions, and
that at a later stage, the programme would be agreed upon. As it was the first opportunity for his
delegation to study the draft work programme, he sought a clarification on the procedure.
82. The Chairman proposed that the Sub-Committee agree to the work programme on the
understanding that it could be revised as necessary. As the programme had only been circulated at the
meeting, and some delegations had said that they would consult further on this, he also proposed a
Silence Procedure be adopted. He stressed that it was only an indicative programme, so as to book
meeting rooms and plan out the calendar ahead, and to avoid overlap in 2002. There were someoperational difficulties in not agreeing to this in 2001, as the proposed date for the next Sub-
Committee meeting, was only in end-February 2002. He proposed that following a Silence Procedure
of three weeks, the work programme be agreed upon on an indicative basis.
83. The representative of Djibouti agreed with the proposal of the Chairman and said that the
work programme could be indicative. If there was an evolution in the next year as mentioned by the
EC, it could be taken into account.
84. The representative of Zambia said that though it could have made its contributions and non-
paper available earlier, it had not participated in the consultations towards the drafting of the work
programme. Bearing in mind the importance of th e LDC-III Programme of Action and the Zanzibar
Declaration, the work programme needed to be better oriented. Zambia would be submitting its
proposal and expressed hope that due consideration would be given to its substance.
                                                     
5 Circulated as document WT/COMTD/LDC/W/24 following the Sub-Committee meeting.WT/COMTD/LDC/M/26
Page 13
85. The representative of India recalled that for 2001, a work programme was agreed upon at the
last Sub-Committee meeting of 2000 and was thereafter refined as and when found necessary. He
agreed with the Chairman's proposal and accepted th e draft work programme that had been proposed.
86. The representative of Canada said that the proposals in the non-paper that Zambia was
intending to circulate could be discussed as the first item on the agenda of the Sub-Committee at its
first meeting in 2002. Delegations would be in a position to review the proposal and adjust the agenda
to meet some of the requirements made by the LDCs.
87. The representative of Guinea emphasized the importance of including the Zanzibar document
and LDC-III programme of action in the work programme.
88. The Chairman said that as mentioned earlie r the outcome of the Zanzibar meeting was
important and that there was a need to adjust the agenda to continue the discussions. He said that the
work programme was an indicative one that could be adjusted. At the next meeting of the Sub-Committee the proposals put forward by Zambia and others would be taken up as possible issues in
the agenda. He proposed that the Sub-Committee move ahead on this basis.
89. It was so agreed.
H. OTHER BUSINESS
90. The representative of Bangladesh proposed under "Other Business" that a section on LDCs
trade be included in the WTO Annual Report: International Trade Statistics so that LDCs trade could
be compared with its trading partners.
91. Mr. Osakwe said that the Economic Research & Analysis Division (ERAD), the Trade Policy
Review Division (TPRD), and the Statistics Divi sion (SD), the Divisions largely responsible for
preparing the Annual Report, would be consulted on this matter.
92. The Chairman proposed that the Sub-Committee meet for its 27th session on 28 February
2002.
93. It was so agreed.
94. In the absence of any other business, the meeting was adjourned.
__________