WORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONWT/TPR/86
13 October 2000
(00-4241)
Trade Policy Review Body
TRADE POLICY REVIEW MECHANISM
Report of the Trade Policy Review Body for 2000
Chairman:  H.E. Dr. Iftekhar Ahmed Chowdhury
1. The Trade Policy Review Mechanism (TPRM) was established in 1989 on a provisional basis
and confirmed by Annex 3 of the Marrakesh Agreement establishing the WTO.  As required by the
Marrakesh Agreement, the operation of the TPRM was appraised by the Trade Policy Review Body in
1999.  The appraisal concluded that the TPRM functions effectively and that its mission and
objectives remain important;  the TPRM had also "demonstrated that it had a valuable public good
aspect, particularly in its contribution to transparency".1  Members have also kept the Mechanism
under frequent review over the years, as a result of which a number of procedural improvements have
been introduced since 1989.
2. This report by the Trade Policy Review Body seeks to provide its annual assessment of the
TPRM and the extent to which it fulfils its objectives as stated in the Marrakesh Agreement.  The
Annual Report discusses the Trade Policy Reviews of Members conducted in the year 2000 and themain issues arising from them.  Tables are a nnexed showing the Members reviewed to the end of
2000, the geographical coverage of the reviews conducted to date, as well as the proposed programme
of reviews for the year 2001.
The Objectives of the TPRM
3. Annex 3 of the Marrakesh Agreement describes the objectives of the TPRM as being "to
contribute to improved adherence by all Members to rules, disciplines and commitments made under
the Multilateral Trade Agreements and, where applicable, the Plurilateral Trade Agreements, andhence to the smoother functioning of the multilateral trading system, by achieving greater
transparency in, and understanding of, the trade policies and practices of Members".
4. In this regard, the TPRM is required to periodically review the trade policies and practices of
all Members.  By the end of 2000, the TPRM will have conducted 135 reviews since its formation
(Annex I).  The reviews have covered 74 out of a total of 124 Members, counting the European Unionas one, and represent around 83%  of the share of world trade (in 1998) and around 60% of the total
WTO Membership (64% if the EU were counted as 15 members).  Increased importance given to the
reviews of least developed countries has led to  12 such reviews since 1989 (Bangladesh has been
reviewed twice).
2
5. In 2000, the Trade Policy Review Body will have conducted 15 reviews, of which one was a
grouped review (Annex II).  The Secretariat report for Tanzania was prepared with the assistance of
consultants under the supervision of Secretariat staff;  Denmark provided funding for this
consultancy.  The Secretariat report on Ghana also had the partial involvement of a consultant, funded
                                                     
1 WTO document WT/MIN(99)/2, 8 October 1999.
2 The least developed countries reviewed since the establishment of the Mechanism are:  Bangladesh
(twice), Benin, Burkina Faso, Guinea, Lesotho, Mali, the Solomon Islands, Tanzania, Togo, Uganda, andZambia.WT/TPR/86
Page 2
by the Secretariat's budget.  The Federal Republic of Germany has made DM1 million available over
a four-year period to undertake reviews of develo ping countries and to improve the Mechanism with
the objective to better adapt it to the requirements of developing countries.  The Secretariat's reports
continue to be carefully supervised by Secretariat staff and written in close consultation with the
authorities of the country under review.
6. Procedures for the reviews conducted in 2000 have generally run smoothly.  Responses to
requests for documentation and questionnaires have, with a few exceptions, been provided at or close
to the requested dates.  In line with practice introduced in the previous year, the Secretariat has
attempted to reduce the burden of providing responses on Members under review by using, to the
extent possible, alternative sources of documentation, including through the internet.  Depending on
the extent of information available through these alternative sources, it has not been possible to do this
for all Members under review and requests for docu mentation continue to be followed up with a
detailed questionnaire when sufficient information is not available from alternative sources.
Secretariat follow-up visits to capitals have continued to be productive, and comments provided to
Secretariat drafts have, in general, been pertinent.  The result is that the quality, content and style of
the reviews has been maintained.
7. As was noted in the TPRB's Annual Report of 1999, the Secretariat has been successful in
eliminating the concentration of reviews towards the la tter half of the year as had been experienced in
previous years.  The reviews conducted in 2000 were evenly spaced throughout the year, reducing
pressure on the Membership of preparing for review meetings at close intervals;  efforts were also
made to avoid clashes with other meetings at the WTO.  In addition, the cooperative publishing
agreement reached with an international publishing company has considerably shortened the periodbetween review meetings and the publication of reviews.
8. The Trade Policy Review programme for the year 2001 proposes to review 21 Members.
These are:
• the United States on the two-year cycle;
• Malaysia on the four-year cycle;
• Brunei;  Cameroon;  Costa Rica;  Czech Republic;  Gabon;  Ghana;  Macau, China;
Mauritius;  the WTO Members of the OECS (a grouped review involving six Members)
3;
Pakistan;  and Slovak Republic, on the six-year cycle;  and
• three least developed countries:  Madagascar, Mozambique and Uganda.
9. The Secretariat intends to continue to provide a more evenly spaced programme of reviews in
2001, thereby avoiding the concentration of reviews and delays that have occurred in the past.
Value of the TPRM
10. As envisaged in Annex 3, the TPRM continues to be a valuable forum for achieving
transparency in, and understanding of, the trade policies and practices of Members, thus contributing
to the smoother functioning of the multilateral trading system.  It provides a forum in which Members
may openly discuss and provide an objective analysis of each others' trade policies, and which
remains separate from the compliance-related and legal work of the WTO.  The Trade Policy reports
provide an objective and independent review of the trade policies and practices of individualMembers under review and are, in general, appreciated by both the Member(s) under review and the
overall Membership.  By providing an overall picture of the institutional interaction in trade policy
formulation and implementation and the effect of policies on different sectors, the reports have also
                                                     
3 The WTO Members of the Organization of East Caribbean States (OECS) are Antigua and Barbuda,
Dominica, Grenada, St. Kitts and Nevis, St. Lucia, and St. Vincent and the Grenadines.WT/TPR/86
Page 3
served as an input to trade policy formulation in some cases.  In addition, several developing and least
developed country Members have found the reviews valuable in providing technical assistance.
11. In addition to trade policy formulation, the review process also discusses the economic impact
of trade measures, and places individual Members' trade and economic regimes within the wider
context of developments in their region.  Given the growing importance of regional trade agreementsand groupings, the analysis in the reports has proved useful in discussing the wider impact of recent
economic developments in certain regions, as well as the more general question of the impact of
regionalism on the multilateral trading system.
Points emerging from the 2000 Reviews
12. While each review highlights the specific issues and measures concerning individual
Members, certain common themes emerged during the course of the reviews conducted in 2000.
These included:
• transparency in policy-making and implementation, and governance issues;
• economic stability and trade liberalization;
• implementation of the WTO Agreements, in particular Customs Valuation, TRIPS and
TRIMs;
• regional trade agreements and their relationship with the multilateral trading system;
• tariff reduction and rationalization;
• difference between applied and bound tariff rates;
• import and export restrictions and licensing procedures;
• the use of contingency measures such as anti-dumping and countervailing duties;
• technical and sanitary measures and market access;
• standards and their equivalence with international norms;
• intellectual property rights legislation and enforcement;
• government procurement procedures;
• the role of state trading enterprises and privatization programmes;
• competition policy issues;
• incentive measures such as subsidies and tax rebates;
• sectoral trade-policy issues, particularly liberalization in agriculture and in textiles and
clothing;
• GATS commitments;  and
• technical assistance in implementing the WTO Agreements.
Coverage of Least Developed Countries (LDCs)
13. The Trade Policy Review Body's Report to the Singapore Ministerial Meeting suggested that
greater attention be paid to the coverage of least developed countries in the preparation of the TPRB
timetable, and the 1999 appraisal of the operation of the TPRM suggested all Members, including
LDCs, be reviewed at least once as soon as possible.  The TPRB has continued to review a steadynumber of least developed members during 2000.  Of the 29 least developed Members of the WTO,
11 would have been reviewed by the end of  2000;  two of these were reviewed in 2000.
4  O f  t h e
21 Members proposed to be reviewed in the year 2001, three will be least developed countries.5
                                                     
4 At the end of 2000, the least developed countries still to be reviewed by the TPRM will be:  Angola,
Burundi, Central African Republic, Chad, Democratic Re public of Congo, Djibouti, the Gambia, Guinea-Bissau,
Haiti, Madagascar, Malawi, Maldives, Mauritania, Mozambique, Myanmar, Niger, Rwanda and Sierra Leone.
5 They are Madagascar, Mozambique and Uganda.WT/TPR/86
Page 4
14. Trade Policy Reviews of LDCs have increasingly performed a technical assistance function
and have been useful in increasing understanding of the trade policy structure in place and its
relationship with the WTO Agreements.  The reviews have also enhanced understanding in these
countries of the WTO Agreements, enabling better compliance and integration in the multilateral
trading system;  in some cases, better interaction between government agencies has been facilitated bythe reviews.  The Reports' wide coverage of Members' policies also enables Members to identify any
shortcomings in policy and specific areas where further technical assistance may be required.
15. The Trade Policy Reports of least developed countries have also responded more
systematically, as of 2000, to technical assistance needs by including a separate section on technical
assistance needs and priorities of the Member under review.  The section is based on discussions with
the Member concerned, in cooperation with the WT O's Technical Cooperation and Training Division.
Conclusion
16. The Trade Policy Review Mechanism provides a forum in which Members discuss each
others' trade and related policies in a transparent and frank manner.  The forum is unique in that the
TPRM's separation from the compliance and dispute settlement aspects of WTO work related to the
Agreements allows an open debate.  The 15 reviews conducted during 2000 have, in general, been
satisfactory, and have met deadlines agreed with the Members.  The tendency towards concentrationof the reviews towards the latter half of the year, in addition, has been eliminated with more evenly
spaced reviews throughout the year, giving adequate time to Members to prepare for the meetings.
The programme for 2001, similarly, aims to avoid delays and concentration of reviews.
17. Notwithstanding the fact that the TPRM continues to function effectively in meeting its
transparency goals, as the Membership of the WTO increases, the pressures on the Secretariat toreview more Members grows.  This, and the limited resources available to the Secretariat to conduct
the reviews, makes it important to keep the Mechanism functioning as effectively as possible within
these constraints.  In particular, continued cooperation between Members and the Secretariat in
preparing the Reports is essential, as is the importance of respecting deadlines, in order to maintain
the standard and quality of the reports.WT/TPR/86
Page 5
Annex I
TRADE POLICY REVIEWS
WTO Members reviewed under GATT 1947 and WTO provisions, 1989-2000
Europe/Middle East Asia/Pacific Africa America
Austria1,aAustralia (3)bBenindArgentina (2)b
BahraincBangladesh(2)b, dBotswana Bolivia(2)b
Cyprus Fiji Burkina FasodBrazil (3)b
Czech Republic Hong Kong, China (3)bCameroonaCanada (6)b
European Union (5)bIndia (2)bCôte d'Ivoire Chile (2)b
Finland1,aIndonesia (3)bEgypt(2)bColombia (2)b
Hungary (2)bJapan (5)bGhanaaCosta Rica
Iceland(2)bKorea (3)bGuineadDominican Republic
Israel(2)bMacau, ChinaaKenya (2)bEl Salvador
Liechtenstein2Malaysia (2)bLesothodJamaica
Norway (3)bNew Zealand (2)bMalidMexico (2)b
Poland(2)bPakistanaMauritius Nicaragua
Romania(2)bPapua New Guinea Morocco (2)bParaguay
Slovak Republic Philippines(2)bNamibia Peru (2)b
Sweden1 (2)aSingapore (3)bNigeria (2)bTrinidad and Tobago
Switzerland (3)b  Solomon IslandsdSenegalaUnited States (5)b
Turkey (2)bSri Lanka South Africa (2)bUruguay (2)b
Thailand (3)bSwaziland Venezuela
Tanzaniac, d
Togod
Tunisiaa
Ugandad
Zambiad
Zimbabwea
28 Members
(31 reviews)18 Members
(39 reviews)24 Members
(29 reviews)18 Members
(36 reviews)
( ) Figures in brackets show the number of reviews where this is greater than 1.
1Included in EU from 1995.
2Joint review with Switzerland (counted as two Members but one review for statistical purposes).
aReviewed under GATT 1947.
bReviewed under the GATT 1947 and the WTO.
cFirst review in 2000.
dLeast developed Member
Number of reviews conducted at end-2000 = 135
Number of WTO Members reviewed =   88 out of 138** (counting EU as 15)
Number of WTO Members reviewed =   74 out of 124** (counting EU as 1)
= 60 % of WTO Members** (of which, 28 in Europe, 18
in Asia/Pacific, 24 in Africa, and 18 in America)
Least-developed WTO Members reviewed =  11Share of world trade of WTO Members reviewed
(1998) (excluding significant double counting and
intra-EU trade) = 83.1%
** WTO Members as at 27 September 2000.WT/TPR/86
Page 6
Annex II
Trade Policy Reviews Conducted in 2000
MemberaMeeting Date
(scheduled)Review Cycle (years)
Kenya (2) 26.01.2000 6
Iceland (2) 02.02.2000 6
Tanzania (1) 01.03.2000 6 b
Singapore (3) 29.03.2000 4
Bangladesh (2) 02.05.2000 6 b
Peru (2) 05.06.2000 6
Norway (3) 21.06.2000 4
Poland (2) 03.07.2000 6
European Union (5) 12.07.2000 2
Korea, Rep. of (3) 26.09.2000 4
Bahrain (1) 11.10.2000 6
Brazil (3) 30.10.2000 4
Japan (5) 14.11.2000 2
Liechtenstein (1) and Switzerland (3) 04.12.2000 4
Canada (6) 13.12.2000 2
aFigures in brackets indicate number of reviews completed
bLeast developed country
Annex III
Proposed programme of reviews for 2001
Two-year cycle United States
Four-year cycle Malaysia
Six-year cycle Brunei, Cameroon, Costa Rica, Czech Republic, Gabon, Ghana,
Macau, Mauritius, OECSa, Pakistan, Slovak Republic
Least-developed countries (six-year cycle) Madagascar, Mozambique, Uganda
aWTO Members of the Organization of East Caribbean States (OECS), namely, Antigua and Barbuda,
Dominica, Grenada, St. Kitts and Nevis, St. Lucia, and St. Vincent and the Grenadines.
__________