RESTRICTED  
  
WT/COMTD/M/96  
 
 
11 November 2015  
(15-5977)  Page: 1/10  
Committee on Trade and Development 
Ninety-Sixth Session    
 
NOTE ON THE MEETING OF 23 SEPTEMBER 2015 
Chairman: H.E. Mr. Juan Esteban Aguirre Martínez (Paraguay) 
A. ADOPTION OF TH E AGENDA .................................................................................... 1  
B. REVIEW OF STEPS TAKEN TO PROVIDE DFQF MARKET ACCESS TO LDCS ................. 1  
C. REVIEW OF THE CURRENT STATE OF PLAY OF DFQF MARKET ACCESS FOR 
LDCS  ............................................................................................................................... . 4 
D. ISSUES IN RELATION TO THE IMPLEM ENTATION OF DFQF MARKET ACCESS 
FOR LDC PROD UCTS ......................................................................................................... 5  
E. POSSIBLE RECOMMENDATIONS ON TH E IMPLEMENTATION OF THE BALI 
DECISION ON DFQF MARK ET ACCESS FOR LDCS .............................................................. 8  
F. OTHER BUSINESS .................................................................................................. 10  
 
A. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA 
1. The Chairman said that the 96th Session of the Committee on Trade and Development (CTD) 
had been convened to discuss duty-free and quot a-free (DFQF) market access for least developed 
countries (LDCs). This followed from the reques t for such a meeting that had been made by 
Bangladesh, the LDC Coordinator, at the 95th Session, and which had been supported by some 
other LDCs. He recalled that the Ambassador of Bangladesh had circulated two formal 
communications in this regard, which were contained in documents WT/COMTD/W/210 and 
WT/COMTD/W/210/Add.1, and that in formal consultations had been held. He also recalled that he 
had kept delegations updated on the status of his consultations, and that he had informed 
Members in a fax dated 31 July 2015 of his intention to hold a session of the CTD in September to 
discuss DFQF market access for LDCs. Members had been invited to propose agenda items by 10 September. The four substantive items on the draft agenda for the present meeting had been 
included based on the proposals by Bangladesh. He indicated that he would open the consideration 
of each item by inviting Bangladesh to take the floor. As for the regular substantive items which normally appeared on the CTD's agenda, these would be taken up at the 97
th Session.  
2. The draft agenda as contained in document WTO/AIR/COMTD/4 of 11 September 2015 was 
adopted. 
B. REVIEW OF STEPS TAKEN TO PROVIDE DFQF MARKET ACCESS TO LDCS 
3. The representative of Bangladesh expressed hope that the present meeting would allow 
Members to exchange views on a way forwar d to ensure the full implementation of 
Ministerial Decisions relating to DFQF market access for LDCs. He recalled that the Enabling Clause allowed special treatment for LDCs in the contex t of Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) 
schemes. He also recalled the 1996 WTO plan of action for the LDCs, in which it was indicated that 
developed country Members, and developing count ry Members on an autonomous basis, would 
explore the possibilities of gran ting preferential duty-free access for the exports of LDCs. At a 
High-Level meeting held in 1997, several Members had pledged to introduce, or extend the 
coverage of, DFQF market access for LDCs. This wa s a period during which the United States (US) 
granted DFQF market access on 1,783 products exclusively for LDCs. In 1999, the General Council adopted a waiver decision exempting developing Members from their most-favoured-nation (MFN) WT/COMTD/M/96 
 
- 2 - 
 
  obligation, to the extent necessary to provide preferential tariff treatment to the products of LDCs. 
The waiver was initially granted until 2009, and was subsequently extended until 2019. He noted the establishment of the European Union (EU)'s Everything But Arms (EBA) initiative in 2001, and the steps taken around this time by Australia, Canada and New Zealand to improve their GSP 
schemes for LDCs. Among the developing Members, he pointed to the DFQF schemes established 
by the Republic of Korea and Chinese Taipei during  this period. He added that the Doha Round had 
set an objective of DFQF market access for LDCs, in recognition of the fact that the integration of 
LDCs into the multilateral trading system requ ired meaningful market access, support for the 
diversification of their production and export base, and trade-related technical assistance and 
capacity building.   
4. Turning to the 2005 Hong Kong Decision on DFQF market access for LDCs, he noted that 
three developed countries had yet to implement th e Decision by granting DFQF market access on 
at least 97% of tariff lines. Of these three countries, the US was a major trading partner of LDCs and a prime driver of LDCs' exports. The US had circulated five communications during 2006 and 
2007 indicating the steps being taken to implement the Hong Kong Decision. Furthermore, in 
2007, the US International Trade Commission (USITC) had initiated an investigation on the probable economic effects of providing DFQF treatm ent for imports from LDCs. In response to this 
investigation, Lesotho, as LDC Coordinator, had made a submission to the USITC on 17 April 2007 
on behalf of the LDC Group, justifying the rationale for the US to provide DFQF market access to LDCs. The investigation was again carried out in 2011 and Bangladesh, as LDC Coordinator, had submitted observations for a second time. The results of the investigations had not been made 
publically available. As for the other developed Members that had yet to implement the Hong Kong 
Decision, he said that it was not known whether Iceland had taken any steps to expand its DFQF coverage past the 90% level observed in 2002. It was also not known whether the 
Russian Federation had taken any initiatives to expand its DFQF coverage since its accession to the 
WTO. He went on to recall elements of the 2013 Bali DFQF Decision, and called on the developed 
Members that were yet to fully implement the DF QF-related Decisions to share with Members the 
steps they were taking in this regard. Among th e developing Members, he noted that Chile and 
Thailand had notified their DFQF schemes after the Bali Ministerial Conference. He invited other developing Members to provide information on any of their initiatives. 
5. The representative of the United States expressed his delegation's support for the 
Bali Decisions. He informed the Committee that th e US had made a serious effort to implement the 
Bali DFQF Decision, including by taking several actions since the CTD's 95th Session. He pointed 
firstly to the legislation which reauthorized the US' GSP scheme to 31 December 2017, and which 
made GSP benefits retroactive to 31 July 2013. Through the GSP scheme, more than 
120 developing countries benefitted from duty-free treatment on over 5,000 tariff lines. The US 
had also passed legislation that extended the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) for 
ten years, up to 2025. With respect to AGOA, he informed the Committee that, in August 2015, 
the US and Gabon had co-hosted the 14th AGOA Forum in Libreville. The theme of the 2015 Forum 
was: "AGOA at 15: Charting a Course for a Sustainable US-Africa Trade and Investment Partnership". The Forum had celebrated the recent reauthorization and the important role of 
women, civil society, and the private sector in promoting trade, expanding inclusive and 
sustainable economic growth, and generating pros perity. Under AGOA, the US provided more than 
97.5% DFQF market access to African LDC beneficiaries. A third initiative was the extension of the 
Haiti HOPE and HELP preferences by five years, up to 2025. The Haiti programmes promoted 
export growth and economic development for Haiti by continuing to provide duty-free entry for a 
variety of products, including certain apparel products. The programmes supported an estimated 
30,000 jobs in Haiti that were created by the apparel industry, which was the country's core 
export industry and primary source of employment growth. 
6. Fourth, and as part of the reauthorization of the GSP scheme, the US Congress had taken 
the necessary legislative step to provide legal auth ority to the President to fully implement the US 
initiative to provide DFQF market access for upland cotton to LDCs. He noted that the US had 
already fulfilled part of its DFQF commitment on cotton in 2012, by designating seven products for 
duty-free treatment under GSP for LDCs only. These seven lines covered in-quota shipments of 
upland cotton from LDCs. Under the new law, the President had the authority to eliminate duties 
for LDCs on five additional tariff lines covering out-of-quota quantities of these products. The domestic process required for these products to receive duty-free treatment was underway. He 
expressed hope that the domestic process could be completed before the Tenth Ministerial 
Conference (MC10), which would allow the US to fulfill its commitment on DFQF market access for WT/COMTD/M/96 
 
- 3 - 
 
  LDCs on upland cotton. Taken together, all of these legislative changes extended benefits to 
developing countries, including LDCs, and provided greater certainty to manufacturers, workers, and traders. He added that, in recognition of the connection between DFQF market access and transparent and simple preferential rules of origin, the US had participated actively in the 
July 2015 dedicated session of the Committee on Rules of Origin, in particular through the 
attendance of experts from his capital. In closing,  he said that he was sharing these points at the 
present meeting in order to demonstrate that the US had actively sought to improve its DFQF 
coverage in 2015, in keeping with the Bali Decision, and remained committed to the initiatives that 
had been mentioned. His delegation looked forward to working with Members to ensure a positive outcome at MC10. 
7. The representative of Montenegro expressed su pport for the Bali Decisions. She informed 
the Committee that legislation was being prepared in Montenegro to grant DFQF market access to 
LDCs. The scope of the initiative was being synchronized with Montenegro's negotiations with the EU. She indicated her delegation's willingness to provide additional information on the initiative 
once the process was finalized. 
8. The representative of Uganda associated his delegation with the statement by Bangladesh, 
and noted that the LDCs had been seeking enhanced market access opportunities for their 
products since the establishment of the WTO. He elaborated on the risks of preference erosion, 
and in this regard emphasized the need for LDCs to obtain DFQF market access as soon as possible. He expressed regret that the language in the Bali DFQF Decision was less binding than the Hong Kong DFQF Decision with respect to  attaining the 97% threshold, but noted that 
paragraph 1.11 of the Bali Ministerial Declaration required Members to pursue on a priority basis 
those issues in the Bali Package which were not legally binding. The importance of harvesting DFQF as a legally binding outcome at MC10 was highlighted. He went on to express appreciation to 
those Members that had made notifications relating to their DFQF schemes. In this respect, he said 
that it was essential for developed countries to ensure that products of commercial interest to LDCs were effectively included. He also encouraged developing countries in a position to do so to 
implement DFQF schemes and further enhance their market access conditions for LDCs. Finally, he 
emphasized the importance of simplified and tr ansparent rules of origin in DFQF schemes. He 
explained that recent reforms of existing rules of origin in some countries had a trade facilitating impact and promoted foreign direct investment in LDCs. In this light, he encouraged Members to 
conduct meaningful reforms of their rules of origin with the view to making them simple, objective 
and transparent in order to facilitate LDC exports. 
9. The representative of the Russian Federation said  that his delegation considered preferential 
treatment in favour of LDCs an integral part of the Doha Development Agenda, and one of its 
cornerstones. He noted that the Russian Federation had been providing DFQF market access to LDCs before its accession to the WTO, and before the Hong Kong Ministerial Conference. He also 
explained that the Russian Federation's membership in the Eurasian Economic Union implied that 
all trade-related policy measures needed to be harmonized between the parties. While this inevitably slowed down the process, it did not compromise the Russian Federation's longstanding 
commitment to facilitate market access for products  originating from LDCs. In this context, he 
indicated that his delegation would welcome concrete proposals regarding a possible decision on 
DFQF at MC10. The Russian Federation was ready to consider such proposals and engage constructively in discussions.  
10. The representative of India said that, pursuant to the Hong Kong Ministerial Declaration, 
India had been the first developing country to extend DFQF market access to LDCs in 2008. Under 
India’s Duty Free Tariff Preference (DFTP) Sc heme for LDCs, beneficiary countries currently 
enjoyed duty-free access on about 96% of India’s ta riff lines at the 6-digit level of the Harmonized 
System, as well as preferential access on 2.2% of  the lines. Only 1.8% of the tariff lines had been 
retained in the exclusion list with no concessions. The scheme was open to all LDCs, and so far 31 had become beneficiaries. He also noted that the International Trade Centre (ITC) had 
launched a project in 2014 called Supporting India's Trade Preferences for Africa (SITA), which 
was helping Ethiopia, Kenya, Rwanda, Tanzania and Uganda to utilize India’s DFTP Scheme in order to enhance their exports. He went on to say that developed Members had a greater 
obligation to provide DFQF market access to the LDCs. In this regard, his delegation noted that 
one developed Member differentiated between LDCs , and provided duty-free access to non-African 
LDCs on only 82.6% of tariff lines - which was about 15 percentage points below the minimum for WT/COMTD/M/96 
 
- 4 - 
 
  developed countries mentioned in the Hong Kong DFQF Decision. In concluding, he urged other 
Members to implement DFQF market access schemes for the benefit of LDCs. 
11. The representative of the European Union said that her delegation wished to recall its strong 
attachment to the Hong Kong and Bali DFQF Decisions. She welcomed the progress that had been 
made towards the Hong Kong commitments, by both developed and developing countries. For its 
part, the EU had been granting full DFQF market access to all LDCs for all products except arms and ammunition since 2009. She also indicated that further progress was possible on the 
Hong Kong commitments. This applied also to emerging economies - both in terms of market 
access for LDC exports, as well as with regard to  the transparency, reliability and quality of the 
data. She expressed hope that progress on DFQF could be shown at MC10.  
12. The representative of Cambodia associated his delegation with the intervention by 
Bangladesh. He called on Members that had as ye t not fully implemented the Hong Kong and Bali 
DFQF Decisions to speed up their implementation. He also noted the importance of simple rules of origin. Finally, he indicated that the effective implementation of the LDC priority areas would 
contribute to increased revenue, employment creation and poverty reduction in LDCs. 
13. The representative of Lesotho said that his delegation was committed to ensuring that DFQF 
market access was implemented in a manner that was beneficial to all LDCs. He emphasized the 
need for the DFQF process to deliver on its development dimension, which meant that the needs of 
all LDCs - and particularly the most vulnerable - were addressed. 
14. The representative of Mauritius said that his country had always subscribed to a fair and 
balanced multilateral trading system. This was particularly important in the context of the 
development outcome that was sought at MC10. His delegation recognized the need for LDCs to 
integrate into the multilateral trading system, and was ready to contribute positively towards the elaboration of an LDC package that did not undermine the development concerns of other 
Members. He emphasized that any initiative or decision that would turn into a development deficit 
f o r  a n y  M e m b e r  s h o u l d  n o t  b e  p u r s u e d .  W i t h  r e g a r d  t o  D F Q F  m a r k e t  a c c e s s ,  h e  s a i d  t h a t  t h e  position of his delegation had not changed. He believed that it was necessary to have an 
assessment of full DFQF market access on some of  Mauritius' most sensitive exports. Trade data 
showed that for some sectors, and in particular for garments, Mauritius had an important competitive gap relative to other, more competitive, suppliers. Some developing countries, including Mauritius, continued to face pressure to sustain their economic and social development, 
and were at least as vulnerable as some of the LDCs that were likely to benefit from DFQF market 
access. This was the motivation behind the reflection in the Hong Kong DFQF Decision to take into account the impact on developing countries at similar levels of development. In the view of his 
delegation, there was a need for a study on the po ssible impact of DFQF implementation on both 
developing countries and LDCs. Such a study woul d help Members to take an informed decision. 
15. The representative of Haiti expressed apprecia tion to the Members that were implementing 
DFQF schemes. He noted in particular that the US provided preferential access to Haiti on several 
products, including textile products. He hoped that the discussion at the present meeting would help Members to find a way forward on the DFQF issue which would take into account all interests and concerns. His delegation looked forward to a positive development outcome at MC10 for all 
LDCs.  
16. The Committee took note of all interventions.  
C. REVIEW OF THE CURRENT STATE OF PLAY OF DFQF MARKET ACCESS FOR LDCS  
17. The representative of Bangladesh said that most developed Members had met the 97% 
threshold stipulated in the Hong Kong DFQF De cision. Some developed Members granted close to 
100% DFQF market access, covering all products of export interest to LDCs. A number of 
developing Members like Chile, China, India and th e Republic of Korea had also come forward with 
comprehensive DFQF schemes which were comparable to the coverage provided by the developed Members. He recalled that, in 2014, the Secretar iat had prepared a report providing information 
on the status of DFQF market access provided by  developed and developing Members, as per the 
Bali DFQF Decision. The Secretariat report demonstrated that three developed Members were yet 
to provide 97% DFQF market access, and certai n schemes excluded products of major export WT/COMTD/M/96 
 
- 5 - 
 
  interest to LDCs. This was somewhat frustrating, given that the Doha Round sought to help LDCs 
improve their participation in world trade and th ereby create employment and reduce poverty. 
Despite the calls in the Bali DFQF Decision for developed Members which were yet to reach the 97% threshold to improve their existing DFQF market access coverage, there had not been any 
substantial movement by the Members in question. In this context, his delegation wished to hear 
from these Members about their future plans. 
18. The representative of the United States expressed his delegation's support for the 
Bali Decisions. He informed the Committee that th e US had made a serious effort to implement the 
Bali DFQF Decision, including by taking several actions since the CTD's 95th Session. He pointed 
firstly to the legislation which reauthorized the US' GSP scheme to 31 December 2017, and which made GSP benefits retroactive to 31 July 2013. Through the GSP scheme, more than 120 
developing countries benefitted from duty-free treatment on over 5,000 tariff lines. The US had 
also passed legislation that extended AGOA for ten years, up to 2025.  With respect to AGOA, he informed the Committee that, in August 2015, the US and Gabon had co-hosted the 14
th AGOA 
Forum in Libreville. The theme of the 2015 Forum was: "AGOA at 15: Charting a Course for a 
Sustainable US-Africa Trade and Investment Partnership". The Forum had celebrated the recent reauthorization and the important role of women, ci vil society, and the private sector in promoting 
trade, expanding inclusive and sustainable econ omic growth, and generating prosperity. Under 
AGOA, the US provided more than 97.5% DFQF mark et access to African LDC beneficiaries. A third 
initiative was the extension of the Haiti HOPE and HELP preferences by five years, up to 2025. The 
Haiti programmes promoted export growth and econ omic development for Haiti by continuing to 
provide duty-free entry for a variety of products, including certain apparel products. The 
programmes supported an estimated 30,000 jobs in Haiti that were created by the apparel industry, which was the country's core export industry and primary source of employment growth. 
19. Fourth, and as part of the reauthorization of the GSP scheme, the US Congress had taken 
the necessary legislative step to provide legal auth ority to the President to fully implement the US 
initiative to provide DFQF market access for upland cotton to LDCs. He noted that the US had 
already fulfilled part of its DFQF commitment on cotton in 2012, by designating seven products for 
duty-free treatment under GSP for LDCs only. These seven lines covered in-quota shipments of upland cotton from LDCs. Under the new law, the President had the authority to eliminate duties for LDCs on five additional tariff lines covering out-of-quota quantities of these products. The 
domestic process required for these products to receive duty-free treatment was underway. He 
expressed hope that the domestic process could be completed before MC10, which would allow the US to fulfill its commitment on DFQF market access for upland cotton to LDCs. Taken together, all 
of these legislative changes extended benefits to developing countries, including LDCs, and 
provided greater certainty to manufacturers, workers,  and traders. He added that, in recognition of 
the connection between DFQF market access and transparent and simple preferential rules of 
origin, the US had participated actively in th e July 2015 dedicated session of the Committee on 
Rules of Origin, in particular through the attendance of experts from his capital. In closing, he said that he was sharing these points at the present meeting in order to demonstrate that the US had 
actively sought to improve its DFQF coverage in 2015, in keeping with the Bali Decision, and 
remained committed to the initiatives that had been mentioned. His delegation looked forward to 
working with Members to ensure a positive outcome at MC10.
1 
20. The Committee took note of all interventions.  
D. ISSUES IN RELATION TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF DFQF MARKET ACCESS FOR 
LDC PRODUCTS  
21. The representative of Bangladesh said that  the value of the present meeting lay in 
addressing the issues that stood in the way of full  implementation of the Hong Kong and Bali DFQF 
Decisions. In this regard, he noted that the Co mmittee had not yet heard from Iceland. He also 
sought further details on what issues the Russian Federation would need to address in order to ensure progress towards DFQF implementation. As for DFQF implementation by the US, he 
believed that this merited greater attention, given that the US was a major trading partner of 
LDCs. Despite the fact that the US was a prime dr iver of LDC exports, its share of exports from 
LDCs had declined from 27% to 10% during the 2000-2014 period. No expansion of DFQF 
                                               
1 This intervention by the US, which was made under  agenda item B, is also  reflected under agenda 
item C at the request of the delegation of the US. WT/COMTD/M/96 
 
- 6 - 
 
  coverage for LDCs had been observed. With respect to the concerns that had been raised on a 
potential negative impact on the LDC beneficiarie s of AGOA, he referred to recent studies by the 
International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD) and the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNC TAD). These studies revealed that a full 
implementation by the US was likely to expand LDC exports by 2.9%. While the exports of Haiti, 
Uganda, Burkina Faso, Malawi, Cambodia, Bangladesh and Nepal were likely to increase, it was possible that the exports of Lesotho and Madagascar  would decline, although the decline would be 
by less than 2%. He informed the Committee that discussions within the LDC Group had revealed 
that the difficulties lay on only a few tariff li nes. If an appropriate mechanism for safeguarding 
these few tariff lines could be devised, the possibility of an adverse impact could be removed. It would then be possible to reach close to 100% DFQF coverage while safeguarding the interests of 
all LDCs. He invited the US to comments on the points that had been raised. 
22. The representative of the United States in dicated that there was no one-size-fits-all 
approach on the matter. He noted that the extensio n of full DFQF coverage by the US would have 
serious consequences. In particular, extending DFQF access to those products from LDCs which did 
not have such access would have an effect on the competitiveness of the LDCs which currently had DFQF access. This was noted in a recent study by UNCTAD, which had concluded that such an 
extension would induce asymmetric trade effects among LDCs and sub-Saharan African countries. 
It would benefit competitive apparel-exporting Asian LDCs that had been exporting apparel products under normal MFN tariffs, but would give  rise to adjustment challenges for LDCs and 
non-LDCs among sub-Saharan AGOA apparel exporters, as their existing AGOA preferences would 
be eroded. He also informed the Committee that  the US Trade Representative had recently 
received a letter representing the views of the governments of all AGOA beneficiary countries. The letter noted the importance of the current US preference programmes to their economies, and 
expressed deep concern over the negative impact s of providing DFQF market access to imports 
from non-African LDCs. Copies of the letter could be  shared with interested delegations. He urged 
the LDC delegations in Geneva to familiarize themse lves with the ramifications of the US extending 
DFQF market access to all LDCs. Finally, with regard to the suggestion made at the present 
meeting for an approach which would exclude certain tariff lines, he said that it was difficult for his delegation to comment on the concept in the absence of additional information. 
23. The representative of Lesotho said that it was important to look into what hurdles existed to 
provide DFQF market access up to the level indicated in the Hong Kong and Bali Decisions, so as to 
be able to arrive at a meaningful outcome that was beneficial to all LDCs - and especially the most vulnerable. He also noted that there were matters  that went beyond the content of the studies 
that had been referred to, and that the LDCs were still discussing these matters among 
themselves. Furthermore, the question of the pref erences granted to African countries under AGOA 
went beyond just the LDCs. This was an African issue, and not just an LDC issue.   
24. The representative of Nigeria supported Lesotho' s observation that this issue was not just an 
LDC issue, given that the preferences under AGOA were granted to other African countries besides 
LDCs. While noting that it was difficult to draw any definitive conclusion on the basis of the studies quoted, he also encouraged further engagement and dialogue between Members with a view to 
having a meaningful and satisfactory outcome.  
25. The representative of Benin emphasized the importance of DFQF market access for LDCs. He 
believed that there was a need for an examination of the technical aspects of DFQF market access, 
which he termed a "clinical examination". Such an examination could bring together all the 
elements related to DFQF market access in order to ensure an appropriate balance. He also pointed to the need for informal consultations to move the process forward and ensure concrete 
outcomes at MC10.  
26. The representative of Haiti stressed the import ance of the DFQF issue for his country. While 
textiles constituted a large share of Haiti's exports, he noted that the issue went beyond 
identifying and excluding certain tariff lines. It was also necessary to take into account the export 
potential of each LDC, and the ability to attrac t investments. The LDCs would continue to discuss 
these matters among themselves.  
27. The representative of Pakistan said that the DFQF issue was critical to Pakistan as well. He 
indicated that there was a need for a balance not only with respect to LDCs, but also with respect WT/COMTD/M/96 
 
- 7 - 
 
  to certain developing countries that had concerns with the DFQF issue. His delegation was willing 
to engage in order to find a way forward.  
28. The representative of Bangladesh noted that the US had referred to the recent study by 
UNCTAD. His understanding was that the study had been prepared on the basis of the assumption 
that preferences would be withdrawn from the AGOA beneficiaries and would be extended to LDCs. 
This was why the impact was high and disproportionate. However, if the analysis could be undertaken under the assumption that the preferences would be granted to both AGOA 
beneficiaries and LDCs, he believed that the impact would be less. He also noted that many AGOA 
beneficiaries were, in fact, not trading under AGOA . Taking into account these points, he indicated 
that a careful study could help Members to find a way forward, so that DFQF market access could 
be extended to all LDCs.  
29. The representative of Uganda expressed suppor t for the intervention by Benin. He believed 
that it was important to undertake the proposed clinical examination in order to understand what 
the real issues were.  
30. The representative of Lesotho said that one of the conclusions of the studies that had been 
referred to was that Lesotho and Madagascar would see declines of 2% in exports. For Lesotho, it 
was very difficult to accept a scenario which would see its exports decrease. A decline of 2% in 
exports was critical. It was difficult to see the development dimension in such an outcome. He took 
the point made by Benin for the need for a clinic al examination of the matter, so that Members 
could be prepared in moving forward. He indicated his willingness to continue to engage in order to explore a solution that would ensure progress for all LDCs.    
31. The representative of Nigeria sought clarification as to what role the Secretariat could play 
to facilitate the clinical examination proposed by Benin.   
32. The representative of Rwanda expressed suppor t for the proposal by Benin for a clinical 
examination. He believed that such an examination could help to safeguard the interests of all 
beneficiary countries. Referring to the question from Nigeria on the role of the Secretariat, he shared his view that any institution that had a proposal to allow Members to find a solution could 
contribute to the discussion.   
33. The representative of Cambodia expressed his hope that progress in DFQF market access 
could be made by the US before MC10. He also st ressed the importance for the LDCs to speak with 
a single voice on the DFQF issue, and called on Members to deliver a meaningful outcome for all 
LDCs at MC10.  
34. The representative of Mauritius said that his country had always subscribed to a fair and 
balanced multilateral trading system. This was particularly important in the context of the 
development outcome that was sought at MC10. His delegation recognized the need for LDCs to 
integrate into the multilateral trading system, and was ready to contribute positively towards the elaboration of an LDC package that did not undermine the development concerns of other 
Members. He emphasized that any initiative or decision that would turn into a development deficit 
f o r  a n y  M e m b e r  s h o u l d  n o t  b e  p u r s u e d .  W i t h  r e g a r d  t o  D F Q F  m a r k e t  a c c e s s ,  h e  s a i d  t h a t  t h e  position of his delegation had not changed. He believed that it was necessary to have an assessment of full DFQF market access on some of  Mauritius' most sensitive exports. Trade data 
showed that for some sectors, and in particular for garments, Mauritius had an important 
competitive gap relative to other, more competitive, suppliers. Some developing countries, including Mauritius, continued to face pressure to sustain their economic and social development, 
and were at least as vulnerable as some of the LDCs that were likely to benefit from DFQF market 
access. This was the motivation behind the reflection in the Hong Kong DFQF Decision to take into account the impact on developing countries at similar levels of development. In the view of his 
delegation, there was a need for a study on the po ssible impact of DFQF implementation on both 
developing countries and LDCs. Such a study woul d help Members to take an informed decision.
2 
35. He also indicated that the DFQF issue was not only an LDC issue, as it would have an impact 
on other developing countries which were beneficiaries under certain trade preference 
                                               
2 This intervention by Mauritius, which was made under agenda item B,  is also reflected under agenda 
item D at the request of the delegation of Mauritius. WT/COMTD/M/96 
 
- 8 - 
 
  programmes. He reiterated that any initiative or decision that would turn into a development 
deficit for any Member should not be pursued.  
36. The Chairman noted that some delegations had expressed support for the proposal by Benin 
for a clinical examination. He invited other Members to share their thoughts on this idea.  
37. The representative of Nigeria believed that Members needed to be clear as to what role the 
Secretariat could play to facilitate the clinical examination proposed by Benin. He also indicated 
that one of the key objectives of the clinical examination should be to ensure that no beneficiary 
countries were made worse off.  
38. The representative of Bangladesh believed that there needed to be clarity as to what the 
problems were, and where the impact would need to  be assessed. A study by the Secretariat could 
help in this regard. It would assist the LDC Group in its dialogue on issues relating to DFQF market 
access, and could contribute to efforts to find a solution. 
39. The representative of Nigeria indicated that it  was important to recognize that there was a 
problem, and that a solution needed to be found that addressed all concerns.  
40. The representative of Rwanda said that some  of the studies that had been undertaken on 
the subject of DFQF market access had proposed a way forward which consisted of identifying a 
number of tariff lines that were important to beneficiary countries and that could face preference 
erosion. However, this approach was not satisfactory to some countries, because it did not take 
into account the possibility of investments in other tariff lines. In this light, there were other studies that had suggested that consideration also be given to products with regard to which investment was envisaged in the future. He invited delegations to reflect on this.   
41. The representative of Uganda observed that there was broad agreement on the idea of a 
clinical examination. With regard to the possible role of the Secretariat, he suggested that this 
could be determined on the basis of informal consultations with the delegations that had the most 
interest in this issue.    
42. The representative of Lesotho said that there ap peared to be general acceptance of the idea 
o f  a  c l i n i c a l  e x a m i n a t i o n .  H e  s u g g e s t e d  t h a t  i t  w o u l d  b e  u s e f u l  t o  h a v e  s o m e  f o c u s  t o  t h i s  
examination. In particular, he noted that the problem was not about DFQF in general, but about 
textiles and garments. In this light, he proposed th at Members could go directly to this sector in 
order to explore what could be done. An explorat ion of the lessons that had been learned from 
past experience in this sector could also be undertaken. He stressed that Lesotho's position was 
not about safeguarding interests, and that th e discussion needed to ensure that all LDCs 
progressed.  
43. The representative of Benin said that the Secretariat could play an important role when it 
came to gathering and sharing trade-related information and data. In this regard, he believed that 
it was important to look at particular sectors and tariff lines that were sensitive to some countries, as they created employment and contributed to national income. He cited textiles and clothing as a 
key example, and stressed the importance of ensu ring that DFQF implementation was not harmful 
to some countries. He also indicated that it would be useful for Members to look at long-term trends in trade flows. In closing, he highlighted the need to establish a schedule for Members to be 
able to assess such information quickly, so  as to be able to move forward.    
44. The representative of Bangladesh indicated that  some useful suggestions had been made by 
Benin. He said that his delegation had some elements to propose with regard to a study by the 
Secretariat, which he would outline in his intervention under the next agenda item.  
45. The Committee took note of all interventions. 
E. POSSIBLE RECOMMENDATIONS ON THE IMPL EMENTATION OF THE BALI DECISION 
ON DFQF MARKET ACCESS FOR LDCS 
46. The representative of Bangladesh observed that the CTD's annual DFQF reviews, mandated 
by the Hong Kong Decision, had not had much impact thus far, and some Members were yet to WT/COMTD/M/96 
 
- 9 - 
 
  provide DFQF market access on the agreed terms. He believed that it was appropriate for the 
Committee to make its considered recommendations to the General Council on the implementation of the DFQF-related Decisions, for subsequent transmission to Ministers. With this background, he went on to outline some elements that could be included in the Secretariat study that his 
delegation was proposing. He said that the study could firstly look into the relevant aspects that 
needed to be covered in order to implement the Hong Kong and Bali DFQF Decisions, so that all stakeholders were comfortable. It was Bangladesh's understanding that it was possible to reach 
the 97% threshold without harming any LDCs in the relevant markets. Another element of the 
study could be to explore the options for moving forward with DFQF coverage, taking into consideration the export interests of all stakeholders. The importance of looking into long-term trends was also highlighted. He clarified that his delegation was asking for statistical facts, on the 
basis of which Members could take an informed decision on the way forward in the CTD, or in the 
negotiations. He also noted the importance of the DFQF issue in the context of a meaningful 
package for LDCs at MC10. In terms of a timeline for the study, he suggested that it would be 
useful if it could be ready by the middle of November, as Members could then make use of it in 
their preparations for MC10. In closing, he expressed his hope that Members would be able to arrive at a meaningful decision on DFQF at MC10, which would advance market access 
opportunities for all LDCs.  
47. The representative of Japan said that her de legation recognized the importance of LDCs' 
participation in global trade. She informed the Committee that Japan was supporting the 
participation of LDCs in global value chains through technical and financial assistance, as well as 
through the provision of DFQF market access ab ove the 97% threshold. She also pointed to the 
usefulness of discussing specific cases on a bilateral basis. The simplification of the rules of origin in Japan's GSP scheme, which entered into force in  April 2015, had been initiated on the basis of a 
request from an LDC. Finally, she encouraged more developing countries to implement DFQF 
schemes, in light of the significant role this would play in improving market access for LDCs and contributing to their integration into the global economy.  
48. The representative of Lesotho believed that it  would be useful to have a discussion among 
L D C s  a s  t o  w h a t  c o u l d  b e  i n c l u d e d  i n  t h e  p r o p o s e d  S e c r e t a r i a t  s t u d y .  H e  e m p h a s i z e d  t h e  
importance of ensuring that the development dimension was not compromised.  
49. The Director of the Development Division noted that the question had been raised as to the 
potential role of the Secretariat. In this regard, he indicated that it was for Members to determine 
what role the Secretariat could play, taking into account the resources available. With regard to the proposal for the Secretariat to prepare a study, he noted that it would be important for the 
parameters of the study to be clearly defined. He suggested that the Chairman could hold informal 
consultations after a proposed outline of the study was ready.  
50. The representative of the United States said that he had a general sense of the objectives of 
a clinical and analytical approach to examining the impediments and potential impact of full 
implementation of DFQF market access. The ques tion of impact was particularly important for 
the US, given the concerns that were being expressed to the US Government by preference beneficiaries in Africa, and given that MC10 woul d be held in Africa. He indicated that his 
delegation was open to moving forward with some form of work on the basis of what had been 
suggested, but wished to first see an outline of the proposed Secretariat study. Informal consultations could then be held. He said that he understood the need to move quickly, given that 
Members were looking at the issue in the context of preparations for MC10. Finally, he observed 
that, while there were differences in perspective on the DFQF question, Members should not have 
an expectation that they could rely on the Secret ariat to resolve the issues. Ultimately, the issues 
would need to be resolved by Members themselves.  
51. The representative of Nigeria agreed with the need for the Chairman to hold informal 
consultations. He believed that a Secretariat study could help to facilitate progress on the DFQF 
issue, and expressed his hope that a satisfactory solution could be found soon.  
52. The representative of Haiti said that the DF QF issue needed a balanced and comprehensive 
approach, particularly for the most vulnerable LDCs. Textiles and apparel were central to the 
discussion, but the issue went beyond the question  of preference erosion. He believed that a 
clinical examination could be a useful way forward, and that the Secretariat could play a role in 
this regard. His delegation was open to informal consultations to discuss the matter further. He WT/COMTD/M/96 
 
- 10 - 
 
  concluded by emphasizing his delegation's commitment to work towards a positive development 
outcome for all LDCs at MC10.  
53. The Chairman said that it would be necessary to define the parameters of the proposed 
Secretariat study. He indicated that a draft outline of the study would need to be prepared as soon 
as possible, after which informal consultations would be held.    
54. The Committee took note of all interventions.   
F. OTHER BUSINESS 
55. No matter was raised under "Other Business".  
56. The meeting was adjourned.    
 
__________