MOREPRESS RELEASE
PRESS/TPRB/183
21 December 2001
(01-6463)
TRADE POLICY REVIEW BODY
REVIEW OF UGANDA
TPRB'S EVALUATION
The Trade Policy Review Body of the World Trade Organization (WTO) concluded its
second review of Uganda on 19 and 21 December  2001. The text of the Chairperson's concluding
remarks is attached as a summary of the salient points which emerged during the discussion.
The review enables the TPRB to conduct a collec tive examination of the full range of trade
policies and practices of each WTO member countries at regular periodic intervals to monitor
significant trends and developments which may have an impact on the global trading system.
The review is based on two reports which are prepared respectively by the WTO Secretariat
and the government under review and which cover all aspects of the country's trade policies, includingits domestic laws and regulations, the institutional framework, bilateral, regional and other
preferential agreements, the wider economic needs and the external environment. A record of the
discussion and the Chairperson's summing-up together with these two reports will be published in due
course at the complete trade policy review of Uganda and will be available from the WTO Secretariat,
Centre William Rappard, 154 rue de Lausanne, 1211 Geneva 21.PRESS/TPRB/183
Page 2
MORESince December 1989, the following reports have been completed: Argentina (1992 and 1999),
Australia (1989, 1994 and 1998), Austria (1992), Ba hrain (2000) Bangladesh (1992 and 2000), Benin
(1997), Bolivia (1993 and 1999), Botswana (1998), Brazil (1992, 1996 and 2000), Brunei Darussalam
(2001), Burkina Faso (1998), Cameroon (1995  and 2001), Canada (1990, 1992, 1994, 1996, 1998 and
2000), Chile (1991 and 1997), Colombia (1990 and 1996), Costa Rica (1995 and 2001), Côte d’Ivoire
(1995), Cyprus (1997), the Czech Republic (1996 and 2001), the Dominican Republic (1996), Egypt
(1992 and 1999), El Salvador (1996), the Eu ropean Communities (1991, 1993, 1995, 1997 and 2000),
Fiji (1997), Finland (1992), Gabon (2001), Ghana (1992 and 2001), Guinea (1999), Hong Kong
(1990, 1994 and 1998), Hungary (1991 and 1998), Iceland (1994 and 2000), India (1993 and 1998),
Indonesia (1991, 1994 and 1998), Israel (1994 and 1999), Jamaica (1998), Japan (1990, 1992,
1995,1998 and 2000), Kenya (1993 and 2000), Korea, Rep. of (1992, 1996 and 2000), Lesotho
(1998), Macao (1994 and 2001), Madagascar (2001), Malaysia (1993, 1997 and 2001), Mali (1998),
Mauritius (1995 and 2001), Mexico (1993 and 1997), Morocco (1989 and 1996), Mozambique(2001), New Zealand (1990 and 1996), Namibia (1998 ), Nicaragua (1999), Nigeria (1991 and 1998),
Norway (1991, 1996 and 2000), OECS (2001), Pakistan (1995), Papua New Guinea (1999), Paraguay
(1997), Peru (1994 and 2000), the Philippines (1993 and 1999), Poland (1993 and 2000), Romania
(1992 and 1999), Senegal (1994), Singapore ( 1992, 1996 and 2000), Slovak Republic (1995 and
2001), the Solomon Islands (1998), South Africa (1993 and 1998), Sri Lanka (1995), Swaziland(1998), Sweden (1990 and 1994), Switzerland (1991, 1996 and 2000 (jointly with Liechtenstein)),
Tanzania (2000), Thailand (1991, 1995 and 1999), Togo (1999), Trinidad and Tobago (1998), Tunisia
(1994), Turkey (1994 and 1998), the United States (1989, 1992, 1994, 1996, 1999 and 2001), Uganda
(1995 and 2001), Uruguay (1992 and 1998), Venezuel a (1996), Zambia (1996) and Zimbabwe (1994).PRESS/TPRB/183
Page 3
MORETRADE POLICY REVIEW BODY
REVIEW UGANDA
CONCLUDING REMARKS OF THE CHAIRPERSON
We have had a very interesting exchange of views during this second Trade Policy Review of
Uganda.  This was facilitated by the presence of a large Ugandan delegation, headed byProfessor Rugumayo, Minister of Tourism, Trad e and Industry.  Members commented positively on
the impressive growth of the Ugandan economy in recent years, aided by structural reforms and a
strong macroeconomic performance, which resulted in Uganda's early inclusion in the HIPC
Initiative.  Various government programmes put emphasis on poverty alleviation, diversification, and
promotion of the private sector.  However, high production costs, declining terms of trade, climaticconditions, non-tariff barriers in export markets and appreciation of the Uganda shilling have
negatively affected its economic performance, its export competitiveness in particular.
Members observed the seriousness with which Uganda had pursued its privatization agenda,
but noted a slowing in recent years.  It was pointed out that, by speeding up the process for the
remaining entities, and by addressing governance and security problems, and regulatory andinstitutional weaknesses, Uganda might further facilitate trade and attract investment.  Members were
encouraged by Uganda's assurances and actions in this respect.  Some Members noted, however, that
issues of governance should be treated prudently in the TPRs
Members commended Uganda on its active participation in the Multilateral Trading System.
They called on Uganda to provide notification concerning its use of WTO-compatible customs
valuation procedures, and to join the Informati on Technology Agreement, in the context of the
Government's clear emphasis on the economic importance of information technology industries.They queried about Uganda’s trade-related priorities, and urged that inter-Ministerial coordination
and coherence be improved in this respect.  Members noted Uganda’s expectations and experience
that non-reciprocal preferential treatment and its regional arrangements were a spur to liberalization,
particularly through the active participation of the private sector.  Concerns were expressed about
overlapping membership of regional agreements in which Uganda participated, and the likelyincreases that might result from the adoption of common external tariffs under the agreements.
Members expressed their appreciation of Uganda's commitment and continued efforts to
liberalize its trade regime.  They commended Uganda for the simplification of its tariff structure
through the reduction of the number of bands to three and of the maximum rate to 15%.  Members
encouraged Uganda to narrow the gap between bound and applied rates, and to increase the coverage
of its tariff bindings on non-agricultural products.  Concerns were expressed about the WTO
compatibility of the import licence commission and the withholding tax, while Uganda had bound
other duties and charges at zero.  Members noted Uganda’s commitment to developing a capability to
create a set of standards, although the effort had been hampered by financial constraints, and made
suggestions for streamlining standardization in Uganda.
Members pointed out the heavy dependence of Uganda’s economy on agriculture, particularly
coffee.  Although recent reforms had emphasized diversification and modernization of agriculture,
much more needed to be done in this area.  In manufacturing, low capacity utilization and high
production costs had meant that few of Uganda's manuf actured goods were competitive.  In services,
Members encouraged Uganda to speed up the liber alization reforms and to improve its commitments
under the GATS.PRESS/TPRB/183
Page 4
Members also sought further clarification on, inter alia :
• customs procedures;
• export bans and controls and their rationale;
• incentives and export financing;
• contingency trade remedies;
• public procurement regime;
• competition policy;  and
• intellectual property protection.
Members appreciated the responses provided by the delegation of Uganda during the meeting,
and looked forward to later replies to some questions.
In conclusion, as a result of this Review, Members have better understood developments in
Uganda’s trade policies and practices since 1995.  Members commended Uganda for the introductionof a social dimension in its economic reforms.  However, they urged that trade policies and practices
be further mainstreamed in Uganda’s poverty alleviation strategy.  Members encouraged Uganda to
pursue its reforms and further integrate its economy into the multilateral trading system.  Several
Members urged that the Ugandan authorities provide additional resources to their Mission in Geneva
to allow it to fully pursue the interests of Uganda, pa rticularly so that it could play an active role on
the Doha Development Agenda.  Some Members indi cated their willingness to provide Uganda with
trade-related technical assistance.  In my personal capacity, I advocate that all Members support
Uganda in its efforts by providing market access for its products, and assistance for trade-related
capacity building and improving competitiveness;  in that respect it is fundamental to ensure full and
active implementation of the Integrated Framework for Uganda.
END