RESTRICTED  
  
WT/WGTTT/M/66  
 
2 November 2021  
(21-8327) Page: 1/5 
Working Group on Trade and Transfer of Technology  
Sixty -Sixth Session  
   
 
 
NOTE ON THE MEETING OF 4 OCTOB ER 202 1 
Chairperson: H.E. Dr. Le Thi Tuyet Mai (Viet Nam)  
 
A. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA  ................................ ................................ ...................  1 
B. ANALYSIS OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TRADE AND TRANSFER OF 
TECHNOLOGY  ................................ ................................ ................................ .........  1 
C. ANY POSSIBLE RECOMMENDATIONS ON STEPS THAT MIGHT BE TAKEN WITHIN 
THE MANDATE OF THE WTO TO INCREASE FLOWS OF TECHNOLOGY TO 
DEVELOPING COUNTRIES  ................................ ................................ .......................  5 
D. OTHER BUSINESS  ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 5 
 
A. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA  
1. The agenda contained in airgram WTO/AIR/WGTTT/1 9/Rev.1 of 30 September  2021 was 
adopted . 
B. ANALYSIS OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TRADE AND TRANSFER OF 
TECHNOLOGY  
2. Under this agenda item on the relationship between trade and transfer of technology, the 
Chairperson  recalled the salient elements from the Working Gro up's deliberations at its 
sixty-fifth session , as follows:   
a. Some Members had underscored the critical role technology played to support 
development efforts, especially in the areas of health, agriculture, environment, education 
and trade.  
b. In this context,  it was stressed that technology and technical know -how remained key 
elements in facilitating industrialization and economic growth and, therefore, were 
essential for improving productivity and output, to diversify economies, to better integrate 
into the r egional and global value chains, for promoting growth, and attaining the 
development aspirations of developing Members, and in particular the least developed 
countries (LDCs).  
c. Attention was also drawn to the key importance of technology in addressing the C OVID -19 
pandemic and that technology was one of the barriers to timely, equitable, safe and 
affordable COVID -19 vaccines and therapeutics.  
d. Against this background, some Members had reiterated their attachment to the Working 
Group's mandate as contained in  Paragraph 37 of the Doha Declaration, and in 
Paragraph  43 of the Hong Kong Ministerial Declaration, and to the significant contribution 
that the fulfilment of the mandate could make in achieving the developmental aspirations 
of Members.  WT/WGTTT/M/66  
 
- 2 - 
 
  e. Some Members had also called for reinvigorating the work of the Group, including through 
the organization of a workshop on transfer of technology, specifically to explore 
technological barriers which Members had been facing during the COVID -19 pandemic.   
f. The Chairperson ha d encouraged Members of the Group to share their experiences with 
innovation, technology generation, its transfer, assimilation, absorption, research and 
development and the role it may have played in economic development.  
3. The Delegation of Japan  (Director of Agricultural and Rural Development of the Economic 
Development Department at Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) ) presented the "Grace 
of the Sea Project " which had been conducted in Vanuatu to promote community -based coastal 
resource  management since 2006.  The presentation revolved around the following:  
a. To promote community -based coastal resource management , the Grace of the Sea Project 
had had to address the following three challenges:  
i. Outreach : Fishing communities in rural areas a nd remote islands are often isolated. 
How to effectively reach them in order to provide needed support?  
ii. Management approach : The socio -physical environment surrounding fishing 
communities was heterogenous such that "one-size-fits-all" type of fisheries 
management model s would have little effectiveness . How to provide communities with 
applicable options f or fisheries management?  
iii. Sustainability of management efforts: Fishing communities were often economically 
vulnerable,  and they would not pursue  management efforts if the benefits were not 
palpable . How to ensure continued efforts of fisheries management?  
b. To overcome th ose challenges , a conceptual framework of integrated cost of the 
Community -Based Region Management (CB-CRM) had been developed  by the Grace of the 
Sea Project for an effective and sustainable implementation of coastal resource 
management.  It revolve d around the following elements:  
i. Selection of management approach . Top-down centralized management did not deliver 
the expected resul ts because management measures were introduced that did not take 
account of local specificities ; decisions were not made in a timely manner ; measures 
were found too harsh,  and fishers could not comply ; and f ishers were not well -informed 
of the management m easures in place and there were no enforcement efforts. When  
management authority was delegated to smaller and locally -based  management units  
- local management units consist of fisheries field office, research institute and fishers ' 
representatives conduc ting consensus -based decision making  - organized collective 
response to management measures were made. Therefore,  community -based fisheries 
management, a variation of fisheries co -management, would be a way forward.  
However, management measures often cause d negative economic impacts on fishers' 
livelihoods. Therefore, it was difficult for fishers to maintain their motivation to 
continue complying with  management measures. It would be necessary to incorporate 
"incentives" to compensate fishers' efforts. One solution is to combine management 
measures with supporting measures. Management measures, such as closed area of 
fishing, closed season for fishing, restriction of fishing gears/methods, and supporting 
measures of alternative income generation to fishery p roducts were combined to 
conduct integrated CB -CRM.  
ii. Selection of management strategies . Positive effects of management efforts were not 
in some instances clearly visible  in the short term. Therefore,  it posed a challenge to 
maintain fishers' motivation to continue complying with management measures. Also, 
the choice of the fish species to start management efforts with carrie d importance, as 
some fish species were highly mobile or migratory and hence difficult to monitor as 
opposed to sedentary  species. Positive effect s of sedentary species management c ould 
be recognized easily  and therefore provided a g ood "entry" species for management. 
Management efforts could then  be gradually expanded to other species.   WT/WGTTT/M/66  
 
- 3 - 
 
  iii. Development of new policy instruments . Fisheries line agencies  did not have sufficient 
resources , therefore fishing communities d id not receive adequate support for 
management of fishery resources. However, when  a community of member -fishers 
was mobilized for fishery -extension work , every fis her extension community receive d 
support from the fishers' field officer and , eventually, every fisher receive d support 
from the community -extension staff in the same community. Key considerations of 
community -based extension support can consist of officia l appointment of community -
extension workers with a title badge and certificate. Clear selection criteria and 
procedure were required. A standard training program need ed to be developed. 
Reference c ould be made to the "Leading professional fishers" scheme in Japan.  For 
effective enforcement, fisheries management plans need ed a certain degree of 
authori ty; management plan s formulated at the community level bec ame community 
ruled; management plan s adopted by local authorities bec ame viral ; and when 
management plan s were endorsed by  the Central Government,  they became law.  
iv. Development of functional decision -making support mechanisms . Given the important 
number of stakeholders in the local fisheries management unit , it was difficult to reach 
a consensus -based decision for fisheries management.  How to make the unit functional 
and ensure that s ocially weak er groups were not marginalized ? A typical management 
unit is operated in a disorganized way. Manag ement unit s employ ed was a crafted 
management of local community. Subgroups c ould be formed for initial internal 
coordination and decision making.  
v. Development of management and supporting tools for integrated CB -CRM. Each 
management area ha d a different c ombination of conditions and there was no 
"one-size-fits-all" type of approach. Therefore , a good variety of management and 
supporting tools were needed so that suitable tools c ould be selected and combined.  
Diversification of fishing efforts with near -short fish aggregating device ( FAD): 
Low-cost FADs can be deployed by normal fishing canoes.  Eco-labelling for 
value -addition was good but extremely expensive to obtain. National labelling could  
be established at reasonable costs and proved  effective enough. Tourists who visit to 
enjoy the natural environment and rich marine ecosystem would highly appreciate 
efforts of resource management. Hence locally -made products with a national 
eco-label c ould be sufficiently appealing. Sales of marine products with an eco-label 
would be a good alternative income for fishing communities. Eco -labelling  or Eco -tag 
is used for locally -made shell craft.  
vi. Vertical integration of primary, secondary & tertiary sectors of industries . Industry 
development, restaurant and retail stores operated by fishers' groups  can make 
producers (fishers) receive a larger share of the end value. Ordinary fishers ha d no 
bargaining power in the negotiations  while selling their catch;  when offered a low p rice, 
they d id not have to sell as they could sell  the fish through their groups' stores . 
c. The presentation concluded that  while t here may not be a single  "model" of fisheries 
management , the key for successful implementation of fisheries management rest ed on 
how many viable options there were to support fishing communities. It underscored the 
importan ce of redoubl ing efforts in develop ing management/supporting tools and shar ing 
them with other countries for the greater public good . 
4. The Chairperson  thanked the Delegation of Japan and invited Members to engage in a 
discussion of the presentation that had been made.  
5. The representative of Chad, on behalf of the LDC Group , found the presentation relevant, 
especially as it related to Vanuatu, an LDC which had since graduated. He enquired whether the 
project presented could be replicated in other LDCs and in what other areas could JICA assist LDCs 
which urgently required increas ing their productivity ; and how could requests to JICA be placed so 
that LDCs might be able to avail themselves of technology transfer  opportunities.  
6. The Delegation of Japan  indicated that the main target in the field of JICA had been agriculture 
and fishery. In Africa, live cultivation was one of the main targets as Japan  has had a long history 
in the fisheries sector.  WT/WGTTT/M/66  
 
- 4 - 
 
  7. The representative of the Philippines  enquired whether the project involved the outlaying of 
funds and to what extent had support been necessary for community -based approach to be effective . 
He also asked w hat should delegations be aware of , with a view to replicat ing this kind of community -
based approach.  
8. The Delegation of Japan  recalled that JICA had conducted th e project since 2006. On capacity 
building of governmental fishers and capacity building of loc al fishers , both areas had been  important 
and needed to be considered  and addressed, as  without local government output , it would not 
expand , and without local fishers'  output , it would not extend.  
9. The representative of Chad, on behalf of the LDC Group , also stated that the mandate of the 
Working Group remained  relevant and important. Various provisions of the WTO Agreement 
reference technology transfer between developed and developing Members, especially to the least 
developed. The LDCs had been vulnerabl e to economic shocks. The COVID -19 pandemic stimulated 
a number of platforms and markets,  but conventional brick -and-mortar companies did not reach the 
same success  as they did not have access to e -commerce technologies . He enquired whether LDCs 
would draw  benefit from technology transfer which would serve transformation and increase 
production, but at the same time make use of technologies to afford development of new products 
making use of existing domestic resources in LDCs. LDCs had resources but need ed technology. The 
LDC Group expressed that the examples presented by  Japan were interesting and provided a  model 
which could be used in th e area of technology transfer to make it possible to latch -on to technology 
and to ensure it was used properly. He also underlined  that technology transfer remained a central 
focus for the LDC Group,  indispensable to the implementation of programs and projects in 
development. The LDC Group continued to find the exchanges in the Working Group useful . 
10. The representative of the Philippines  assessed that it was in the interest of the Membership 
to identify benefits of th e Working Group. The capacity -building project presented at the sixty -sixth 
session wa s consistent with the WTO 's general mandate of prosperity and sustainability. Some of 
the projects often include d domestic -capacity building , and sharing of technology was one of the 
essential elements of building capacity and building ability to trade. For maximum benefit, he advised 
to replicate the project in other jurisdictions. He also recalled a suggestion  that had been previously 
discussed , and which sought to develop an experience database for cooperation among Members on 
capacity building and best practice sharing . 
11. The representative of Canada  found the presentation useful as it gave the view from the field , 
and from the perspective of a longer -term project. He assessed that it was the kind of discussion 
that could help promote constructive discussions in the Working Group. He welcomed the initiative 
and encouraged the practice of sharing experience s about these sorts of projects.  
12. The representative of Viet Nam  said that technology was a key con tributor to trade and to 
develop productivity and prosperity. With that recognition, Viet Nam's focus had been on creating a 
conducive, open and transparent environment for technology transfer, especially by the 
promulgation of the Law on Technology Transf er in 2017, which set up a legal framework for 
achieving that goal , including to  address structural bottlenecks that hinder ed the transfer of 
technology, such as labour skill -mismatch; low awareness of the domestic business community 
about the significance  of technology absorption and adaptation; and weak linkages between the 
innovators and their potential clients . The Government of Viet Nam had set up a programme from 
2013 to 2020 to develop markets for science and technology. That programme aimed at match ing 
technology buyers and sellers, providing essential tools for those agents to engage and thrive.  
13. Approximately 10 years since the implementation had begun, on 13 July 2021, the 
Government of Viet Nam upgraded the programme until 2030 with four pillars  under focus . First, to 
continue improving the rel evant legal frameworks. Second, to support the technology demand side 
by activities to improve understand ing of the needs of technology demandeurs. Third, to support 
the supply -side, especially with regard t o the promotion of information of available technologies to 
buy, to co -operate, to transfer, to venture. Fourth, to support intermediaries that possess the 
necessary expertise to link technology supply and demand sides.  
14. Based on its 2030 programme, Viet Na m was particularly interested in access ing information 
on technologies available for transfer and hoped that the Working Group c ould add value in th at 
regard.  WT/WGTTT/M/66  
 
- 5 - 
 
  15. The representative of India thanked the delegations of Japan and Viet Nam for their 
presentations. She expressed disappointment as to the lack of progress in achieving the Working 
Group's mandate as contained in Paragraph 37 of the Doha Ministerial Declaration as well as 
Paragraph  43 of the Hong Kong Ministerial Declaration. She noted that, in the context of the 
COVID -19 pandemic, the vulnerabilities of developing and least developed countries vis–à–vis access 
to technology and technical know -how had limited the world's capacity to c ombat the pandemic with 
the required pace. She also noted that technological growth and advancement had been essential 
to improving productivity, promoting growth and attaining the development aspiration of all 
Members. Also, in the immediate context , the need for technology and know -how transfer was all 
the more imperative for saving lives, livelihoods and economies.  
16. She also recalled previous proposals that had been made in the Working Group to advance 
the mandate and assessed that it was time for the Wor king Group to constructively engage to 
reinvigorate the discussions and take the work mandated to its final outcome.  
17. The Chairperson  gave a summary  of the informal consultations she had held with some of the 
Working Group Members. The objective was to seek  views on how to inject new life in the work of 
the Working Group , namely on the relationship between trade and transfer of technology, and 
possible recommendations that the Working Group could make in the future. She reported that these 
consultations were  held in informal bilateral and plurilateral formats with Members . She indicated 
that Members that she had consulted, including the proponents, overall stressed the continued 
importance of technology generation and its transfer , and expressed keen and cont inued interest in 
the topic. In terms of recommendations, these Members wanted to continue the experience -sharing 
exercise as they found it useful to improve understanding of the relationship between trade and 
transfer of technology. They suggested invitin g, at a future meeting of the Working Group, 
presentations by other intergovernmental organizations active in this field, that would hopefully 
allow cross -fertilization.  
18. The Chairperson assessed that the Working Group faced a situation in which work had 
progressed somewhat slowly; that there was scope and appetite to achieve more. She expressed 
optimism and said that - with leadership on the proponents' side to generate and drive the 
discussion  - an outcome on technology transfer would be feasible.  
19. The representative of Chad supported the consultation by the Chairperson and encouraged 
her to continue to pursue the approach.  
C. ANY POSSIBLE RECOMMENDATIONS ON STEPS THAT MIGHT BE TAKEN WITHIN THE 
MANDATE OF THE WTO TO INCREASE FLOWS OF TECHNOLOGY TO DEVELOPING 
COUNTRIES  
20. Under the agenda item on possible recommendations that the Working Group could make in 
the future, the Chairperson  reiterated the importance of a formal submission by the  proponents of 
a submission made in 2008 by India, Pakistan and the Philippines entitled , "Facilitating Access to 
Information on Appropriate Technology Sourcing – A Step to Increase Flows of Technology to 
Developing Countries".  
21. No substantive discussion t ook place .  
D. OTHER BUSINESS  
22. Under other business, the Chairperson  indicated that - given the mandate to make an annual 
report on the work of the Group to the General Council, and in line with past practice - the draft 
annual report would be circulated; a nd, if no substantive comments were received within a week 
after its circulation , it would be deemed to have been adopted.  
23. The meeting was adjourned . 
__________