. /.  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  WT/IFSC/7 
17 February 2004 
 (04-0636) 
Integrated Framework Steering Committee  
  
INTEGRATED FRAMEWORK WORK PROGRAMME 
 
Follow-up Actions to the Second Evaluation of the Integrated Framework
 
 
 
1. Following the submission of the report of the S econd Evaluation of the Integrated Framework 
(IF) by CAPRA1 in August 2003, the IF Steering Committee (IFSC) at its 10th session on 
27 October 2003 requested the IF Working Group (IFWG) to formulate a work programme which 
would improve the operational aspects of the IF .  The IFWG met to discuss the report and its 
recommendations at its 37th session on 28 October 2003, which was followed by another informal 
meeting on 4-5 December 2003.  Taking into account various views expressed by all IF stakeholders 
during the evaluation debate, as well as the lessons and experiences gained in the implementation of 
the IF since May 2001, the IFWG adopted the foll owing Work Programme for the next phase of the 
IF at its Meeting on 9 – 10 February, 2004.  It w as subsequently approved by the IFSC at its 
11th Session on 13 February 2004. 
2. The IFWG aims to achieve the following by 31 December 2005:  
(a) Encourage effective follow-up to the Diagnos tic Trade Integration Study (DTIS) in 
those countries where the studies have been completed2, as outlined in document 
WT/LDC/SWG/IF/13.  Bilateral and multilate ral development partners are urged to 
work with committed IF partner governments to respond to the trade-related technical 
assistance priorities identified in the DTIS and its Action Matrix;   
(b) undertake new DTIS in countries that ha ve demonstrated clear and strong 
commitment to mainstream trade into national development plans such as PRSPs; 
(c) assess work undertaken in the five Round Table countries (Bangladesh, the Gambia, 
Haiti, Tanzania and Uganda) and explore ways  to incorporate those countries into the 
revamped IF process, provided they meet the agreed criteria;  
(d) clarify the operation of Window II of the IF Trust Fund and encourage effective and 
efficient use of its funds;  
(e) ensure greater synergies and coordination with  other trade-related technical assistance 
projects, in particular with the Joint Integrated Technical Assistance Programme 
(JITAP).  In countries where both the IF and JITAP are in place, the government should establish arrangements to ensure sy nergies, including the use of a single 
national steering committee for both the IF and JITAP, the appointment of the same 
focal point and to link the DTIS and JITAP capacity building activities.  The agencies 
involved in the two programmes should also ensure internal coordination through the 
                                                     
 
1 The full report of the Second Evaluation is contained in document WT/IFSC/6/Rev.2.  A summary is 
contained in document WT/IFSC/6/Rev.2/Add.1.  The Terms of Reference for the Evaluation are contained in 
document WT/IFSC/3/Rev.1. 
2 Burundi, Cambodia, Djibouti, Ethiopia, Guinea, Lesotho, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Mauritania, 
Nepal, Senegal and Yemen.   WT/IFSC/7 
Page 2  
 
holding of periodic consultations between  Members of the IFWG and the JITAP 
Common Trust Fund Steering Group;  
(f) further strengthen country ownership of th e IF and ensure that the LDC is in the 
driver's seat.  The effectiveness of the National Steering Committee and the IF Focal 
Point is key to the successful implementation of the IF and the trade mainstreaming 
process in general.  More resources and s upport should be made available to them 
through the UNDP managed project "Strengt hening the National Implementation of 
the IF".  Locally-based agencies and lead f acilitators should also offer support to the 
IF focal point;  
(g) enhance the management of the IF by strengthening the IF Secretariat.  A fully 
resourced Secretariat is essential for the smooth implementation and management of 
the IF, in light of the upcoming expansion of the IF to additional LDCs, accompanied 
by increased IF activities and the greater n eed for coordination.  The IFWG should 
agree on the functions of the IF Secretariat as well as on the additional resources required to enable the Secretariat to execute its functions efficiently; 
(h) improve communication and undertake outr each activities.  The following actions 
could be considered provided that resources required for their implementation are met: revamping the IF website (www.int egratedframework.o rg) as a tool for 
dissemination information;  preparation of monthly electronic newsletters to 
supplement the website; development of a group website to replace the current 
practice of e-mail communications among IF WG members;  maintaining regular 
contacts with the beneficiary countries to monitor progress in the field; and 
organization of outreach seminars/workshops to promote  the IF and to allow 
experience sharing among IF stakeholders in Geneva and in the field;  and 
(i) encourage development partners to increase contributions to the IF Trust Fund. 
 
 
__________