RESTRICTED
WORLD TRADE WT/TPR/20
19July1996
ORGANIZATION(96-2869)
Trade Policy Review Mechanism
PROCEDURAL IMPROVEMENTS TOTHE TPRM
Note bytheChairperson1
1. Aninformal TPRB meeting washeldon28February tocontinue thediscussion onpossible
procedural improvements inthereview mechanism. Inconcluding themeeting, Iundertook tocirculate
abriefnotesetting outthesepoints which attracted awidemeasure ofsupport among delegations (with
other proposals tobeleftaside forfurther discussion atalaterstage). Below isasummary ofpoints
which seemed tometofallintothatcategory.
Context ofdiscussion
2. There isagreement that,broadly speaking, theTPRM isworking wellandcontinues toprove
itsworth forcountries reviewed aswellasWTO trading partners. Thechallenge istoensure that
themechanism operates tomaximum effect, withthebestpossible return ontheinvestment ofhuman
andfinancial resources. (These areconsiderable: thereare30authorized posts intheWTO Secretariat
dealing withtheTPRB, withatotalstaffandtravel costs inexcess ofCHF 4m.perannum. There
isalsoamajor investment oftimebyMembers.)
Preparation ofTPRB meetings
3. Within ageneral understanding thattheSecretariat report should remain comprehensive, efforts
toachieve amore streamlined approach should continue. Inparticular, themacro-economic section
should beconcise, relevant tothepurpose ofthereview, andnotrehearse material readily available
elsewhere. Some oftheexisting chapter headings might beintegrated and,ingeneral, amore user-
friendly approach adopted.
4. Adegree offlexibility isnecessary interms ofthedemands made oncapitals during the
preparatory stage. While thorough preparation ofreviews isalways essential, notallmember States
arewelladapted fordealing withlengthy questionnaires; theSecretariat should continue itsefforts
tokeepthepaperwork toareasonable level.
5. Thereportsubmittedbythecountryunderreviewshouldaddresskeyissues,beaforward-looking
policy statement, andavoid any"propagandistic" overtones.
./.
1This Note wascirculated on29March 1996 andsubmitted totheTPRB meeting on12June 1996
(WT/TPR/21).WT/TPR/20
Page2
6. Most delegations continue tofavour thediscussants being drawn fromdelegations inGeneva,
atanappropriately senior levelandwithagood rotation among delegations. (Ifthepoolofpotential
discussants weretobroadened, government officials withGATT/WTO experience butnotcurrently
posted inGeneva would probably bethenextcategory tobeconsidered.)
Conduct ofmeetings; follow-up
7. Countries under review usually head their delegations atMinisterial level, anditisnot
unreasonable forthemtoexpect some reflection ofthisinthecomposition ofother delegations. There
wasnodissent from aproposal thatattendance byacertain number ofAmbassadors ateachreview
meeting should beactively encouraged.
8. TheChairperson 'sconcluding remarks should reflect theactual content ofthemeeting and
should combine afactual summary ofissues raised withamore personal appraisal ofthediscussion.
9. Athorough review implies careful attention tofollow-up. Totheextent possible, delegations
should respond atthemeeting towritten andoralquestions. Following eachreview, theSecretariat
should compile achecklist ofpoints onwhich thecountry reviewed hasundertaken toprovide further
information. Thischecklist would alsonotepoints onwhich thecountry hasindicated thataction is
pending (legislative oradministrative measures inthepipeline). TheChairperson would forward this
checklist tothecountry concerned andinvite (a)thesupplementary information promised and(b)a
progress report inareas where forthcoming action hadbeensignalled. Areply would besought within
areasonable timeframe. Onreceipt ofareply, copies ofthecorrespondence would becirculated to
allMembers. (Ifnoreply isreceived within areasonable timeframe, theChairperson 'sletter would
becirculated withanindication thatareply ispending.)
Rhythm ofReview
10. Alargemajority ofdelegations continue tosupport therhythm ofmeetings outlined inAnnex 3
totheUruguay Round Agreement; however, there wasnodissent from suggestions that,incaseof
theQuad, every second review might havemore ofan"interim" character.
11. There iscaution about theideaof"grouping" countries forreview, since criteria forsuch
groupings would bedifficult todevelop andthebenefits arenotself-evident. However, where smaller
member States might themselves volunteer tobereviewed asagroup, such requests would be
sympathetically considered.
Enhancing awareness oftheTPRM
12. There isaviewthattheTPRM maybeunder-valued asaresource. Suggestions forenhancing
awareness ofthemechanism, particularly inbusiness andacademic circles, areencouraged; thepotential
forimproved linkages withother WTO bodies willalsobekeptunder consideration.