RESTRICTED  
  
WT/COMTD/LDC/M/70  
 
28 January 2014  
(14-0474)  Page: 1/7  
Sub-Committee on Least-Developed Countries 
Seventieth Session    
 
 NOTE OF THE MEETING OF 10 OCTOBER 2013 
Chairperson:  Ambassador Steffen Smidt  
A.  ADOPTION OF TH E AGENDA .................................................................................... 1  
B.  MARKET ACCESS FOR LEAST- DEVELOPED CO UNTRIES ............................................ 1  
-  Market Access for Products and Services of Export Interest to Least-Developed 
Countries (WT/COMT D/LDC/W/58) ...................................................................................... 1  
C. TRADE-RELATED TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND CAPACITY-BUILDING 
INITIATIVES FOR LEAST- DEVELOPED COUNTRIES ........................................................... 5  
-  An Update on the Enhanced Integrated Framework (EIF): Oral Report by the EIF 
Executive Secretariat ......................................................................................................... 5  
D. OTHER BUSINESS .................................................................................................... 7  
 
A.  ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA  
1. The Sub-Committee adopted the draft agenda contained in WTO/AIR/4179. The Chairman 
noted that the meeting date had been rescheduled through the document WTO/AIR/4179/Corr.1. 
 B.  MARKET ACCESS FOR LEAST-DEVELOPED COUNTRIES 
- Market Access for Products and Services of Export Interest to Least-Developed 
Countries (WT/COMTD/LDC/W/58) 
2. The Chairman said that in pursuance of the Work Programme for the LDCs, the Secretariat 
had been preparing a document every year to facilitate the annual review of market access for 
products originating from LDCs. The latest market access review by the Secretariat was contained 
in document WT/COMTD/LDC/W/58. It provided an account of trends in LDC trade and market access conditions faced by LDC exports. He invited the Secretariat to present the Note. 
 
3. The representative of the Secretariat (Chief Stat istician) said that the growth of exports of 
goods and services of LDCs in value terms had b een less than 1% in 2012, as compared to nearly 
24% in 2011. The annual average growth of LDC ex ports of goods and services was 15.5% during 
2000-2012; this growth performance was higher compared to other developing economies which 
registered an annual average growth rate of nearly 12% during the same period. The share of LDCs in world merchandise exports stood at 1.12% in 2012, while their share in world commercial 
services exports was 0.62%. The quarterly evol ution of LDC merchandise exports exhibited a 
downward trend after the third quarter of 2011; ho wever, the degree of decline was not the same 
as the one during the period of the global crisis (2008-2009). He noted that the developing 
countries had been increasing their share as destination markets for LDC exports. In 2012, 
developing countries represented 53% of LDCs' total merchandise exports; while the share of developed countries was 40%.  
4. He went on to say that fuel had been the top export item of LDCs as a group. Developing 
countries constituted the major markets for LDC exports of fuels and mining as well as agricultural products. Developed countries, on the other ha nd, had been the major destinations for LDC 
manufacture products in 2012.  WT/COMTD/LDC/M/70 
 
- 2 - 
 
   
5. He said that data improvements were continually being made to better capture LDC trade in 
services. In 2012, travel exports accounted for 45%  of LDCs' total commercial services exports, 
while transportation services receipts represente d 22%. He pointed out that while LDC exports of 
commercial services had been dominated by travel on a quantitative basis, a number of LDCs had 
achieved some success in the exports of IT services as well as construction services. For instance, Bangladesh's IT and IT-enabled sector had grown in recent years with estimated revenue earnings 
of US$7 million in 2011. Uganda ranked as the le ading exporter of computer services, with 
earnings of US$57 million in 2012. Afghanistan accounted for some 64% and 66% of total LDCs' construction and financial services exports in 2011.  
6. He continued by saying that the merchandise trade balance of the LDCs, as a group, had 
continued to register deficits. Following the gl obal crisis (2008-2009), the group had posted a 
record trade deficit of US$26 billion in 2009; in 2012, it had registered the second highest trade 
deficit (US$18 billion). He noted that LDC fuel exporters had been enjoying persistent trade 
surpluses, while non-fuel exporters had been expe riencing systemic and growing trade deficits. In 
2012, the exporters of LDC agricultural products ha d posted the highest trade deficit and had been 
able only to cover 34% of their imports by th eir merchandise exports. The LDC exporters of 
predominantly manufactured products had been able to finance only 62% of their import bills with 
their goods exports.   
7. He noted that the majority of the LDCs lacked  foreign exchange resources needed to finance 
their imports, and thus experienced large deficits. These deficits were typically financed through capital inflows such as ODA, FDI, remittances an d other concessional loans. The evolution of ODA 
and remittances in the last decade showed that during 2000-2011, ODA and remittances had 
increased by an annual average of 12% and 14%, respectively, though as a percentage of imports, both these channels of financial flows had declined since 2003. The LDCs accounted for 
nearly 2% of global FDI inflows in 2012, up from 1.3% in 2011. This increase was due to 
expanding South-South FDI flows.  8. With regard to market access for LDC products, he highlighted that the proportion of exports 
from LDCs imported free of duty by developed countries, in value terms, hovered around 80% in 
the last few years. Most of the LDCs enjoyed tr ue preferential duty-free access (percentage of 
exports offered duty-free treatment under the GSP-LDC and other preferential schemes as 
compared to products offered duty-free entry under the MFN treatment), which had been 
increasing over time; 53% of true duty-free access in 2011 as against 35% in 2000. In contrast, most of the improvements recorded for other developing countries were largely due to elimination 
of tariffs on an MFN basis. In 2011, out of th e 80% of non-dutiable exports from developing 
countries, only 20% corresponded to true preferential access. He further informed Members that average tariffs on LDC agricultural export products witnessed a gradual decline over the last decade. The average tariffs for clothing products remained relatively high reaching 6.7% in 2011. 
The LDCs enjoyed preference margins compared to other developing countries for both agricultural 
and clothing products, though the margin was higher for agricultural products (6.37%) in 2011.  
9. In conclusion, he drew Members' attention to the importance of trade facilitation which was 
not addressed in the Secretariat Note, but was important for LDCs' beneficial integration into world trade. In this regard, time of delivery and cost of exports were important determinants for 
improving the participation of LDCs in global value chains. He noted that despite improvements, 
the transaction costs in LDCs remained high. For instance, a World Bank study showed that the number of days to clear a container at a port was 33 days, on average, for LDCs as against 18 days for other developing countries. In conclusion, he drew Members' attention to Table 20 of 
the Note where Norway had been shown as prov iding duty-free and quota-free (DFQF) access to 
all products from LDCs, except cut flowers. He said that Norway provided 100% duty-free access 
to all products from LDCs including cut flowers; this information would be appropriately reflected in 
the next version of the Note. 
 10. The representative of Nepal, on behalf of th e LDC Group, thanked the WTO Secretariat for a 
comprehensive report on global trends in LDCs' trade and market access conditions, covering 
merchandise trade as well as trade in services. Market access had been a prime factor for LDC economies' integration into the global trading system. This reality had been recognized by the Doha Development Agenda in 2001, as well as by the Hong Kong Ministerial Declaration in 2005, 
both of which emphasized the importance of granti ng preferential market access to LDCs so as to WT/COMTD/LDC/M/70 
 
- 3 - 
 
  enhance their exports. However, despite this re cognition, implementation had been mixed and 
incomplete. Inadequate market access had impeded the integration of LDCs in the global trading 
system. Securing enhanced market access for LDC products, thus, remained a top priority for the 
LDCs.  
 
11. He went on to make a number of points with regard to the content of the Note. He was 
disappointed to note that LDC exports of goods and commercial services had only grown by a mere 
0.7% in 2012, compared to a 23.7% growth re gistered the year before, and a 15.5% annual 
average growth registered during 2000-2012. In volume terms, LDCs' exports had grown by 4.3% 
while their imports had expanded by 8.8%. While LDCs' share in world merchandise trade had doubled since 2000, reaching 1.14% in 2012 - up from 0.58% in 2000, that low share confirmed 
that the LDCs remained grossly marginalized in world trade. Moreover, LDC merchandise exports 
had stagnated in 2012, mainly due to stagnant or diminishing prices of primary commodities. He noted that the share of LDCs in world merchandise exports stood at 1.12% similar to the level 
registered in 2011.  
 12. He pointed out that the share of LDCs in worl d trade of commercial services had risen from 
0.64% in 2000 to 1.16% in 2012, still a low level that he attributed in part to burdensome 
regulatory regimes. He expressed concern with the static share of LDCs in world exports of commercial services. The LDC exports of commercial services grew by 6% in 2012, but their share 
in world commercial services exports only marg inally increased to 0.62% in 2012 from 0.60% in 
2011. He noted that the LDCs were yet to penetrate higher segments of services trade, and 
tourism services remained the dominant services sector for many LDCs. As a result, merchandise 
exports accounted for around 88% of total LDC exports, while the share of services was a mere 
12% in 2012. He underlined the continuing domination of primary commodities in LDCs' goods 
exports; petroleum and other fuel and mining products accounted for 62% of LDC exports in 2012. On the other hand, the share of manufactured products in LDC exports had shrunk from 33% in 
2000 to 23% in 2012; that of agricultural products had fallen from 17% to 10% during the same 
period.   13. He pointed out that the stagnating growth in merchandise trade in 2012, coupled with an 
8% expansion of import growth had led to the wo rsening of the merchandise trade deficit of the 
LDCs in 2012; the LDCs, as a Group, had experienced their second largest trade deficit (US$18 billion) since 2009. The LDC fuel exporter s had been enjoying trade surpluses while 
non-fuel exporters (mainly agriculture and manuf actures) had been experiencing systemic and 
growing trade deficits.   
14. In conclusion, he was encouraged to note that LDCs had been gradually expanding their 
exports to developing country markets. While expr essing appreciation for the increased efforts by 
developing countries to open up their markets to LDC products, he called for additional efforts to provide LDCs with adequate market opportunities. He asked for a dedicated discussion on the 
underlying causes of LDCs' near-static export grow th and possible solutions to it, based on the 
current and previous Secretariat reports on LDC market access. He reiterated the Group's emphasis on the importance of full and timely implementation of the Hong Kong Decision on DFQF 
market access in order to help LDCs better integrate into the multilateral trading system. He 
stressed the importance of delivering tangible outputs for LDCs at the WTO's Ninth Ministerial Conference (MC9) to be held  in Bali in December 2013. 
 
15. The representative of Guatemala sought clarific ation relating to some graphs presented at 
the meeting by the Secretariat, in particular th e proportion/extent of duty-free treatment granted 
by developed countries to developing countries and LDCs. 
 
16. The representative of the Secretariat explained that the graphs referred to by the delegate 
of Guatemala sought to portray a comparison of the duty-free access received by the LDCs with 
the duty-free access received by other developing  countries. The graphs demonstrated that while 
developing countries tended to receive duty-free treatment primarily on lines for which MFN tariffs were zero, for products such as oil or electronic equipment, many LDC exports occurred in areas 
where they received true duty-free access (per centage of exports offered duty-free treatment 
under the GSP-LDC and other preferential schemes , as compared to products offered duty-free 
entry under MFN treatment). An analysis by sector s revealed that in 2011, out of total duty-free 
exports by the LDCs, 37% corresponded to true pr eferences in agriculture; 62% was on textiles WT/COMTD/LDC/M/70 
 
- 4 - 
 
  and 69% was on clothing. The share of LDC expo rts entering on an MFN-basis in 2011 was only 
27% as against 59% for other developing countries.   17. The representative of Norway thanked the Secr etariat for the Note, and for the update with 
regard to Norway's duty-free treatment to LDC products. She confirmed that Norway had been 
granting duty-free market access to all LDC products, including cut flowers.  
18. The representative of the European Union considered the Note useful, including for research 
by her delegation on LDC issues. She expressed appreciation for the Note's greater attention to 
LDC trade in services and investment flows to the LDCs, as well as on the market access conditions faced by LDC exports in emerging mark ets. Her delegation requested a deeper analysis 
in these areas in the future versions of the Note. 
 19. She drew attention to paragraph 4.6 of the Note where it was stated that the new EU GSP 
regulation, effective from 1 January 2014, would have  no implications for the LDCs. In this regard, 
she argued that the reduction in the number of GSP beneficiaries under the revised regulation could effectively increase preference margins for LDCs, which was in line with the EU goal of 
focusing trade preferences on countries most in need. Hence, the new GSP regulation might 
further contribute to greater integr ation of LDCs into the EU market. 
 20. The representative of Australia thanked the Secretariat for a comprehensive Note, and 
expressed hope that Members would be able to discuss its findings in subsequent meetings of the 
Sub-Committee. He acknowledged that the low grow th in LDC goods trade in 2012 reflected trends 
in commodity prices which also underlined the need for a more sustained focus on diversifying 
LDCs' goods exports. He welcomed the additional information provided concerning trade costs in 
LDCs, which did not form part of the Note but co ntinued to be an important determinant in the 
competitiveness of LDCs' goods exports. He was of the view that it would be useful for Members if 
such information was appropriately included in future versions of the Note.  
 21. He considered the analysis on LDC services trade interesting, which confirmed the fact that 
the tourism sector had continued to dominate the LDC services exports. This also underscored the 
need to closely look at how both tourism and value chains functioned so that efforts could be 
geared towards making LDCs competitive in these value chains. That would also help LDCs maximize the benefits from tourism for their economies, particularly through backward linkages 
into other sectors of the LDC economies. In this regard, he appreciated the wealth of information 
that had become available during the Aid for Trad e Global Review held in July 2013. He was also 
encouraged to note that a number of LDCs had been  trying to diversify their services exports. He 
observed that while data constraints remained to fully understand the diversification that was 
going on in LDC services exports, several organizations were working to gain a better understanding. He recommended Members to look at a study done by the ITC entitled: "LDC 
Services Exports: Trends and Success Stories", which detailed a number of useful case stories 
from LDC services exporters and set out a matrix of factors driving international competitiveness 
in services. He looked forward to further discussions on these issues at a future meeting of the Sub-Committee. 
 
22. The representative of India considered the Note informative. She said that the Note served 
as an important reminder about the collective re sponsibility of Members to assist LDCs with 
enhanced market access, and in helping them to  build physical and human capacity needed to 
better integrate into the multilateral trading system . She highlighted some of the findings from the 
Note: (i) LDC exports of goods and services had increased by only 0.7% in 2012 compared to a growth of 24% in 2011, while total exports of goods had stagnated; (ii) heavy concentration of 
LDC exports in petroleum and clothing underlined th e need for diversification of the export base; 
(iii) the LDC exports continued to be vulnerable to price volatility; (iv) the LDCs, as a Group, had registered a huge trade deficit of US$18.4 billion  in 2012; and (v) FDI inflows from developing 
countries to LDCs had been increasing, though the Group had accounted for a mere 2% of global 
FDI flows in 2012. The LDCs were unable to finance their deficits in view of insufficient FDI inflows along with declining ODA and remittances.  
 
23. She went on to say that the LDCs represented a miniscule share of 1.14% of world trade in 
2012, demonstrating the need for enhanced market access for their products. Since 2008, India had voluntarily offered a duty-free tariff preference scheme for LDCs. She urged developed 
Members that had not yet done so to make it a priority to provide DFQF market access to LDC WT/COMTD/LDC/M/70 
 
- 5 - 
 
  products. She invited Members' attention to the fact that in 2012, LDC exports to developing 
countries had expanded by 8%, while those to developed countries had declined by 4%; as a result of which the share of LDC exports going to developing countries had increased to 53% compared to 50% in 2011, while the proportion going to developed countries had continued to 
shrink reaching 40% in 2012 compared to 54% in 2000. She lent support to the suggestion from 
the LDC Group for a more substantive discussion on LDC trade issues, with a view to focusing on the challenges and steps that could be taken to enable LDCs' meaningful integration into the 
multilateral trading system.  
 24. The representative of China said that his authorities in the capital were still studying the 
document, and might come back with comments at  a future meeting of the Sub-Committee. He 
reiterated the statement made by the Chinese President Xi Jinping at the G-20 summit in Saint 
Petersburg held in September 2013 that China would expand its present zero tariff treatment to 97% of its tariff lines for all LDCs having diplomatic relations with China by 2015. He stressed that 
an early harvest at MC9 should encompass issues of special interest to the LDCs. His delegation 
stood committed to work with other Members to en sure a successful outcome at MC9, including an 
LDC package.  
 
25. The representative of the Solomon Islands associated himself with the statement made by 
Nepal, on behalf of the LDC Group. He reiterat ed the need for the LDCs to improve their trade 
performance. He drew attention to regulatory i ssues that prevented LDCs from taking advantage 
of DFQF market access provided to them. He adde d that standards-related requirements had often 
been stringent and acted as non-tariff barriers for LDC exports. He urged Members to urgently address such non-tariff barriers to facilitate exports from LDCs. In conclusion, he sought 
clarification as to whether Pacific Island LDCs had been grouped together with Asian LDCs in the 
Table presented at the meeting dealing with costs of exports from LDCs.   
26. The representative of the Secretariat clarif ied that in keeping with the standard WTO 
practice, the Pacific region's LDCs had been included in the Asian LDC group shown in the Table. 
He would explore having a separate category of small island countries in the context of that Table since these countries were in a specific situation with respect to their connectedness to the rest of 
the world.  
 27. The representative from the United States thanked the Secretariat for the Note. He asked if 
the presentation made by the Secretariat at th e meeting could be made available to Members. 
 28. The Chairman requested the Secretariat to take into account the remarks made at the 
meeting, as and when the Secretariat updated the document in future. He took note of the 
suggestion from the LDC Group to have an elaborat e and dedicated debate on the issues analysed 
in the Note. He would undertake consultations with Members to explore how such a discussion could be organized. He suggested that the Sub-Committee take note of the statements made at 
the meeting. He also suggested that the Note re main on the agenda of the next meeting of the 
Sub-Committee.  
29. It was so agreed. 
 
C. TRADE-RELATED TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND CAPACITY-BUILDING INITIATIVES 
FOR LEAST-DEVELOPED COUNTRIES 
- An Update on the Enhanced Integrated Framework (EIF): Oral Report by the EIF 
Executive Secretariat 
30. The Chairman invited the representative of the Secretariat of the EIF to take the floor.  
 
31. The outgoing Executive Director of the EIF Secretariat, Ms. Dorothy Tembo, gave an 
overview of the implementation of the EIF programm e. She said that since the last reporting to the 
Sub-Committee made in October 2012, the programme had continued to grow both in number of 
country participation, as well as in accessing resources which allowed forging ahead with the EIF work, including undertaking of trade mainstreaming activities. The enhanced participation of LDCs 
and the increasing recognition of EIF as trade and development tool had been gratifying. She 
noted that a total number of 49 countries were EIF beneficiaries with South Sudan and Myanmar WT/COMTD/LDC/M/70 
 
- 6 - 
 
  having joined the programme recently. In both cases, progress towards the undertaking of the 
diagnostic trade integration studies (DTISs) and identification of priority needs were under way.  32. She went on to say that continued efforts were being made in supporting countries with the 
establishment of national implementation structur es to support the country implementation of the 
EIF and broader Aid-for-Trade programmes. Since the establishment of the EIF in July 2009, two-thirds of EIF beneficiaries, corresponding to  a total number of 36 beneficiaries, had accessed 
Tier 1 resources (institutional capacity building and trade mainstreaming). The majority of these 
projects had been nationally implemented; that demonstrated a strong ownership by the LDCs of 
the programme, as well as a steady enhancement of the capacity to manage fiduciary and other aspects of technical assistance. She informed Members that as of 2013, a total number of 43 
DTISs had been validated of which seven had be en updates. Sixteen DTIS updates were under 
way. With respect to Tier 2 resources (sector-specific interventions), the EIF had approved a total of 17 projects; these projects had received direct  funding from the EIF Trust Fund. In addition, 
other priority projects were being financed through different partner mechanisms at the country 
level.   
33. She stressed that the provision of capacity buil ding remained an integral part of the EIF 
process. Modules were being continually designed  to support country capacity-building efforts. 
Some of the recent ones included trade mainstreaming, medium-term programming and a specific EIF stakeholder engagement module. Training tools were also being developed in partnership with 
other institutions. Progress had been made in this regard in the tourism sector with the UN World 
Tourism Organization.  
34. She was pleased to report that the EIF had continued to provide result-based reports, 
launched in 2011. The 2012 EIF Annual Progress Report  provided the overall achievements of the 
programme with respect to trade mainstreaming, Aid-for-Trade leverage and coordination. It also 
provided country-specific implementation status results. 
 35. She said that building on the successfully completed EIF Mid-Term Review of 2012 and its 
recommendations, the programme would focus on further strengthening of the partnership at the 
global and national levels with a view to addre ssing the needs of LDCs in a sustainable manner. 
The programme would also address its repositioning post-2015, and a key input in this regard would be the 2014 evaluation. In conclusion, she th anked all the EIF Partners for their continued 
support and commitment to the programme which had enabled the EIF to stay relevant to the LDC 
trade and development agenda. She thanked Members for their support rendered to her during her tenure. She underscored that the foundation of th e programme had been set. She urged Members 
to collectively build on to it to help the neediest countries in the world. 
 36. The incoming Executive Director of the EIF Se cretariat, Mr. Ratnakar Adhikari, thanked the 
Chairman for providing him with an opportunity to address the Sub-Committee. He was privileged 
to take up this position with an objective of building the trade capacity of the weakest and 
neediest countries of the world. He reiterated his commitment to build on to the achievement made by the EIF thus far, along with his team in the EIF Secretariat. He was of the view that the 
EIF process could leverage support from all development partners for implementing trade-related 
activities identified in the DTIS Action Matrices. That would help LDCs achieve sustainable economic growth and contribute towards poverty alleviation.  
 
37. He underscored the importance of strengthening engagement with regional institutions such 
as regional development banks, regional economic and social commissions of the United Nations as well as regional economic groupings which could help LDCs in the implementation of EIF activities 
in their countries. He noted that there were seve ral challenges for LDCs to take advantage of the 
market access opportunities at the regional level, and that he would work with all stakeholders to help LDCs overcome those challenges. He underlined the need for the LDCs to lower trade costs to 
integrate beneficially into global trade. He also stressed on strengthening the standards-related 
infrastructure in LDCs to effectively utilize the preferences granted to them. The EIF would 
continue to work on these areas based on the needs identified by the LDCs in their DTIS Action 
Matrices. In conclusion, he sought cooperation from Members to help LDCs build their trade 
capacity.    38. The representative of Nepal emphasized the impo rtance of the EIF for the LDCs, in particular 
as a framework for mobilizing resources to enhance trade capacity in their economies. The EIF had WT/COMTD/LDC/M/70 
 
- 7 - 
 
  proved its worth by delivering results on the ground. In particular, the EIF had been instrumental 
in meeting three main objectives: first, it was supporting LDCs to mainstream trade in their national development strategies; second, it was helping LDCs to set up structures needed to coordinate the delivery of trade-related technical assistance; and third, it was providing support to 
LDCs to build their trade capacity and enable them to address supply-side constraints. The 
Mid-Term Review of the EIF conducted in 2012 had reconfirmed the EIF’s relevance and usefulness in addressing the issues mentioned above. 
 
39. He went on to say that over the last one and a half decades, many LDCs had benefitted from 
the EIF. It had not only assisted countries to develop DTISs for trade development but also had helped mobilize support from the international community for its successful implementation. As an 
excellent centrepiece of partnership between thre e constituencies namely, LDCs, donors and core 
agencies, the EIF remained a valuable instrument for trade capacity building in the LDCs. In the context of the post Mid-Term Review of the EIF,  he highlighted a number of points to further 
strengthen the EIF. These included: (i) ensuring adeq uate levels of funding; (ii) continuity of the 
EIF to build on the current achievements, and to make this process a gateway to access broader Aid-for-Trade resources; (iii) enlarging the scope of the partnership by exploring new 
opportunities; and (iv) streamlining procedures to further improve efficiency, such as simplifying 
the procedure for project approval and implementation and bridging the commitment-disbursement gaps. He also underlined the need for increased communication between the EIF global governance structures and recipient countries as well as strengthening the 
capacity of National Implementation Arrangements , with a view to implementing the EIF projects 
effectively.   
40. In conclusion, he expressed deep appreciation to Ms. Dorothy Tembo, the outgoing 
Executive Director of the EIF Secretariat, for her outstanding services rendered to the cause of the 
EIF and the LDCs. He also welcomed the new EIF Executive Director, Mr. Ratnakar Adhikari, and 
reiterated the support of the LDC Group for his successful tenure.  
 41. The Chairman underscored the importance of the EIF to help build trade capacity in the 
LDCs. He, on his own behalf as well as on behalf  of the Sub-Committee, expressed appreciation to 
the outgoing Executive Director, Dorothy Tembo,  for her contribution and welcomed the new 
Executive Director, Mr. Ratnakar Adhikari. Member s gave both of them a round of applause. The 
Chairman suggested that the Sub-Committee take no te of the reports made by the EIF Executive 
Secretariat as well as the statements made. 
 42. It was so agreed. 
 
D. OTHER BUSINESS 
43. The Chairman said that this was the last m eeting of the year 2013. The next meeting was 
tentatively scheduled for the first quarter of 2014. The exact date would be communicated in due 
course.  
 44. In the absence of any other business, the meeting was adjourned. 
 
__________