RESTRICTED  
  
WT/BFA/W/522  
19 May 2020 
(20-3697) Page: 1/4 
Committee on Budget, Finance and Administration   
 
 
COHERENCE IN THE ESTABLISHMENT AND MANAGEMENT OF WTO TRUST FUNDS  
1  INTRODUCTION  
1.1.  This paper is a follow up to the paper that was presented to and discussed by the CBFA during 
its meeting on 9 March  and takes comments made by Members into consideration. The objective of 
this paper is to update Members on the proposals being developed by  the WTO Secretariat to respond 
appropriately to the questions being raised about coherence.  
1.2.  Table 1 at the end of the p aper is a summary of the  131 Trust Funds managed by the WTO 
Secretariat.  From the analysis of these funds , internal consultations within the Secretariat and based 
on feedback from Members, a significant portion of these funds (especially when measured by total 
funds and expenditures) are already subject to reasonably well documented and established 
procedures for planning and governance, transparency and reporting, and monitoring and 
evaluation. The most obvious among these established funds are the Global  Trust Fund (GTF) 
managed by the Institute for Training and Technical Cooperation (ITTC)  and the Standards and 
Trade Development Facility (STDF) a quasi -independent  entity with its own governance and 
oversight mechanisms set out in the STDF Operational Rul es.  
1.3.  While the specificities for how the GTF and the STDF are  managed are unique, they share 
important elements such as 1) implementation plans based on consultations with beneficiaries and 
contributors  and subsequently approved by oversight bodies; 2) transparent and regular narrative 
and financial reporting; and 3) periodic  and independent monitoring and evaluation.  
1.4.  Questions about coherence in oversight, transparency and reporting are mostly directed at a 
newer generation of trust funds that have emerged over the past several years and which do not 
fall under the formal manag ement and administration structures of the Institute for Training and 
Technical Cooperation (ITTC) nor the STDF Policy Committee and Working Group. This would include 
the larger multi -year initiatives that cover a range of activities like the Trade Facilit ation Agreement 
Facility and the China Development Cooperation Research Initiative  (CDCRI) . It would also include 
the smaller, more narrowly defined project -oriented funds like the Cotton, LDC Graduation, and 
Natural Disaster Research  Funds . 
1.5.  In addition to  the three elements mentioned in paragraph 1.3 above, Members seem to also 
be interested in  the following  general principles.  
a. The WTO should a void an unnecessary proliferation of trust funds, especially small value 
short duration initiatives. Members makin g contributions should work through existing 
trust funds where possible.  
b. Trust fund oversight should be linked to an appropriate committee, but there should be 
separation between the division/staff responsible for managing a trust fund and the 
divisions/s taff servicing technical policy and negotiating committees.  
c. Members  should not micromanage voluntary contributions or trust fund activities . 
However, there  should be clear mechanisms for sharing information . 
 
1 In our last paper on this topic we reported 14 Trust Funds at the end of 2019. One of those, Data Set 
on Trade in Services, was closed at the end of 2019 and will no longer be included in 2020 trust fund reporting.  WT/BFA/W/522  
 
- 2 - 
 
  1.6.  Based on consultations within the Secretariat  and historical documents , the GTF and ITTC were 
established for and organized principally to support technical assistance. The more recently 
established trust funds and narrowly targeted project -based  trust funds often do not fit into the 
established TA model  at the WTO , although there are general practices that can be learned from the 
experience of ITTC and its management of the GTF and then applied to the new types of funds.  
1.7.  The "Guidelines for the Receipt and Notification of Voluntary F und Contributions" (WT/INF/219) 
are a major part of ensuring  consistency and transparency around new trust funds. However, these 
guidelines do not fully address further questions related to coherence of governance, implementation 
or reporting and assessmen t. It is these remaining aspects of trust fund management that the 
Secretariat is now focused on addressing in this paper . 
2  THE ITTC AS THE MODEL FOR THE GOVERNANCE OF TRUST FUNDS  
2.1.  The Secretariat believes in the principles that led to the establishment of the GTF such as 
privileging larger, unearmarked, multi -donor funds. Fragmentation is not a preferred approach not 
the least because it is less efficient to administer. A smaller time -limited fund of CHF 250,000 will 
require almost the same  level administrative resources to set up as a larger CHF 2.5 million fund.  
Additionally, more individual and narrowly defined funds increased complexity in terms of accounting 
and reporting and make resource allocation much less responsive to evolving ben eficiary needs and 
organizational priorities.  
2.2.  The Trust Funds managed by the ITTC have been well -governed over the years. Therefore, 
there is no need to reinvent the wheel. As the ITTC specializes in developing, organizing , 
implementing  and monitoring and evaluation of  TA, they should continue to play that coordinating 
role for the WTO.  Of course, they work closely with the content specialists in the operational and 
technical trade divisions.  
2.3.  When a Member wishes to support initiatives similar to  existing a ctivities in the Biennial TA 
Plan, their contributions  should be channelled through existing trust funds. Where it is deemed 
necessary to establish a new trust fund that is principally targeted at TA activities , it should be 
overseen by the ITTC and incorp orated into future Biennial TA Plans . The Secretariat is looking at 
the possibility to establish additional categories within the ITTC mandate for the purpose of funding 
and managing activities that, like traditional TA, are focused on services to Members.  For example, 
facilitating participation in meetings,  negotiations,  workshops and other events that contribute to 
capacity building. T hese new categories of  activities and funds would be subject to  structured 
planning and appropriate  monitoring and evaluation protocols developed by  ITTC as is done for the 
Biennial TA Plan . They would then be presented to the Committee on Trade and Development, as 
part of the reporting on the TA Plan.  
2.4.  The challenge o f how to manage funds that would fit within the mandate of the ITTC is mostly 
about resources. Expanding the breadth of ITTC's responsibilities to additional funds and activities 
will require making sure that ITTC have the capacity  and resources  to handle a larger volume of 
activities.  Where the 13% overhead w ould not be sufficient, direct costs would need to be included 
in the budgeting of these extra -budgetary funds.  
2.5.  However, some of the newer generation of trust funds do not fit easily into the tradition al scope 
of TA coordinated by ITTC. A good example of this are some of the trust funds that result from the 
CDCR I, whose focus is on research.  
2.1  AN ADDITIONAL MECHANISM FOR TRUST FUND GOVERNANCE  
2.6.  The CDCRI projects are of a different nature tha n those typic ally found in the GTF or the 
Biennial TA Plan  and the document shared recently with Members as (WT/BFA/INF/9) illustrates that  
the Secretariat is well on the way to establishing coherent guidance for how these projects are 
identified, developed, implemente d and reported on. While this guidance is still being tested and 
refined as there have only been two projects funded so far from the CDCRI, there are current ly three 
more projects  under consideration for which the full process is being implemented . WT/BFA/W/522  
 
- 3 - 
 
  2.7.  The pro cess developed by ERSD in relation to the CRCDI  could serve as a model for other 
project based voluntary contributions that do not fit comfortably under the umbrella of TA as 
coordinated by ITTC.   
2.8.  These  types of extra -budgetary funded projects and activiti es that are more targeted to 
development -oriented policy research and capacity building  will report in a still to be  formalize d 
process  similar to that undertaken by the ITTC. This will  bring consistency, coherence, oversight, 
administration and monitoring/evaluation to these types of activities and projects.  
2.2  GOVERNANCE OF THE TRADE FACILITATION AGREEMENT FACILITY (TFAF)   
2.9.  The TFAF has developed well -established procedures for its management. These include 
Operational Guidelines, an Annual Work Pla n, project -level Results Based Management (RBM) log -
frames and an Annual Report published on the TFAF website. This is consistent broadly with the 
management of other large multi -year, multi -donor trust funds like the GTF and the STDF.  
2.10.   However, there have been concerns raised suggesting that oversight  by Members could be 
enhanced and a perceived lack of administrative separation between staff implementing the TFAF 
activities and the ongoing work of the Trade Facilitation Committee. Both the GTF and the STDF  are 
administered by structures separate from the WTO policy committees to which they relate. For 
example,  the GTF is administered by  ITTC, a separate division without any direct responsibility for 
policy or negotiating c ommittees.  
2.11.   The Annual Work Plans of the TFAF have, as a matter of practice,  been reviewed by a group 
of Members who have contributed to the TFAF, but they have not been formally reviewed  by the 
larger Membership as is the case for the Biennial TA Plan. The Secretari at proposes that oversigh t 
of the TFAF be done by  the Trade Facilitation Committee. The TFAF work plans would be submitted 
to the Committee for input and review as well as annual reporting on activities and outcomes.  
2.12.   The Secretariat is of the view that by following the proposals i n this paper, existing trust funds 
and any future initiatives will be managed with appropriate oversight, transparency and 
accountability . 
  
  WT/BFA/W/522  
 
- 4 - Table 1 2019 Trust Funds – Provisional statement of accounts  
Trust Fund  Division Responsible  Expenditure  
2019  
(CHF 000)  Balance 2019  
(CHF 000)  % of All 
Trust 
Funds 
(exp.)  % of All 
Trust 
Funds 
(bal.)  
Global Trust Fund  ITTC 9,187  9,664  52.22%  32.98%  
French -Irish Mission Internship Programme  ITTC 1,122  1,230  6.38%  4.20%  
Netherlands Trainee Programme  ITTC 672 1,185  3.82%  4.04%  
China LDCs & Accessions Programme  ITTC/ Accessions  320 750 1.82%  2.56%  
Standards and Trade Development Facility - STDF - Agriculture/ STDF Policy 
Committee  4,728  9,412  26.88%  32.12%  
Trade Facilitation Agreement Facility  Market Access  1,211  5,126  6.88%  17.50%  
LDC in the 12th WTO Ministerial Conf, Kazakhstan  Administration  0 406 0.00%  1.39%  
WTO Fisheries LDCs participation  Rules  135 34 0.77%  0.12%  
LDC Graduation Fund  Development  80 120 0.45%  0.41%  
Transferring technologies for the dev. of Cotton  Agriculture  69 78 0.39%  0.27%  
China Development Cooperation Research Initiat ive1 Economic Research          
• Investment Facilitation for Development  Services  0 196 0.00%  0.67%  
• ASYCUDA TIVA Databases  Economic Research  1 1,090  0.01%  3.72%  
            
Natural Disasters and Trade*  Development  44 8 0.25%  0.03%  
Data Set on Trade in Services**  Economic Research  23 0 0.13%  0.00%  
Total    17,592  29,299  100%  100%  
1 Total amount currently pledged: up to USD 8 million . 
* Activities related to this fund were largely concluded in 2019 and it is currently not active.  
** Activities of this fund are formally concluded and it is closed.  
 
 
__________