WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  WT/TPR/W/40 
15 October 2008 
 (08-4971) 
Trade Policy Review Body   
  
DRAFT 
 
TRADE POLICY REVIEW MECHANISM 
 
Report of the Trade Policy Review Body for 2008
 
 
Chairperson:  H.E. Mr. Yonov Frederick Agah (Nigeria) 
 
 1. The Trade Policy Review Mech anism (TPRM) was established in 1989 on a provisional basis 
and confirmed by Annex 3 of the Marrakesh Agreem ent establishing the WTO.  Since then the Trade 
Policy Review Body (TPRB) has thrice appraised the operation of the TPRM.
1  The third appraisal, 
conducted in 2008, found that the TPRM functioned eff ectively and that its objectives, as defined in 
Annex 3, were being achieved.  The appraisal also  introduced a number of procedural improvements, 
subsequently incorporated in revised Rul es of Procedure for Meetings of the TPRB2, thus continuing a 
process by Members of keeping the Mechanism under frequent review. 
2. This Report by the Trade Policy Review Body provides a brief assessment of the TPRM, and 
reports on the reviews of Members conducted in 200 8.  Tables are annexed showing the Members that 
will have been reviewed up to the end of 2008, the geographical coverage of the reviews conducted to 
date, as well as the proposed programme of reviews for the year 2009. 
Objectives of the TPRM  
3. Annex 3 of the Marrakesh Agreement states the objectives of the TPRM as: "to contribute to 
improved adherence by all Members to rules,  disciplines and commitments made under the 
Multilateral Trade Agreements and, where applicable , the Plurilateral Trade Agreements, and hence to 
the smoother functioning of the multilateral trading system, by achieving greater transparency in, and 
understanding of, the trade policies and practices of Members". 
4. In this regard, the TPRM is re quired to periodically review the trade policies and practices of 
all Members.  By the end of 2008, the TPRM will have conducted 254 reviews since its formation 
(Annex I).  The reviews have covered 135 of 153 Me mbers, representing some 97% of the share of 
world trade.  The trade policies and practices of tw o Members were reviewed for the first time during 
2008.3 
5. The Trade Policy Review Body will have c onducted 16 reviews in 2008 (Annex II).  The 
Secretariat reports for the reviews of Madagascar and Pakistan were prepared with the assistance of 
consultants, under the close supervision of Secretar iat staff.  Dutch and German financing in support 
of TPRs proved invaluable in preparing the revi ews of Ghana, Madagascar, Mauritius and Pakistan.4  
                                                      
1 WTO document WT/MIN(99)/2, 8 October 1999, WT/MIN(05)1, 21 September 2005, and 
WT/TPR/229. 
2 WTO document WT/TPR/6/Rev.2. 
3 These are the Oman and Jordan. 
4 The Kingdom of the Netherlands and the Federal Republic of Germany make financing available 
under the DDA Global Trust Fund to undertake reviews of the "poorest and most vulnerable" countries and to facilitate the trade-policy review process to better adapt to the requirements of these countries. WT/TPR/W/40 
Page 2  
 
The Secretariat's reports continue to be prepared  in close consultation with the authorities of the 
Member under review. 
6. Procedures for the reviews conducted in 2008 ha ve generally run smoothly.  Responses to 
requests for documentation and questionnaires have normally been provided at or close to the 
requested dates.  In line with recent practice, th e Secretariat has attempted to reduce the burden on 
Members under review of providing responses by using,  to the extent possible, alternative sources of 
documentation, including Members' official web-sites or  other authentic sites on the Internet.  It has 
not been possible to do this for all Members under review, and requests for documentation continue to 
be followed up with a detailed questionnaire when  sufficient information is not available from 
alternative sources.  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 an d clarity of the documentation prepared for the 
Review.  The result is that the quality, content,  and style of the reviews has been maintained. 
7. The reviews conducted in 2008 were relatively evenly spaced throughout the period, reducing 
pressure of preparation on the Membership for revi ew meetings at close intervals.  Efforts also 
continue to be made to avoid clashes with other meetings at the WTO;  nevertheless, clashes do 
happen. 
8. The Trade Policy Review programme for 2009 comprises 18 review dates for 22 Members 
(Annex III). 
9. The TPRB intends to continue to  provide an evenly spaced programme of reviews in 2009, 
thereby avoiding a concentration of reviews a nd delays that have occurred in the past. 
Value of the TPRM
 
10. As envisaged in Annex 3, the TPRM conti nues to be a valuable forum for achieving 
transparency in, and understanding of, the trade policies and practices of Members, thus contributing to the smoother functioning of the multilateral tradi ng system.  It provides a forum in which Members 
may openly discuss and provide an objective analysis of each others' trade policies and practices.  The 
reports prepared by the Secretariat provide a factua l and independent review of the trade policies and 
practices of individual Members under review and ar e, in general, appreciated by both the Member(s) 
under review and the overall Membership.  By pr oviding an overall picture of the institutional 
interaction in trade policy formulation and implem entation and the effect of policies on different 
sectors, the reports have also served as an input to trade policy formulation in some cases.  In 
addition, several developing and least developed c ountry Members have found the reviews valuable in 
highlighting their infrastructural constr aints and technical assistance needs.  
11. While carrying out an assessment of the Member s' trade policies and practices, the review 
process also discusses the economic impact of trade measures, and places the trade and economic regimes of individual Members within the broader cont ext of developments in their region.  Given the 
growing importance of regional trade agreements a nd groupings, the analysis in the reports has proved 
useful in discussing the wider impact of recent econom ic developments in certain regions, as well as 
the more general question of the impact of regionalism on the multilateral trading system.  
Points emerging from the 2008 reviews
 
12. While each review highlights the specific issues and measures concerning the individual 
Member, certain common themes emerged during the c ourse of the reviews conducted in 2008.  These 
included: 
• transparency in policy-making and implementation; WT/TPR/W/40 
Page 3 
 
• economic environment and trade liberalization; 
• implementation of the WTO Agreements; 
• regional trade agreements and their relati onship with the multilateral trading system; 
• tariff issues, including peaks, escalation, preferences, rationalization and the gap 
between applied and bound rates; 
• customs clearance procedures; 
• import and export restrictions and licensing procedures; 
• the use of contingency measures such as anti-dumping and countervailing duties; 
• technical and sanitary measures and market access; 
• standards and their equivalence with international norms; 
• intellectual property rights legislation and enforcement; 
• government procurement policies and practices5; 
• state involvement in the economy and privatization programmes; 
• trade-related competition and investment policy issues; 
• incentive measures such as s ubsidies and tax forgone; 
• sectoral trade-policy issues, particularly liberalization in agriculture and certain 
services sectors; 
• GATS commitments;  
• special and differential treatment, including market access and implementation, 
particularly for customs valuation, TRIPS and TRIMs;  and 
• technical assistance in implementing the WTO Agreements and the experience with 
Aid for Trade, and the Integrated Framework. 
Coverage of least developed countries (LDCs)  
13. The Trade Policy Review Body's Report to the Singapore Ministerial Meeting suggested that 
greater attention be paid to the coverage of LDCs  in the preparation of the TPRB timetable, and the 
1999 Appraisal of the operation of the TPRM also drew attention to this matter.  The TPRB has 
continued to review a steady number of least developed Members.  Of the 32 least developed 
Members of the WTO, 27 will have been reviewed by the end of 2008.6,7 
14. Trade Policy Reviews of LDCs have increasingly performed a technical assistance function 
and have been useful in increasing understanding of the trade policy structure in place and its 
relationship with the WTO Agreements.  The revi ews have also enhanced understanding in these 
countries of the WTO Agreements, enabling better compliance and integration in the multilateral 
trading system;  in some cases, better interaction between government agencies has been facilitated by 
the reviews.  The reports' wide coverage of Memb ers' policies also enables Members to identify any 
shortcomings in policy and specific areas where further technical assistance may be required. 
15. Since 2000, the preparation of reviews of LDCs has responded more systematically to 
technical assistance needs.  The review process fo r an LDC now includes a two-to-three-day seminar 
for its officials on the WTO and, in particular, the tr ade policy review exercise and the role of trade in 
economic policy;  such seminars have been held during 2008 for the review process of Lesotho, the 
Maldives, Mozambique, Solomon Islands and Zambia ;  in addition, similar exercises were conducted 
                                                      
5 This has been discussed even in cases where Me mbers are not party to the plurilateral Agreement on 
Government Procurement. 
6 The least developed countries reviewed since th e establishment of the M echanism are:  Angola, 
Bangladesh (three times), Benin (twice), Burkina Faso (twice), Burundi, Chad, Central African Republic, 
Djibouti, Gambia, Guinea (twice), Haiti, Lesotho (twice) , Madagascar (twice), Malawi, Maldives, Mali (twice), 
Mauritania, Mozambique, Niger, Rwanda, Senegal (twice), Sierra Leone, the Solomon Islands, Tanzania 
(twice), Togo (twice), Uganda (t hree times), and Zambia (twice). 
7 The least developed country Members of the WTO yet to be reviewed are:  Cambodia, Democratic 
Republic of Congo, Guinea-Bissau, Myanmar, and Nepal.   WT/TPR/W/40 
Page 4  
 
in the preparation of the reviews of other Me mbers, including The Dominican Republic and the 
Southern African Customs Union (SACU).  The S ecretariat Report for an LDC review includes a 
section on technical assistance needs and priorities,  as identified in cooperation with the Member 
concerned, with a view to feeding this into the Integrated Framework process.  The seminars and the 
technical assistance section in the Secretariat reports involve close cooperation with the WTO's 
Development Division and Institute for Tr aining and Technical Cooperation Division. 
Conclusion
 
16. The Trade Policy Review Mechanism provid es a forum in which Members discuss each 
others' trade policies in a transparent and frank manner .  The forum is unique in that the separation of 
the TPRM from the compliance and dispute settlement aspects of WTO work allows an open debate.  
The 16 reviews conducted in 2008 have been satisf actory, and have met deadlines agreed with the 
Members. The reviews have been relatively evenly spaced throughout  the period, giving adequate 
time to Members to prepare for the meetings.  The discussants have continued to play a very useful 
role in assisting the discussion during the reviews.  The programme for 2009, similarly, aims to avoid 
delays and concentration of reviews. 
17. The TPRM continues to function effectively in me eting its transparency goals.  However, as 
the Membership of the WTO increases, the pressure  on the TPRB to review more Members grows.  
This, and the limited resources available to the Secr etariat to prepare the reviews, makes it important 
to keep the Mechanism functioning as effectively as po ssible within these constraints.  In particular, 
continued cooperation between Members and the Secretar iat in preparing the reports is essential, as is 
the respect of deadlines, in order to maintain th e standard and quality of the reports, and in the 
successful reviews of Members by the TPRB. WT/TPR/W/40 
Page 5 
 
Annex  I  
TRADE POLICY REVIEWS  
WTO Members reviewed, 1989-2008  
Europe/Middle East  Asia/Pacific  Africa  America  
Austria1 Australia (5) Angolab Argentina (3) 
Bahrain (2) Bangladeshb (3) Beninb,6 (2) Antigua and Barbuda4 (2) 
Bulgaria1 Brunei Darussalam (2) Botswana3 (2) Barbados (2) 
Cyprus1 China (2) Burkina Fasob,6 (2) Belize 
Czech Republic1 (2) Chinese Taipei Burundib Bolivia (3) 
European Communities (8) Fiji Cameroon6 (3) Brazil (4) 
Finland1 Hong Kong, China (5) Chadb Canada (8) 
Hungary1 (2) India (4) Central African Republicb Chile (3) 
Iceland (3) Indonesia (5) Congo Colombia (3) 
Israel (3) Japan (8) Côte d'Ivoire Costa Rica (3) 
Liechtenstein2 (3) Korea, Rep. of  (5) Djiboutib Dominica4 (2) 
Norway (5) Kyrgyz Republic Egypt (3) Dominican Republic (3) 
Poland1 (2) Macao, China (3)  Gabon6 (2) Ecuador 
Qatar Malaysia (4) Gambiab El Salvador (2) 
Romania1 (3) Maldivesb Ghana (3) Guatemala 
Slovak Republic1 (2) Mongolia Guineab  (2) Grenada4 (2) 
Slovenia1 New Zealand (3) Kenya5 (3) Guyana 
Sweden1 (2) Pakistan (3) Lesothob,3 (2) Haitib 
Switzerland (5) Papua New Guinea Madagascarb (2) Honduras 
Turkey (4) Philippines (3) Malawib  Jamaica (2)  
United Arab Emirates Singapore (5) Malib,6 (2) Mexico (4) 
Jordana Solomon Islandsb Mauritaniab
 Nicaragua (2) 
Omana Sri Lanka (2) Mauritius (3) Panama 
 Thailand (5) Morocco (3) Paraguay (2) 
  Mozambiqueb Peru (3) 
  Namibia3 (2) St.Kitts and Nevis4 (2) 
  Nigerb,6 St.Lucia4 (2) 
  Nigeria (3) St.Vincent & Grenadines4 (2) 
  Rwandab Suriname 
  Senegalb,6 (2) Trinidad and Tobago (2) 
  Sierra Leoneb United States (9) 
  South Africa3 (3) Uruguay (3) 
  Swaziland3 (2) Venezuela (2) 
  Tanzaniab,5 (2)  
  Togob (2)  
  Tunisia (2)  
  Ugandab,5 (3)  
  Zambiab (2)  
  Zimbabwe  
37 Members  
(52 reviews)  24 Members 
(74 reviews) 39 Members 
(65 reviews)  33 Members 
(73 reviews)  
( ) Number of reviews completed where this is greater than one. 
a First review in 2008. 
b Least developed Member. 
1 Now included in European Communities (EC). 
2 Joint review with Switzerland (counted as two Members but one review for statistical purposes). 
3 Reviewed as member of the Southern African Customs Union (counted as five Members, but one review). 
4 Reviewed as a member of the Organization of East Ca ribbean States (counted as six Members but one review). 
5 Reviewed as a member of the East African Comm unity (counted as three Members but one review). 
6 Joint Review (two Members, but one Review for statistical purposes). 
Reviews conducted at end-2008   = 264 
WTO Members reviewed   = 135 out of 153 Members 
Least-developed WTO Members reviewed   =     27  
Share of world trade of WTO Members reviewed 
(excluding significant double counting and intra-EC trade) =  around 97% WT/TPR/W/40 
Page 6  
 
Annex II
 
Trade Policy Reviews conducted in 2008 
 
 
Membera Meeting Date 
(scheduled) Review Cycle (years) 
Pakistan (3) 16/01/2008 6 
Ghana (3) 28/01/2008 6 
Mexico (4) 11/02/2008 4 
Brunei (2) 25/02/2008 6 
Madagascar* (2) 02/04/2008 6 
Mauritius (3) 23/04/2008 6 
China (2) 21/05/2008 2 
United States (9) 09/06/2008 2 
Oman 25/06/2008 6 
Singapore (5) 14/07/2008 4 
Barbados (2) 23/07/2008 6 
Korea (5) 08/10/2008 4 
Norway (5) 22/10/2008 4 
Jordan 10/11/2008 6 
Dominican Republic (3) 24/11/2008 6 
Liechtenstein (3) +Switzerland (5) 15/12/2009 4 
 
* Least developed country. 
a Figures in brackets indicate number of reviews. 
 
 
   
Annex III
 
Proposed programme of reviews for 2009 
 
Two-year cycle Japan, EC 
Four-year cycle Brazil, Southern African Customs Union (Botswana, Lesotho*, 
Namibia, South Africa and Swaziland)  
Six-year cycle Croatia, El Salvador, Fiji, Georgia, Guatemala, Guyana, 
Maldives*, Morocco, Mozambique*, New Zealand, Senegal*, Solomon Islands*, and Zambia* 
 * Least developed country. 
__________