RESTRICTED  
  
WT/TPR/W/55  
 
17 October 2013  
(13-5701)  Page: 1/6  
Trade Policy Review Body   
 
TRADE POLICY REVIEW MECHANISM 
FIFTH APPRAISAL OF THE TRADE POLICY REVIEW MECHANISM 
Chairperson: H.E. Mr Joakim Reiter (Sweden) 
Final Draft 
1  BACKGROUND 
1.1.  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 World Trade Organization. 
Paragraph F of Annex 3 established that the Trade Policy Review Body (TPRB) "shall undertake an appraisal of the operation of the TPRM not more th an five years after the entry into force of the 
Agreement Establishing the WTO.  The results of th e appraisal will be presented to the Ministerial 
Conference. It may subsequently undertake appraisa ls of the TPRM at intervals to be determined 
by it or as requested by the Ministerial Conference". 
1.2.  The first Appraisal of the TPRM (WT/MIN(99)/2) was undertaken in 1999, the second 
(WT/MIN(05/1) in 2005, the third (WT/TPR/229) in 2008, and the fourth (WT/MIN(11)/6 in 2011. 
The fourth Appraisal concluded that "the TPRB shou ld prepare a fifth Appraisal of the operation of 
the TPRM for the Ninth Ministerial Conference". 
1.3.  The Chairperson announced his intention to begin the fifth Appraisal of the operation of the 
TPRM on 2 July 2013. Informal meetings of the TPRB were held between July and October 2013 to 
discuss successive drafts of this Report and prop osals by Members. The Report was agreed at a 
TPRB Meeting on [… 2013].  
1.4.  By the end of 2013, the TPRB will have conducted 384 reviews covering all but one of the 
WTO's Members in 1995. Owing to their more recent accession to the WTO, eight other Members are yet to complete their first review. As of November 2013, the reviews have covered 147 of the 
159 Members, including 30 of the 34 least-developed-country (LDC) Members. 
2  RESULTS OF THE 2011 APPRAISAL 2.1.  In an effort to streamline the existing TPRM and make it more effective in achieving its 
objectives as an exercise in policy transpar ency, during the 2011 Appraisal Members made a 
number of suggestions. As regards the role of  the Secretariat, Members expressed broad 
satisfaction with the quality of the Secretariat's reports and their impartiality. Nevertheless, they 
saw room for improvement in several respects, including consistency across all Members 
(especially those in the same cycle) in terms of comprehensiveness, accuracy and detailed 
analysis.  
2.2.  Regarding the question-and-answer process during TPRB meetings, Members broadly agreed 
that the usefulness of meetings and discussion ther ein could be greatly improved by more timely 
receipt of written answers to questions submitted to the Member under review in advance of the 
meeting. However, Members could not reach a consensus on the alternative timelines that would 
allow this. Consequently, they decided to maintain the standard timelines for submission of written WT/TPR/W/55 
 
- 2 - 
 
  questions and answers, while allowing volunteers to apply the alternative timelines on a pilot basis 
that, it was agreed, would be reviewed in this fifth Appraisal.1 
2.3.  With respect to the organization and st ructure of TPRB meetings, and with a view to 
encouraging a more interactive and fruitful discussion, Members agreed on some suggestions for 
the Chairperson and the Discussant, without limi ting their freedom. These included that the 
Chairperson's Introductory Remarks should identify key themes for discussion, and that the Discussant, in coordination with the Chairperson, might review trade and trade-related policy 
changes of the Member under review since its previous TPR. Members also agreed that their 
statements during the first day of the meeting should not exceed seven minutes. 
2.4.  Members also considered it important to e nhance, where required, the role of the TPRM in 
making available technical assistance to developi ng-country Members, and in particular to LDC 
Members (in accordance with Annex 3D). Members ag reed that there could be further follow-up to 
reviews of those Members, at their request. This  follow-up could involve a workshop/seminar to 
discuss and disseminate the results of the review, as  well as to identify the trade-related technical 
assistance and capacity-building needs of the reviewed Member(s).  
2.5.  The TPRB suggested other changes to the operation of the TPRM relating to, among other 
things, the possibility of one-day TPRB meetings
2; and the possibility of video-conferencing, 
web-linking or podcasting TPRB meetings in the three official languages at the request of the 
Member under review.3  
2.6.  Members also emphasized the importance of  undertaking the first TPR of Members that have 
not yet been reviewed, in accordance with the six-year cycle. 
2.7.  During the fourth Appraisal, there was broad consensus for the continuation and 
strengthening of the current monitoring exercise on trade and trade-related measures (based on Section G of Annex 3) and related briefings by the Director-General in international forums such as 
the G-20. The Eighth Ministerial Conference took a decision in this regard.
4 
3  PROGRESS AND DEVELOPMENTS SINCE THE 2011 APPRAISAL OF THE TPRM 3.1  Secretariat Reports 
3.1.  The Secretariat continues to seek to ensure that its reports are factual and objective and 
that, subject to each Member providing the data  and information needed for a thorough trade 
policy review, there is consistency across all Members in terms of comprehensiveness, accuracy and detailed analysis, particularly when they are re viewed on the same cycle. With this purpose, 
the Secretariat has modified the Summary Observations in its reports.  
3.2.  In its reports, the Secretariat continues to make efforts to provide a more detailed analysis of 
behind-the-border measures of the Member under review, for example on state aid, subsidies, 
government procurement, and state trading. In addition, and in line with Ministers' 
recommendations from the fourth Appraisal, the Secretariat aims to improve its coverage and analysis of trade and trade-related policies at the sub-central level, where relevant and feasible, 
and where data are available. Further progress in this area could be made if Members contributed 
more information about such measures. 
3.3.  The Secretariat's reports continue to be prepared in close consultation with the authorities of 
the Member under review. An attempt has been made to reduce the burden on these Members of 
providing information by using, to the extent possible, alternative sources of documentation, 
including information available in other WTO bodies, and Members' official web-sites, while 
                                               
1 The standard and alternative ti melines are described in document  WT/MIN(11)/6 of 29 November 
2011. 
2 In the event of a request by a Member under re view, the TPRB agreed that the Chairperson would 
consult with Members on the possibility of holding a one-day meeting for that Member on a pilot basis. 
3 Members felt that this possibility should be offered to the Member under review as long as the 
Secretariat is able to provide this service within existing budget limitations. 
4 WT/L/848 of 19 December 2011. WT/TPR/W/55 
 
- 3 - 
 
  ensuring that this information is verified by the Member concerned, in line with current practice.5 
Secretariat visits to capitals have continued to be productive, and comments provided on Secretariat drafts have been pertinent; close contact with the Member under review is necessary to help ensure the factual accuracy and clarity of the documentation prepared for the TPR. 
3.4.  The Secretariat is also working to produce shorter and more concise reports without 
compromising the quality of the information and analysis. It will focus more on specific trade policy issues that have a significant impact for the Member(s) under review, rather than attempting to 
produce a comprehensive report each time, particularly where this is justified by the relative 
frequency of a Member's review cycle. By streamlining its reports, the Secretariat also aims to reduce documentation and translation costs.  
3.2   Question-and-Answer Process and TPRB Meetings 
3.5.  During 2012-2013, the following nine Members volunteered to use the alternative timelines 
for distribution and receipt of documents for th eir TPRB meetings: Costa Rica; the EU; Kyrgyz 
Republic; Macao, China; Mexico; Norway; Philippines; Singapore; and Suriname. The alternative 
timeline process allowed the Members under review  more time to prepare written answers, while 
Members raising questions in writing also had more time to review the answers provided, including sending them to capitals. Other improvements that have been made to the organization of TPRB 
meetings, such as limiting to seven minutes the interventions by Members during the first day of 
the meeting and reinforcing the roles of the Chai rperson and the Discussant, are felt by Members 
to have contributed to making TPRB meetings more interactive and the discussion more fruitful. To date, deviations from the seven minute rule have  been rare. However, some Members noted that 
flexibility may be required in the application of the seven-minute time-limit in the case of group 
reviews so as to allow deeper consideration of each member of the group. 
3.6.  The Secretariat introduced in 2012, on a pilot basis, digital audio files (podcasting) of TPRB 
meetings whenever Members requested it. During 2012-2013, 13 Members have used this service. 
Storing the podcast on the WTO website allows Members to listen to statements in their original language, in addition to interpretation into the other official languages.  
3.7.  So far, no Member has requested holding a one-day TPRB meeting. 
3.8.  Efforts continue to be made to space meetin gs of the TPRB as evenly as possible throughout 
the year and to avoid clashes with other WTO meetings so as to reduce pressure on Members. 
3.3  Consultations by the TPRB Chairperson to reduce documentation costs 
3.9.  Since the fourth Appraisal, several steps have been taken to reduce the volume of 
documentation, such as the discontinuation of prin ting and distribution in paper form of the Draft 
and the Final Record of TPRB Meetings. Instead, these documents are now posted in draft on the 
Members' Website and in final form on the WTO Website.
6 In addition, the Chairman has carried 
out consultations with delegations on cutting the volume of documentation to reduce costs of the TPRB. As a result of these consultations, Members agreed to discontinue the distribution of hard 
copies regarding questions and answers for review s and the distribution of paper copies of TPR 
reports.  
3.10.  With regard to the minutes of TPRB meetings, Members discussed but did not reach 
agreement on whether podcasts might allow for their discontinuation.
7  
3.4  Roles of the Chairperson and the Discussant 
3.11.  In line with the TPRM's mandate, the role s of the Chairperson and the Discussant have been 
reinforced. Since 2012, the TPRB Chairpersons have attempted, in their introductory remarks, to 
                                               
5 It has not been possible to do this for all Me mbers under review, and requests for documentation 
continue to be followed up with a detailed questionnaire when sufficient information is not available from alternative sources. 
6 Delegations were informed of this in WT/TPR/INF/2 of 8 February 2012. 
7 The annual cost of translating the minutes of TPRB meetings, of which the bulk consists of Members' 
statements, amounts to about CHF 400,000. WT/TPR/W/55 
 
- 4 - 
 
  highlight the most important issues for discussion , recalling the outcome of the previous review, 
and covering, in particular, themes of systemic importance to the multilateral trading system. In their concluding remarks, the Chairpersons have also paid particular attention to make them consistent across all TPRs. In coordination with the Chairperson, the Discussants have encouraged 
debate during the meetings by focusing on the main trade and trade-related challenges facing the 
Member(s) under review, and the key changes since their previous TPR.  
3.5  First Trade Policy Reviews and Backlog of Reviews 
3.12.  Over the last two years, six Members have had their first TPR: Guinea-Bissau, Kuwait, 
FYR of Macedonia, Nepal, Saudi Arabia, and Vi et Nam, while those of Myanmar and Tonga are 
scheduled for the first half of 2014. The first TPR of Ukraine is expected to take place at the end of 2014.  
3.13.  With respect to the backlog of reviews, the TPRs of seven Members are overdue.
8 
3.14.  Owing to their more recent accession to the WTO, the following Members are also yet to 
complete their first review (in parentheses the year of accession): Cape Verde (2008); Lao, 
People's Democratic Republic (2013); Montenegro (2012); Russian Federation (2012); Samoa 
(2012); Tajikistan (2013); Ukraine (2008); and Vanuatu (2012). 
3.6  Group Reviews 
3.15.  The Secretariat continues to group the re views of Members into one TPRB meeting where 
Members agree to be grouped and such a grouping  is justified by, for example, the Members' 
participation in a regional trade or economic agreement. In 2012-2013, the following joint reviews took place: the Central African Economic and Monetary Community (CEMAC)
9; the East African 
Community (EAC)10; Guinea-Bissau and Togo; and Liechten stein and Switzerland. In 2014, joint 
reviews are scheduled for Bahrain, Oman and Qatar; Ghana and Sierra Leone; Djibouti and Mauritius; and the Organization of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS) WTO Members (Antigua and 
Barbuda, Dominica, Grenada, St. Kitts and Nevis, St. Lucia, and St Vincent and the Grenadines). 
In these cases, the Secretariat produced indivi dual TPR reports for each WTO Member of the 
group. 
3.7  Number of Reviews 
3.16.  Given the increasing number of WTO Members, the review cycle set out in the TPRM 
mandate now requires that 24 reviews are completed each year. The number of reviews went from about 15 per year between 2000 and 2005 to 26 in 2012
11, and 20 (counting the EU as one) in 
201312, while 24 are scheduled for 2014. Once all countries that are currently in accession 
proceedings become WTO Members, that total will increase to 30 per year which will require even more time and resources of Members, the TPRB Ch airperson, the Discussants and the Secretariat.  
3.17.  Already today, with the current structure of two-day meetings, the TPRB Chairperson must 
count on a commitment to the TPRB of at least 50 days per year which is very demanding and difficult to fulfil.
13 In that regard, it is worth recalling from the Rules of Procedure for TPRB 
Meetings that the TPRB may elect a Vice-Chairpers on beyond the current practice of relying on ad 
hoc solutions, which was apparent not least during the recent selection of the new Director-
General. "If the Chairperson is absent from any me eting or part thereof, the Vice-Chairperson shall 
perform the functions of the Chairperson. If a Vi ce-Chairperson is not elected or available, the 
                                               
8 These are (in parentheses the date of their last TPR): Angola (February 2006); the Plurinational State 
of Bolivia (November 2005); Cuba; Egypt (July 2005); Haiti (November 2003); Moldova; and the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela (November 2002). 
9 The members of CEMAC are: Cameroon, Centra l African Republic, Chad, Congo, and Gabon. 
10 The members of the EAC are: Burundi,  Kenya, Rwanda, Tanzania, and Uganda. 
11 TPRB meetings for three Members (Kuwait, Nepal and Saudi Arabia) were shifted from 2011 into 2012 
to avoid clashes with the Eighth Ministerial Conference in December 2011. 
12 In view of the difficulty of scheduling TPRB meet ings in December 2013 due to the Ninth Ministerial 
Conference, the TPRs of Mongolia, Myanmar an d Tonga have been shifted from 2013 into 2014. 
13 The TPRB also meets at least twice a year to conduct its periodic review of the Director-General's 
monitoring reports on recent  trade policy developments. WT/TPR/W/55 
 
- 5 - 
 
  Chairperson of the General Council or in the latter's absence, the Chairperson of the Dispute 
Settlement Body, shall perform the functions of the Chairperson. If the Chairpersons of the 
General Council and of the Dispute Settlement Body are also absent, the TPRB shall elect an interim Chairperson for the meeting or that part of the meeting".
14 
3.8  Follow-Up to TPRB Meetings 
3.18.  In the Secretariat's experience, TPRs can be particularly valuable for LDC Members in 
providing them with an opportunity to undertake a comprehensive analysis of their trade policies 
from the point of view of their development object ives, and to identify their technical-assistance 
and capacity-building needs.15 Consequently, the Secretariat regularly offers to assist LDCs and 
any other Members who wish to conduct a follow-up workshop in capitals, after the TPRB meeting, 
to discuss and disseminate the results of the re view. Since the last Appraisal, TPR follow-up 
workshops have been organized in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Nicaragua, and 
Zimbabwe, while similar workshops are scheduled in the second half of 2013 for Burundi, and the West African Economic and Monetary Union (WAEMU)
16 both at their community level and at the 
country level.  For 2014, the Central African Economic and Monetary Community (CEMAC), the 
East African Community (EAC), and the Organization of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS) have indicated that they would like to have a follow-u p regional seminar. Follow-up to TPRB meetings 
can be provided at the request of Members within existing budget limitations. 
4 CONCLUSIONS 
4.1 Members recalled the importance of the Trade Policy Review Mechanism for the functioning of 
the multilateral trading system by achieving grea ter transparency in, and mutual understanding of, 
the trade policies and practices of Members. They  acknowledged that the TPRM had proven all the 
more vital in recent years in the aftermath of the economic crisis and in the collective efforts to keep protectionism at bay. Therefore, Members st ressed the need to ensure the proper operation 
of the TPRM, including through the full participation of all Members. 
 4.2 Members underlined that the TPRM has generally performed its functions well. Members also 
considered that the various changes introduced to the TPRM following the fourth Appraisal (section 
2 of this note) have worked satisfactorily, but that more time is needed to fully appreciate all aspects of these changes before agreeing to make  them definitive. Similarly, Members stressed 
the need to keep this Appraisal light and simple in view of the forthcoming ninth Ministerial 
Conference.  
 4.3 Consequently, Members agreed that the changes introduced following the fourth Appraisal will 
continue to apply on a provisional basis until the next (sixth) Appraisal. It is understood that, in 
the meantime, nothing prevents the TPRB deciding  on more specific areas for further improving 
the functioning of the TPRM. In this regard, recalling some of the points raised in this Appraisal, 
Members expressed an interest in reflecting further on, inter alia , how the meetings can be made 
more interactive; how to facilitate the full participation of all Members, especially developing countries and LDCs, in the review meetings; whet her the review meetings could be made more 
accessible to the public; what could be done to simp lify the handling of large sets of questions and 
help identify which aspects are of the greatest systemic importance; whether there is a need to 
revise the time-frame for reviews; what other measures could be taken to reduce the costs involved in TPRs and the burden imposed on Members; and the potential formats for government 
reports. 
 4.4 In that context, Members: 
 
 recognised the need to continue to make the review meetings of the TPRB as interactive 
and fruitful as possible by, inter alia , focusing on the main trade and trade-related policy 
changes since the last review and areas of systemic importance, and keeping to a 
                                               
14 See WT/TPR/6/Rev.3 of 31 January 2012. 
15 Since 2009, additional material has been added to TPR reports of LDCs and some other six-year cycle 
Members to use/enhance the TPR as a tool to identify and follow up the trade-related technical assistance and 
wider aid-for-trade needs of  the Member under review. 
16 The members of WAEMU are: Benin, Burkina Faso, Cô te d'Ivoire, Guinea-Bissau, Mali, Niger, Senegal, 
and Togo. WT/TPR/W/55 
 
- 6 - 
 
  minimum, to the extent possible, diplomatic courtesy and extensive routine description of 
bilateral relations. 
 invited the Secretariat to continue to explore ways to improve and streamline its reports 
in order to make them more effective in achieving the objectives of the TPRM and, at the 
same time, help reduce documentation and translation costs of the TPRB. 
 requested the Secretariat to pay more attention in its TPR reports to reporting more 
comprehensively on trade and trade-related me asures, covering both trade in goods and 
trade in services, that are applied behind th e border by individual Members at central 
government level and, where they are relevant and feasible and where data are available at the central government level, matters at sub-central level, in areas such as regulatory measures, subsidies and state aid, state trading and government procurement. 
 agreed to maintain until the next Appraisal th e choice for the Member under review of the 
standard or alternative timeline for the submission of written questions and answers. In the meantime they agreed to share their experiences to date with the alternative timeline 
on the basis of the survey questionnaire circulated by the Secretariat. 
 emphasized the importance of undertaking TPRs of those Members that have not yet 
been reviewed or have exceeded the time set out for their reviews (Annex IV of the TPRB 
2013 Annual Report in document WT/TPR/321), and invited them to schedule and 
conduct their TPRs before the next Appraisal. 
 requested the Secretariat to put in place an IT system for Members' consideration to 
facilitate the treatment electronically of the question-and-answer process by Members, 
and to simplify and expedite the process for the Member under review to group the 
questions according to themes. 
 decided that, in view of the increased number of TPRs taking place each year, from 2014 
the TPRB would appoint, under its Rules of Pr ocedure, a Vice-Chairperson to assist the 
Chairperson in chairing form al TPR review meetings.  
 welcomed the steps already taken to reduce TPRB documentation costs. 
 underlined the value, especially for LDCs, of follow-up workshops, if the Member(s) under 
review so request(s), and invited the Secretariat to report on, and provide an assessment of, the experiences of such activities. 
 
4.5 The next Appraisal of the operation of the TPRM  should take place at a time to be decided by 
the TPRB but not later than within five years, and preferably not in the lead up to a WTO Ministerial Conference. It is understood that nothing precludes the TPRB to decide on specific items 
for improvement before the next Appraisal. 
__________