RESTRICTED  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  S/C/W/317 
10 June 2010 
 
 (10-3163) 
Council for Trade in Services  
  
 
LOGISTICS SERVICES 
 
Note by the Secretariat
1 
  
1. This Note has been produced at the request of  the Council for Trade in Services in order to 
encourage discussion of logistics services within the Council.  It provides some basic information and 
focuses on the trends and issues deemed to be the most  relevant to the GATS.  It is not intended to 
provide an exhaustive picture of the sector. 
2. This Note will first describe the economic and regulatory features of the logistics sector using 
the same concepts and categories as those generally used by professional operators and the trade 
press.  These categories and concepts are somewhat nebulous and do not always correspond to precise 
legal definitions, but at least they have the advant age of being the subject of a relative consensus and 
serving as the basis for compiling a large number of data.
2 
3. Second, the Note will describe the commit ments on logistics services undertaken by 
Members, attempting to provide as complete a pict ure as possible of the various services covered in 
the classifications in use and in Members' commitments. 
I. STRUCTURE AND ECONOMIC AND REGULATORY FEATURES OF LOGISTICS 
SERVICES 
4. The concept of logistics has military origins.   The first companies that specialized in 
organizing all modes of transport emerged in Switzerland and Germany (Danzas, for example) in the 
late XVIIIth and early XIXth centuries in connection with the wars  of the French Revolution and the 
                                                      
1 This document was prepared under the Secretaria t's own responsibility and without prejudice to the 
positions of Members and to their rights and obligations under the WTO. 
2 The logistics sector does not app ear as such in the classifications commonly used by the majority of 
Members to formulate and negotiate their commitments (document MTN.GNS/W/120 and provisional CPC) and a search by key word in the Uruguay Round archives shows that "logistics" was not negotiated or 
considered to be a separate sector by negotiators at that  time, and was not the subject of discussions as such.  Its 
emergence in the GATS sphere came later and its definition varies according to the various proposals in which it is mentioned.  See, for example, the documents "Logistics and Related Services, Communication from Hong 
Kong, China" (S/CSS/W/68, 28 March 2001), "GATS 2000:  Services Auxiliary to All Modes of Transport, 
Communication from Switzerland" (S/CSS/W/78, 4 May 2001), "Logistics Services, Communication from 
Australia;  Hong Kong, China;  Liechtenstein;  Mauritius;  New Zealand;  Nicaragua;  Switzerland;  and the 
Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu" (TN/S/W/20, 25 June 2004) and "Joint 
Statement on Liberalization of Logistics Services, Communication from Australia Canada, Chile, Djibouti, the European Communities, Hong Kong, China, Iceland, Ja pan, Korea, Liechtenstein, Mauritius, New Zealand, 
Nicaragua, Norway, Panama, Peru, Singapore, Switzerland,  the Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, 
Kinmen and Matsu and the United States" (TN/S/ W/34, 18 February 2005).  For a summary of 
Members' discussions of these propos als, see the Information Note from the Secretariat "Road, Rail, Inland 
Waterways and Auxiliary Transport Se rvices, and Logistics Services" (JOB /(05)/297 of 18 November 2005). S/C/W/317 
Page 2  
 
  Empire in order to supply the armies at war.
3  The etymology of the word derives from the Greek 
"logistikos ", literally "skilled in calculating".  Until the mid-1980s, in most firms logistics was 
essentially an internal function and they only turned  to transport organizers, brokers or freight 
forwarders (all these concepts be ing legally and economically equivalent) when they needed to 
arrange for complex consignments that i nvolved several modes of transport.   
5. At the beginning of the 1980s, the managerial trend was to bring down the cost of maintaining 
stocks (lean inventory, just-in-time production), wh ich made this function more complex and incited 
companies to make increasing use of third party speci alist firms.  As a result, the profession of freight 
forwarder changed radically from simply being an intermediary in the transport chain to a real 
organizer and coordinator of logistics flows on beha lf of someone else (what the profession calls 3 PL 
and 4 PL for third party and fourth  party logistics providers).  This trend became even more marked 
with the increase in the number and complex ity of flows as a result of delocalization. 
6. One of the reasons for the strong growth in outsourced logistics is in fact changes in 
production methods:  the generalized use of subcontr acting within a country and then delocalization 
of plants manufacturing components to a country where labour costs are lower or even the use of 
third party firms situated in those countries to manufacture these components.  While suppliers in 
developed countries tend to focus on design, final assembly and marketing, they increasingly rely on  
long-distance logistics flows of rising complexity (break-bulk of consignments, larger number of 
destinations, increased frequency of deliveries).  Th is has led to supply chain management developing 
as an activity per se .  Companies often decide to entrust this task to trade specialists, the 3 PL (third 
party logistics providers), which usually come from the freight forwarding sector, or if not to express 
delivery or transport services.  The 4 PL (fourth pa rty logistics providers) re present the culmination of 
this trend;  these are companies which have no phys ical assets of their own but specialize in buying 
and coordinating logistics. 
7. Geographical developments in production structur es have not all been in the same direction 
either.  Continual increases in transport costs caused by higher fuel prices;  the signing of free-trade 
agreements or the extension of unilateral trad e concessions;  geopolitical uncertainties and similar 
factors sometimes incite companies to relocate or compartmentalize production by major geographical zone (usually at the continental level), thus comb ining the advantages of relative proximity and lower 
production costs in the zone in question.  In all three cases, firms seek to avoid the risks associated 
with a breakdown in the long-distance logistics chain.  Recent studies (Vinod Singhal, Georgia 
Institute of Technology) suggest that financial ma rkets react more negatively to announcements of 
breakdowns in supply chains than to other "bad news " and that the global costs of such incidents may 
have an impact on performance lasting at least two years.
4  
8. The trend towards growing complexity in the logistics chain has been abundantly 
documented, although mostly in an anecdotal way,  for the aeronautical, automotive and electronics 
industries.  It would appear that these phenomena now extend to industry as a whole, even if it is not 
possible to quantify them with any precision. 
9. While the increase in flows and in their comple xity could have meant ever higher logistics 
costs, on the contrary more efficient spending on  inventories and technical progress have enabled 
                                                      
3 Logistics also played a key role in the two World Wars in the XXth century, both for supplying the 
"rear" and the "front", especially when  theatres of operations were far away and dispersed, as was the case 
during the war in the Pacific.  On th ese aspects, see for example, the memoir s of Jean Monnet or "The Role of 
Transportation in Logistics Chain" by Tseng, Yue and Taylor (2005) in Pro ceedings of the Eastern Asia Society 
for Transportation Studies, Vol. 5, pages 1657-1672. 
4 See Hendricks, K. B., and Singhal, V. R. (2003),  The effect of supply chain glitches on shareholder 
value, Journal of Operations Management , 21, 501-522  S/C/W/317 
 Page 3 
 
 
  costs to be brought down in mature markets (relev ant developments include bar codes, tracking, 
integrated data systems that allow orders and rest ocking in real time without the need for any buffer 
stock or any breakdowns in supply, etc.).  In the Un ited States, they have fallen by 60 per cent in 20 
years. 
10. The Council of Supply Chain Management estimat es logistics costs in 2006 to be 21 per cent 
of GDP in China, 13 per cent in India, 11 per cen t in Europe, and 8 per cent in the United States.5 
These costs should not be confu sed with the turnover in the outsourced  logistics sector, which is 
measured  rather in tenth of percent of  national GDP.   
11. The Table below, gives an idea of the va riety of services grouped under the catchword 
"logistics" and, even more, of the different ways  in which specialist firms combine these various 
services. 
Table 1:  Top 25 third-party logistics services providers (3PL), by revenue 
3PL 
2003 total revenue  
in US$ millions  Logistics services provided 
Exel plc 
(United Kingdom) 
8,900 Warehousing and distribution (contract logistics), air and ocean freight 
forwarding, supply-chain consulting, customs brokerage, transportation 
management, returns management, home delivery. 
Kuehne and Nagel 
International AG 
(Switzerland) 
6,900 Ocean and air freight forwarding, valu e-added warehousing and distribution, 
transportation management, customs brokerage, supply-chain management. 
Schenker 
(Germany) 
6,400 Air and ocean freight forwarding, customs brokerage, warehousing and 
distribution, transportation management. 
DHL Danzas Air & Ocean 
North America 
(Germany) 
5,700 Air and ocean freight forwarding, customs br okerage, transportation 
management, warehousing and distribution, supply-chain consulting. 
P&O Nedlloyd 
(United Kingdom and 
Netherlands) 
4,800 Warehousing and distribution, ocean shipping, supply-chain consulting, 
customs brokerage, port services. 
TPG/TNT 
(Netherlands) 
4,700 Manufacturing support and subassembly, transportation management, 
supply-chain consulting, dedicated contract carriage, warehousing and 
distribution, returns management.  
Panalpina 
(Switzerland) 
4,600 Air and ocean freight fo rwarding, transportation management, warehousing 
and distribution, oil and gas services. 
UPS Supply Chain Solutions 
(United States) 
4,100 Air and ocean freight forwarding, customs br okerage, transportation 
management, warehousing and distribution, supply-chain consulting, 
dedicated contract carriage,  trade finance and insurance, equipment leasing, 
mail services. 
                                                      
5 See http://cscmp.org/press/fastfacts.asp. S/C/W/317 
Page 4  
 
  3PL 
2003 total revenue  
in US$ millions  Logistics services provided 
Nippon Express 
(United Kingdom) 
4,000 Air and ocean freight forwarding,  warehousing an d distribution, 
transportation management, supply-chain consulting, customs brokerage. 
C.H. Robinson Worldwide 
(United States) 
3,600 Freight brokerage, air and ocean freight forwarding, transportation 
management, print logistics. 
Menlo Worldwide 
(United States) 
3,100 Transportation management, warehousing and distribution, air freight 
forwarding, customs brokerage, supply-chain consulting, returns management and expedited. 
NYK Logistics 
(Japan) 
3,000 Freight forwarding, customs broker age, inter-modal transportation, 
value-added warehousing. 
Expeditors International of 
Washington 
(United States) 
2,600 Air freight forwarding, customs brokerage, transportation management, 
warehousing and distribution, supply-chain consulting. 
Penske Logistics  
(United States) 
2,500 Dedicated contract carri age, transportation management, supply-chain 
consulting, warehousing and distribution, equipment leasing. 
Eagle Global Logistics 
(United States) 
2,200 Air and ocean freight forwarding, transportation management, warehousing 
and distribution, customs brokerage, expedited, project management. 
BAX Global 
(United States) 
2,000 Air freight forwarding, transportation management, warehousing and 
distribution, supply-chain consulting, freight payment and auditing, customs 
brokerage. 
Ryder 
(United States) 
1,900 Supply-chain consulting, transportation management, warehousing and 
distribution, dedicated contract carriage, air and ocean freight forwarding, 
equipment leasing, returns management, payment and auditing, insurance.  
Schneider Logistics 
(United States) 
1,900 Transportation management, supply-chain consulting, dedicated contract 
carriage, freight payment and auditing. 
UTi Worldwide 
(United States) 
1,200 Air and ocean freight fo rwarding, customs broke rage, warehousing and 
distribution. 
Caterpillar Logistics 
(United States) 
1,000 Warehousing and distribution, transportation management, logistics 
consulting. 
APL Logistics 
(Singapore) 
990 Ocean and air freight forwarding , warehousing and distribution, 
transportation management, dedicated co ntract carriage, customs brokerage. 
Wilson Logistics Group 
(Sweden) 
860 Warehousing and distribution, air and ocean freight forwarding, customs 
brokerage, transportation management, supply-chain consulting.  S/C/W/317 
 Page 5 
 
 
  3PL 
2003 total revenue  
in US$ millions  Logistics services provided 
FedEx Supply Chain 
Services 
(United States) 
603 Domestic and international transportation management, customs brokerage 
and freight forwarding, supply-chain consulting, warehousing and distribution services. 
Maersk Logistics 
(Denmark) 
350 Ocean and air freight forwarding, wa rehousing and distribution, customs 
brokerage, supply-chain consulting. 
SembCorp Logistics Ltd. 
(Singapore) 
275 Warehousing and distribution, air and ocean shipping, supply-chain 
management, dangerous goods management, offshore logistics. 
Source : Thomas A. Foster and Richard Armstrong (2004), "Top 25 Third-Party Logistics Provi ders Extend Their Global 
Reach", in Global Logistics & Supply Chain Strategies , May 2004, pages 2 to 11, also cited in USITC (2005), 
"Logistics Services:  An Overview of  the Global Market and Potential Effe cts of Removing Trade Impediments". 
 
12. There are three major subsectors in the logisti cs chain:  storage and warehousing (A), freight 
forwarding (B), and contract logistics (C).  Each subsector has its particular economic structure and 
regulatory frameworks, which are described separatel y in the following sections before turning to the 
logistics chain as a whole.  
13. It is not always easy to separate the activiti es provided by these subsectors.  For example, 
freight forwarding and contract logistics operato rs often provide warehousing services alongside firms 
that specialize in this sector alone.  Likewise, a freight forwarder, who mainly focuses on organizing 
and coordinating transport without using any asset s other than an efficient data system, may 
occasionally become a contract logistics operator and be  responsible for all a client's physical logistics 
operations.  Nevertheless, these categories have differe nt features and are viewed by those in the trade 
as distinct entities.   
A. WAREHOUSING AND STORAGE SERVICES  
1. Economic aspects 
14. All logistics services commence with a warehouse, a couple of warehouses or a network of 
warehouses, as can be seen from Table 1, in which warehousing is one of the activities mentioned in 
24 out of the 25 cases.6  The data available on warehousing and storage are, however, extremely 
fragmentary, since there is no international trade as sociation bringing together all actors in the sector, 
and in many cases not even a national association.7 
15. Warehousing and storage activities are often in tegrated within the manufacturing process, 
with the infrastructure being owned and operated by  the companies themselves (around their factory, 
but increasingly also in the "logistics zones" or distribution centres which are springing up in ports, 
airports, and around motorway hubs).  Since they  do not involve any trad e, such activities are, 
therefore, not within the purview of the GATS and hence of this Note. 
                                                      
6 According to its website, the 25th operator, Schneider Logistics, also provides warehousing services, 
even though this is not mentioned in the table. (See http://www.schneider.com/logistics/index.htm .) 
7 The International Warehouse and Logistics As sociation (IWLA) in fact only represents 
North American operators and its website ( http://www.iwla.com ) does not have any pub licly accessible global 
data. S/C/W/317 
Page 6  
 
  16. Another common example is warehousing or stor age integrated within a broader range of 
services:  handling (for example, yards used by por t operators to store containers);  transport (for 
example, the investment by the Israeli shipping  operator ZIM in a controlled temperature warehouse 
in Kingston for storing tropical fruit);  express delivery services (for example, FedEx's facilities at 
Roissy);  or distribution.  Lastly, some warehousing services are provided by freight forwarders or 
contract logistics operators.  To the extent that  these storage/warehousing services are provided to a 
third party, they come within the scope of this Note.  Consequently, there are a probably very few 
independent and non-integrated wa rehousing and storage activities ("pure players").  In addition, 
available sources refer at length to the builders, pr omoters and developers of warehouses and logistics 
zones such as the American Pro-logis or the British Gazelay.   
17. In such circumstances, it is virtually impossibl e to develop a clear picture of the size and 
special features of the sector or to id entify a common regulatory framework.   
18. The warehousing sector is not confined to operations between industrial operators.  
Specialized firms in fact provide individual consumer s with a whole series of services.  For example, 
the supply of storage space to individuals (self storage), where the overall sales figure for 2006 was 
US$18.5 billion and is growing strongly (by over 10  per cent annually), with major mergers taking 
place.
8   
19. Types of warehousing not only consist of traditi onal closed warehouses with loading bays for 
trucks.  Rather, they range from extremely simple fo rms such as storage yards in the open air or just 
with a roof for heavy materials to highly sophisti cated forms that involve substantial investment and 
high operating and maintenance costs.9.  Even in the case of traditional warehouses, there is a wide 
variety.  They range from fully automatic ware houses which may manage spare parts for a car 
producer for the whole world, to the less mechani zed warehouse of an Internet retailer, where 
employees on roller skates, but equipped with ha ndheld computers, put together the orders and 
replenish stocks.  Informatics can now be integrated  with commands for forklifts and even the storage 
system itself.  Another technological advance cons ists of combining conveyi ng and sorting functions 
by using belts with adjustable speed (dynamic gapping).10  Whether the warehouse is computerized or 
mechanized (conveyor belts, etc.) or not, informa tics plays an increasingly important role because it 
allows closer tracking of orders and restocking.  Wh ere it is managed by an outside logistics provider, 
it is often integrated with the client's central pr oduction and distribution computer system by means of 
complex interfaces (Enterprise Resource Planning ERP, of the Baan or SAP type).  Stock 
management in warehouses has created a whole s ector producing software and offering informatics 
consulting services. 
20. One trend is towards "green" warehouses (for exampl e, with roofs made of plant material and 
"zero" emissions).  Environmental pressure sometim es coincide with shortages of land, in Japan for 
example, where multi-storey warehouses have begun to be seen. 
21. Another trend is to transfer upstream in the original warehouse activities traditionally 
undertaken by the manufacturer or distributor themse lves (quality audits, packing, labelling, sorting, 
                                                      
8 According to Financial Times; see also: 
http://www.selfstorage.org/SSA/Home/AM/ContentMan agerNet/ContentDisplay.aspx?Section=Home&Content
ID=4590 
9 Cases in point are cold stores, tanks for petroleum or chemical products, storage facilities for 
regasifying liquefied natural gas, or even natural cavities converted for storing gas and monitored electronically, 
and perhaps also for CO 2.  
10 For further details on these techno logical advances, see the site of  the Material Handling Industry 
Association of America, http://www.mhia.org .  S/C/W/317 
 Page 7 
 
 
  even management of product guarantees, returns or repairs).11  According to experts, this development 
is gradually moving down the value chain, from electronics to clothing and footwear, because it allows considerable savings to be made in terms of labour and inventory costs.  Such practices of 
course require infallible computer systems, fully in terconnected with the client's system, and hence 
the means to develop such interfaces, which expl ains the growing concentration in the sector. 
22. This trend should not, however, be exaggerated.  Acco rding to a survey by the review Fortune 
500 in 2007, 47 per cent of firms outsource ware housing activities, while 86 per cent still managed 
their own stocks, deemed to be strategic. 
23. A virtually reverse trend – insourcing - can also be perceived:  distributors (for example, 
Carrefour, Tesco and Sainsburys) may move up the logistics chain in order to provide logistics 
themselves from the production site (factories or  agricultural cooperative associations) to the 
warehouses and, further on, to their stores (factory gate pricing).  This type of phenomenon mostly 
applies to fresh products and/or goods produced dom estically.  The development of public, but above 
all private, practices, for ecological traceability ( carbon footprint, Food Miles) could increase this 
trend as distributors consider they have more control when they act directly. 
24. Warehouses have also developed in connection w ith collection and recycling facilities, often 
managed by third parties or by trade associations , for the legally mandatory recycling of an 
ever-increasing number of products (tyres, batteri es, electronic goods, etc.).  These warehouses often 
take the place of "fly tips".  This has led to inte rnational trade in waste, whether or not toxic (for 
example, paper is the main maritime cargo between  the United States and China) and, as a result, a 
whole storage and recycling industry in developing countries.  "Reverse logistics" was estimated to 
amount to US$35 billion in 2000
12, or 4 per cent of total logistics costs (including collection services), 
and may have grown significantly since then. 
25. It is difficult to detect trends in the size and geographical distribution of warehouses, even 
though it appears that, overall, th e average surface area is increasing.13  The industry constantly 
appears to balance the savings associated with a few centralized warehouses which, if they are 
blocked, could have disastrous impact on the suppl y chain, and a series of small warehouses, which 
are easier to manage but also more difficult to coordi nate.  In any event, the type of product matters.  
A stock of heavy goods is not managed in the same way as a stock of pharmaceutical products. 
26. There is less talk of "warehouses" but more and more of "logistics parks" or "distribution 
platforms".  These terms cover the link between wa rehouses and multimodal transport infrastructure:  
loading bays for heavy goods vehicles, railway lin e, and sometimes a river port with equipment for 
handling heavy goods and the associated containers. 
                                                      
11 To take an example, Carrefour no longer sort s deliveries in its warehouses in Europe before 
distributing them among its supermarkets.  This is now done in a centralizing warehouse before shipment in 
China, at Ningbo by Geodis for the North and in Yantian/Shenzhen by Kuehne and Nagel for the South.  This third party provider may be a logistics/forwarding agent as in the case mentioned, or an express delivery 
operator such as UPS or DHL, a road carrier such as Ye llow, or companies that speci alize in audits such as 
Veritas or SGS. 
12 La Tribune , April 2000. 
13  A warehouse of 1,000 sq. ft. - the standard unit of measurement in the sect or - was deemed to be 
"large" ten years ago, whereas today this term applies to warehouses covering 500,000 to 1 million sq. ft. Yet, 
these are only averages , one current record is the Transpak project, launched in 2007 by Deutsche Post World 
Network (DPWN) and Dubai International City (DIC) fo r a warehouse in Dubai covering 20 million sq. ft. S/C/W/317 
Page 8  
 
  2. Regulatory aspects and trade restrictions 
27. Regulators rarely seem to take warehousing a nd storage activities into account as a separate 
sector.  Indeed, such activities may subject to a myriad of regulators - and regulations - which are pursuing different policy objectives:  town planni ng, safety at dangerous facilities (for example, 
chemical and oil storage), economic development (pro motion of logistics zones), security at port and 
airport storage facilities, etc. 
28. The fragmentary information available mainly concern emerging economies, where strong 
expansion in the sector is accompanied both by liberalization measures (in the sense of Articles XVI and XVII of the GATS) and regulatory reform.  This is the case for China, where improving the 
logistics network has been made a national priority .  According to some data, transport accounts for 
30 to 50 per cent of the final cost of a Chinese pr oduct, whereas the share ranges from 3 to 10 per cent 
in OECD countries.  The industrialization of Chin a's internal provinces makes such developments 
even more necessary because logistics costs there ar e higher than in the coastal provinces, reflecting 
the structural handicap of land and river transport compared to maritime transport.
14 Reportedly, the 
Swiss company Kuehne and Nagel, the first logistics operator to create a wholly foreign-owned 
company, used China's Closer Economic Partners hip Agreement (CEPA) with Hong Kong, China as a 
legal vehicle.  
29. In terms of market access specifically, it is di fficult to obtain any comprehensive data apart 
from the commitments made under the GATS.  As  is well known, however, these do not necessarily 
correspond to the applied regime, which may be mo re open.  Nevertheless,  the bound regimes appear 
to be reasonably liberal.  
B. FREIGHT FORWARDING  
1. Economic aspects 
30. Global figures on the size of the sector are fragmentary and contradictory, reflecting, among 
other things, different statistical conventions.  According to one source, in 2008 global freight 
forwarding revenue amounted to US$700 billion, wi th the following breakdown by sector and mode:  
warehousing and land transport commissioning, US $500 billion;  air transport commissioning, 
US$50 billion;  and maritime transport commissioning, US$150 billion.15  
31. Firms operating in this sector may be divided into four major groups: 
 (a) Firstly, truly global actors (Deutsche Post World Network-DHL-Excell-Tibbet and 
Britain group;  Deutsche Bahn-Schenker-BAX Global-Stinnes;  and the Swiss group 
Kuehne and Nagel); 
 
 (b) secondly, around a dozen actors that provide some or all of the services in certain 
geographical areas (in Europe:  Panalp ina (Switzerland), DFDS (Denmark), 
Wincanton (United Kingdom), Geodis (France), DSV (Denmark);  in the United 
                                                      
14 One ship can carry up to 14,000 containers, wher eas a truck only carries one or two and a train or 
large river barge around 100. 
15 Les Echos, 11 March 2008.  Another source, the consultancy Transport Intelligence, estimates that 
the freight forwarding and transport commissioning market in 2007 amounted to a figure over six times lower than that quoted above.  This discrepancy can be explained by the fact that the figures in Les Echos  also take 
into account contract logistics activities by freight forw arders, which are estimated separately by Transport 
Intelligence (at US$140 billion), and also probably tota l turnover for the modes of transport covered (air, 
maritime and land).  According to Tr ansport Intelligence, growth in the sect or was over 10 per cent in each of 
the years preceding the crisis.    S/C/W/317 
 Page 9 
 
 
  States: Expeditors, CEVA, C.H. Robinson, UPS-SPS, and UTi;  in Japan:  Kintetsu 
and Nippon Express;  and in the Middle  East:  Agility Logistics (Kuwait)); 
  (c) regional operators (for exampl e, Sinotrans (China)); and    
 
 (d) a myriad of small or medium-sized firm s, specializing in one type of product and/or 
one destination, and/or one mode of transport.
16 
 32. In terms of geographical breakdown, the relevant  shares (revenue in 2007) are estimated at 
some 33 per cent for Europe, 30 per cent for Asia-P acific, 26 per cent for North America, 5 per cent 
for Latin America and the Caribbean, 4 per cent for Middle East, and 2 per cent for Africa.
17  The 
highest rates of growth are recorded in those market s that are proportionately smaller, while the larger 
markets seem to be more mature. 
33. The share of traffic controlled by freight forwar ders differs greatly according to the mode of 
transport.  It is estimated to be 50 per cent in the case of container traffic (maritime, road and rail), but 
95 per cent for air traffic.18  According to another source19, for maritime transport alone freight 
forwarders only control around 30 per cent of shipme nts, with the remainder being directly in the 
hands of ship operators.  Also, average company size differs significantly between specializing on 
different modes of transport.  For example, 95 pe r cent of shipping agencies are small companies with 
a strong domestic focus, while only three global act ors emerge:  Inchcape (United Kingdom), Barwill 
(Norway), and GAC (United Arab Emirates).  The air freight sector, on the other hand, is highly 
concentrated and most shipments are in the ha nds of a few operators, which continue to be 
indispensable intermediaries.20 
34. Overall, the freight forwarding sector is still highly dispersed (according to several sources, 
the "top 10" only account for 40 per cent of total turnover), but marked by a strong move towards 
concentration.  It is occurring mostly on a transn ational basis along two major axes:  on the one hand, 
consolidation of large operators and, on the othe r, many small companies are being taken over by 
large groups.21  The "national" nature of freight forwar ding has never been very marked, unlike what 
is still the case for air and road transport, where th e national flag element remains essential.  There is 
also cross-ownership among large groups, for exampl e, Semb Corp (Singapore) took 6 per cent of the 
capital of Kuehne and Nagel in 2000, with the latter in turn taking 5 per cent of the capital of Semb 
Corp.   
                                                      
16 According to Les Echos, op.cit. 
17 Transport Intelligence. 
18 According to Mr. Hugo  B. Ross (presentation at the UNCTAD Ad Hoc Expert Meeting on Logistics 
Services, 13 July 2006). 
19 Les Echos , 11 March 2008 
20 For further details on these points, see document S/C/W/270/Add.2 of 28 September 2007, 
paragraphs 439-446, pages 335-337. 
21 In the case of postal operations, Deutsche Post Wo rld Net bought the expre ss delivery operator DHL, 
then the forwarder Exel (for €5.5 b illion), the forwarder Danzas, and the a ll-cargo air operator AEI.  Among rail 
operators, the Belgian railway company SNCB bought the forwarder ABX, while the German railway company 
Deutsche Bahn bought the forwarders Stinnes, BAX Gl obal (for €1.1 billion) and Schenker.  The express 
delivery operator UPS bought the forwarders Fritz and Me nlo (formerly Emery).  The French forwarder Geodis 
bought the forwarding branch of TNT Logistics (formerly Wilson), while the Swiss forwarder Kuehne and 
Nagel bought ACR Logistic (formerly Hays) and USCO.  UPS made 30 purchases over two years amounting to 
US$20 billion.  In 2005, Kuehne and Nagel also took ov er the forwarder Seabrock and Smith, specialists in 
shipping wines and spirits, in order to gain a larger footing in this subsector.  This is why large logistics groups 
often appear to be a "multitude of SMEs".  S/C/W/317 
Page 10  
 
  35. The present economic and financial crisis should reinforce the consolidation trend because it 
is weakening many small firms that are over-dependent on certain forms of transport and are less able to cope with longer delays in payment or the bankru ptcy of their clients.  Overall, the trend will be 
particularly marked in the air cargo sector.  Consol idation may occur across virtually all regions  and 
not solely along North-North or North-South lines.
22 Also, some medium-sized operators have sought 
to form alliances in order to expand their networks  and combine their resources without losing their 
independence.23   
36. In the wake of the current economic crisis, tr ansport volumes have fallen sharply, by around 
20 per cent for containers by sea during 2009, 20 to 50 per cent for road transport in Europe and some 
25 per cent for air cargo.24  Furthermore, the virtual collapse in demand in some sectors, the 
automotive industry for example, caused companies to hold larger stocks, meaning a slowdown in 
logistics operations.  This was followed by a technica l recovery for "restocking" in May 2009.  In any 
event, these developments cannot yet be seen in the 2008 performance figures for the major 
forwarders, as is shown in Table 2. 
Table 2:  Financial performance of the major freight forwarders in 2008, in US$ millions 
Company Turnover 
2008 Turnover 
2007 Percentage 
trend Earnings before 
interest and tax 
(EBIT) 2008 Earnings before 
interest and tax 
(EBIT) 2007 Percentage 
trend 
Agility  6.735  6.094  10.5  589  636  -7.3 
CEVA  8.922  7.048  26.6  149  -54  
DB Schenker  20.695  20.652  0.2  537  620  -13.4 
DHL  19.989  19.087  4.7  548  602  -9.0 
Kuehne and 
Nagel  20.461  18.634  9.8  697  616  13.3 
Panalpina  10.039  9.371  7.1  183  266  -31.3 
UTi  4.543  4.366  4.1  23  150  -84.7 
Source :  Containerisation International , May 2009. 
 
2. Regulatory aspects and trade restrictions 
37. There is little evidence of systemic regulatory barriers impeding trade in the sector.  The 
focus of the trade associations concerned seems to  be on the solution of problems related to customs 
regulations (for example, the question of compulso ry security in in-bond warehouses and the different 
obligations it imposes for nationals and foreigners, but also between different types of providers).  
Such associations have been highly active in recent years in ensuring that freight forwarders are given 
the same status and can use the same fast lanes as other operators in the transport chain under the new 
security regulations such as the American progr amme C-TPAT (Customs Trade Partnership against 
Terrorism) or the status of Authorized Economic  Operator (AEO) in the European Community. 
                                                      
22 For example, the Kuwaiti company PWC Logistics bought out the company Geologistics, and the 
Indian companies All Cargo Logistics and Tirupur, respectively, bought the Belgian company ECU Lines (a large operator:  120 offices in 60 countries), and the Britis h firm Saint Patrick, specialist in dealing with textile 
articles.  There are also the cases of  the Kenyan company Star Freight, which bought LEP International, based in 
Australia and New Zealand, as well as the takeover of the Chinese company Cosa Fr eight in July 2008 by the 
Kuwaiti company Agility Logistics.   
 
23 This is the case, for example, for the Logistic s World Alliance group, composed of Azkar (Spain), 
MGF Logistics (France), Bartolini (Italy) and Rhen us (Germany), which together have 3.3 million m2 of 
warehouses.  
24 According to IRU and IATA.  S/C/W/317 
 Page 11 
 
 
  38. While China has notified the laws and regula tions governing the sector, including in the 
context of the Transitional Review Mechanism,  there is little information of a comparably 
comprehensive nature on other Members' trade regimes.25  Available sources are either relatively 
dated or limited to particular initiatives by individual Members.26     
C. CONTRACT LOGISTICS  
1. Economic aspects 
39. Contract logistics consists of carrying out th e logistics operations of a client company, 
ranging from organizing transportation to warehousing and the actual transport itself.  This activity is 
also known by the generic term 3 PL (third party logi stics providers).  Contract logistics is a very 
different activity to freight forwarding, even if it is  often provided by companies that were originally 
forwarders.  It implies substantial investment in ph ysical assets (warehouses, fleets of trucks, or even 
aircraft and ships) and in personnel.  Contract logist ics operations are fully integrated into the client's 
production and sometimes use the latter's resources a nd personnel.  For example, in BMW's American 
plant in Spartanburg, forklifts belonging to and ma naged by TNT feed the assembly lines.  Likewise, 
Michelin sold its warehouses to TNT and made th e personnel available, while TNT invested in 
modernizing the warehouses in exch ange for a long-term contract 
40. The size of the contract logistics sector in  2008 was estimated at some US$140 billion, a 9 per 
cent increase in comparison with the previous year.27  Pre-crisis estimates forecast an annual rate of 
growth of around 8 per cent, as compared to 12 per cen t for freight forwarding.  A key factor in this 
estimate is the degree of outsourcing of logistics func tions, also called the "penetration rate".  In 2008, 
this rate overall was 15.4 per cent, with significant variations across countries (some 40 per cent in the 
United Kingdom compared with 24 per cent in France,  19 per cent in the United States, 10 per cent in 
the Asia-Pacific region, and less than 3 per cent in  China). The geographical breakdown of the market 
is fairly similar to that recorded above for freight forwarding, although its structure  is even more dispersed.  The cumulative share of the world's te n largest operators does not exceed 25 per cent of 
the total (compared to 40 per cent for forwarding).
28 
41. Several types of operator have  developed contract logistics activities in addition to the 
traditional freight forwarders:  express carriers, many major shipping lines (Maersk, CMA-CGM, APL, OOCL, Zim), railway companies, often in association with shipping lines (to develop and manage dry ports and inland container depots) an d road carriers (Yellow, Penske, Willy Betz, 
Calberson, GEFCO).  Carriers undertaking such activ ities, particularly ship operators, essentially try 
                                                     
 
 25 Document S/C/N/246 of 24 November 2003 and document S/C/W/296 of 4 December 2008, 
pages 16-17.  In addition, there is some (dated) ev idence of trading conditions in the Asia-Pacific region, inter 
alia based on a survey carried out in 2000 by the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and 
the Pacific (UNESCAP). See UNESCAP , "Review of developments in transport and communications in the 
ESCAP region 1996-2001", pages 126-127.  In 2004, during a seminar organized by a group of interested WTO 
Members ("Friends of Freight Logistics"), Mr. Tschui, a representative of a major freight forwarder, Panalpina, spoke about obstacles en countered in various countries.  The presen tation is available at the WTO Secretariat 
upon request.   
 
26 Reportedly, there have been initiatives recently to  reserve maritime freight forwarding activities, 
previously open to foreigners, to nationals alone.  Cases in point are Kenya (Article XVI of the 2009 Shipping 
Act, to come into effect in 2010) and Egypt (Decree No. 451/2009 of 1 October 2009, to come into effect in 
October 2010).   
27 According to Transport Intelligence.  
28 DPWN-DHL-Exel (Germany, clearly first with 9.5 per cent of the global market), CEVA 
(United States, far down in second place with 2.5 per cent), Kuehne an d Nagel (Switzerland), Wincanton 
(United Kingdom), UPS-SCS (United States), CAT Logistics (United States), Penske Logistics (United States), 
Fiege Logistik (Germany), Ryder (United States), and Schenker (Germany).   S/C/W/317 
Page 12  
 
  to diversify into activities with higher value added than transport per se , and to reap cost savings via 
productivity gains.   
42. Compared to transport by the shipper itself (" merchant haulage"), transport by specialized 
carriers ("carrier haulage") has the following advant ages:  door-to-door delivery with a one-stop shop, 
more efficient planning of transport by consolida ting loads and lessening the number of empty return 
trips
29, meaning better use of equipment, gains in productivity and cost, and economies of scale that 
justify subsequent investment in infrastructure by  the government.  They also claim that intermodal 
distribution is better from an environmental perspec tive (merchant haulage:  river barge 31 per cent, 
railway 8 per cent, road 61 per cent;  carrier haulage:   river barge 34 per cent, rail 40 per cent, road 26 
per cent).30  Environmental concerns will undoubtedly play an increasingly important role.  In Europe 
in particular governments are tending more and more  to promote intermodal transfer of freight from 
the road to "greener" modes (river, rail, sea) by means of incentives (subsidies) or constraints 
(fiscality, transport regulations, etc.). 
43. Contract logistics operations can cover the whole logistics chain, as can be seen from Table 1, 
but they may also cover only one specialized branch.31  The contracts involved can be extraordinarily 
broad in scope, both in terms of duration and business volumes.32   
44. One important trend is the emergence of majo r logistics operators in emerging economies, 
which are becoming more international in order to support domestic exporters.  This is typically the 
case for the Chinese company COSCO Logistics.  Ther e are also numerous joint ventures that involve 
all types of providers and all national origins.33  Nevertheless, the degree of internationalization in the 
sector should not be over-estimated.  If shippers ar e increasingly turning to logistics operators, and 
more generally 3 PL, this is to gain access to thei r networks but, in the case of large markets, does not 
necessarily involve cross-border moves.  For exam ple, the 20 foremost 3 PL in the United States 
include several companies with very little interna tional scope.  In other instances, however, the focus 
is predominantly international as can be observed in Japan and elsewhere.34    
45. Unlike the freight forwarding sector, contract l ogistics is an activity in which margins are 
low.  Stiff competition has prompted the withdrawal of some operators, while others have adopted an 
increasingly cautious attitude.  Due to generally heavie r investments in assets, logistics providers tend 
to be more vulnerable to downturns than freight forwarders.35   
                                                      
29 Empty return trips are estimated to be 20 to 30 per cent for international transport and 50 per cent for 
short distances. 
30 According to Mr. Maarten Tromp, Maersk Line. 
31 For example, FedEx has a subsidiary, FedEx Trade Networks, which specializes in customs 
clearance and provides services to clie nts other than its parent company. 
 32 For example, DHL and the British National Health Service have concluded a 10-year contract for a 
total of US$1.6 billion.   
 33 For example, Tata Steel (India) has teamed up with IQ Martaade Ho lding (Germany) to create inland 
container depots and offer warehousing and distribution services, or Yes Log (the logistics subsidiary of the Chinese Taipei shipping line Yang Ming) with Chinese company Chong Qing National Shipping Group to build 
a multi-use distribution centre. 
34 Japanese companies sometimes renounce their traditional practice of Keretsu (using companies that 
belong to the same group) and utilize the services of foreign logistics operators such as Exel, even on the 
domestic market.  Likewise, many freight forwarders are engaged in third party traffic (cross trade), that is, trade 
flows that do not involve their own countries, such as the French company Bolloré fo r traffic between India and 
the United States.  In addition, there is "triangular" or "quadrangular" trade in which, for instance, a Japanese 
company entrusts a European logistics operator with the management of logistics for its production units in 
China, most of its output being exported to the United States. 
35 To the Secretariat's knowledge, there are no global data on the impact of the crisis on this sector 
similar to those for freight forwarders.  It is nevertheless highly probable that they have been badly affected.  S/C/W/317 
 Page 13 
 
 
  2. Regulatory aspects and trade restrictions 
46. As is the case for warehousing and forwarding,  there is little information on the regulatory 
regime applicable to the contract logistics sect or.  In 2005, the United States International Trade 
Commission (USITC) published a survey based on a questionnaire sent to 73 American logistics 
companies covering 53 countries and territories. Th e findings relate to measures falling under the 
market access and national treatment provisions of GATS (Articles XVI and XVII) as well as to 
perceived regulatory restrictions:  
 (a) In 26 countries (or territories) the firms surveyed considered that in practice 
"domestic firms have an easier time obtaining licenses than foreign-owned firms"; 
 
 (b) in 20 countries regulations that affect logistics services were deemed not to be 
transparent; 
  (c) in 13 countries domestic competitors re portedly have easier access to information 
affecting regulations than foreigners; 
 
 (d) in 30 countries firms were required to hire local residents in certain positions;  and   (e) in 19 countries firms experienced difficulties in obtaining entry visas and work 
permits in order to engage in their activities.
36 
 
47. In general terms, observers commenting on longe r-term trends in the sector have noted that, 
"[r]egardless of the important role market deregula tion has played in transport over the last decades, 
public policy remains a major factor of influence fo r the framework of distribution and thus freight 
traffic performance.  This is due to the vital role of nation States in providing and maintaining 
transport infrastructure, to the jurisdiction issue, particularly the enforcement of loads and vehicle 
inspection, labour regulations or vehi cle noise and air emissions standards."37 
48. Based on a survey of operators in the trade, completed by quantitative data, the World Bank 
created a Logistics Performance Index (LPI)38, which classifies countries or territories according to 
broad variety of parameters, including regulatory issues.39 The Index is regularly updated and has 
been published twice to date (2007 and 2010).  Accord ing to operators, in general, obtaining a licence 
is the main obstacle to market access.  The scope of licences and the criteria for obtaining them differ 
considerably between countries and modes of transport.   
                                                      
36 For further details, see in the USITC survey Tables 3-3, page 3-18;  3-4, page 3-19;  3-5, page 3-21;  
and 3-6, page 3-23. 
37 Markus Hesse and Jean Paul  Rodrigue (2007), in:  Rob Kitchin and Nigel  Thrift (eds), International 
Encyclopedia of Human Geography, Elsevier publisher.   
 http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/bookdescription.authors/722034/description#description 
38 Available at:  
http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/TOP ICS/EXTTRANSPORT/EXT TLF/0,,contentMDK:21514
122~menuPK:3875957~pagePK:210058~piPK:210062~theSitePK:515434,00.html . 
39 Efficiency of the customs process, quality of tr ade- and transpor t-related infrastructure (ports, 
airports, roads, railways, wareh ouses, trans-shipment and telecommunications), the ease of arranging 
competitively priced shipments, competence and quality of  local logistics services (e.g. transport operators and 
customs brokers), ability to track and trace consignments , the relative difficulty (compared to the situation in 
2005) of complying with cargo security requirements  (screening, advance information), observance of 
scheduled delivery dates, the amount of certain charges (port, airport, rail, storage, trans-shipment and agency) 
compared to the service provided, the frequency of unforeseen delays, criminal activities and solicitation of 
informal payments, the regulatory framework for logistic s, the number of governme nt agencies involved, and 
the percentage of physical inspection of freight. S/C/W/317 
Page 14  
 
  49. The ease of operations also depends greatly on the conditions for market access, national 
treatment and MFN within the meaning of the GA TS for the various modes of transport used by 
contract logistics operators.  These conditions diffe r considerably from mode to mode and Member to 
Member.  They have been or are to be discussed in the context of relevant Background Notes, e.g. on 
maritime and on road freight transport (forthcom ing), and the documents prepared for the Air 
Transport Reviews (documents S/C/W/270 and S/C/W/270/Add.1 and Add.2).    
50. China, India and other emerging economies have experienced strong growth in this sector as 
well
40, which may have been stimulated by liberalizat ion measures.  For example, since January 2007, 
foreign firms have been able to own up to 100 pe r cent of the capital of a road carrier in China.  
Operators reportedly view it as a major step forwar d to be able to carry out their own logistics 
operations after an initial joint venture phase.41  The playing field is still very open, given that none of 
the 18,000 logistics firms in China holds a market share of more than 2 per cent.  In a similar vein, 
India abolished a monopoly of rail transport of cont ainers in January 2006, leading to a series of 
private sector initiatives both from national and foreign firms.  Indian railways, for its part, announced 
Private Public Partnership (PPP) projects in Fe bruary 2005 to rehabilita te and operate 7'000 rail 
freight depots.  
II. GATS COMMITMENTS ON LOGISTICS SERVICES 
51. The following overview will focus on exis ting commitments as scheduled under the 
"traditional" classification system contained in document MTN.GNS/W/120 which, in turn, is based 
on the provisional UN Central Product Classificati on (CPC provisional).  However, given their 
specific relevance in this sector, the section first addresses certain classification issues as raised in a 
proposal made by the so-called "Friends of Freight Logistics" (TN/S/W/20). 
A. CLASSIFICATION OF CORE FREIGHT LOGISTICS SERVICES /SERVICES AUXILIARY TO ALL 
MODES OF TRANSPORT  
52. According to the classification proposal TN/S/W/20, "Core freight logistics services", the first 
of the three categories of logistics services in th e proposal, are virtually synonymous with heading 
11.H in document MTN.GNS/W/120, "Services auxiliary to all modes of transport".  The only 
difference concerns the explicit listing of certain services that could be considered as implicitly 
included, as can be seen from Table 3, where the relevant details are shown in bold. 
                                                      
40 For example, the Chinese Ministry of Trade has estimated that between 2003 and 2004 the Chinese 
3 PL market rose from US$8.5 billion to US$14 billion, an increase of 40 per cent in one year. 
41 FedEx, therefore, has bought up the shares of its local partner in the joint venture FedEx 
Tianjin-Datian in order to have direct  access to the express delivery and logis tics market in Central China.  The 
French company GEFCO has done the same with its Ch inese partner DTW.  The Japanese company NYK has 
also been able to set up a distribution system for automobile spare parts " overnight " (in 24 hours) for Toyota 
concessionaires in Western and Central China, which it considered impossible under the previous regulations.    S/C/W/317 
 Page 15 
 
 
  Table 3:  Core freight logistics services ac cording to the proposal in document TN/S/W/20 
Description and W/120 category where 
applicable CPC codes and inclusions where applicable 
11.H Services auxiliary to all modes of transport   
a. Cargo handling services: 
  Container handling services  
CPC 7411 
  Other cargo handling CPC 7419 
b. Storage and warehousing services CPC 742 (including distribution  centre services and 
materials handling and equipment services such as 
container station and depot services)  
c. Transport agency services CPC 748 (including customs agency services and load 
scheduling)  
d. Other auxiliary services CPC 749 (including through-chai n logistics services, 
reverse logistics, contai ner leasing and rental 
services)  
 
53. Document TN/S/W/20 does not explicitly address the partial overlapping between 
11.H.c/CPC 748 "Freight transport agency servi ces" and 11.H.d/CPC 749 "Other supporting and 
auxiliary transport services".  Both categories include  in their definitions "freight brokerage services", 
although classifications should be mutually exclusive.  This "double counting" is already contained in 
the CPC provisional.  Indeed, it is not easy to see what differentiates the activities covered by each 
category, especially in the light of actual economic conditions in these sectors as described before.  In 
both cases, it appears to be a question of organizing transport from both a physical and a documentary 
point of view, as can be seen from the comparison in Table 4. 
Table 4:  Comparison of the definitions in the headings 11.H.c and 11.H.d in document MTN.GNS/W/120 
11.H.c/CPC 748 
Freight transport agency services 11.H.d/CPC 749 
Other supporting and auxiliary transport services 
Freight brokerage serv ices, goods shipment 
services (principally se rvices organizing their 
transport on behalf of the shipper or consignee), air and maritime brokerage services, 
consolidation and break-bulk freight services.
 Freight brokerage services;  bill auditing and freight rate 
information services;  transportation document preparation services;  packing and unpacking services;  freight inspection, weighing and sampling services;  freight 
receiving and acceptance (including local pick-up and 
delivery). 
 
54. The additions proposed to these two headings in document TN/S/W/20 appear to limit one, 
11.H.c/CPC 748, to the traditional functions of frei ght forwarding and transport commissioning, and 
to reserve the other, 11.H.d/CPC 749, either to  more "modern" tasks (management of the logistics 
chain) or to truly supporting services (leasing of containers). 
B. CURRENT COMMITMENTS ON SUPPORTING AND AUXILIARY SERVICES FOR ALL MOPDES OF 
TRANSPORT  
55. The commitments described belo w (Table 5) are confined to generic commitments under 
heading 11.H, without reference to any particular mode of transport.  In turn, the commitments on 
auxiliary transport services limited to maritime tr ansport services alone are set out in the Background 
Note on maritime transport (S/C/W/ 315).  S/C/W/317 
Page 16  
 
  Table 5:   Specific commitments on supporting an d auxiliary services for all modes of transport 
Country or 
territory 11.H.a. Cargo- 
handling 
services 11.H.b. 
Storage and 
warehousing 
services 11.H.c. 
Transport 
agency 
services 11.H.d. Other 
supporting 
and auxiliary 
transport 
services Total 
Albania X X X X 4 
Armenia X X X  3 
Australia  X X X 3 
Austria  X X  2 
Brazil X X   2 
Bulgaria  X X X 3 
China  X X X 3 
Croatia X X X X 4 
Estonia X X X  3 
EC 12  X X X 3 
Finland  X X X 3 
FYROM  X X  2 
Georgia X X X X 4 
Hungary  X   1 
Iceland  X   1 
Japan  X X  2 
Jordan   X X 2 
Korea, Rep. of  X   1 
Kyrgyz Republic X X X  3 
Latvia X X X X 4 
Liechtenstein X X X X 4 
Lithuania X X X X 4 
Mexico    X 1 
Moldova X X X X 4 
Nepal  X   1 
Philippines X X X  3 
St. Lucia    X 1 
St. Vincent & G.    X 1 
Saudi Arabia X X X  3 
Sierra Leone X X X X 4 
Slovenia  X X X 3 
Switzerland X X X X 4 
Chinese Taipei X X X X 4 
Thailand  X   1 
Tonga X X X X 4 
Ukraine X X X X 4 
United States    X 1 
Uruguay  X   1 
Viet Nam X X X X 4 
Total* 19 34 28 24 105 
* Counting EC 12 as one 
  S/C/W/317 
 Page 17 
 
 
  56. As regards handling services , a total of 19 Members have made  commitments.  Four of them 
have explicitly qualified the scope of their commitmen ts, one by limiting them solely to the activities 
of approved customs brokers, a second by excluding handling services for air transport, a third by limiting them to containers and also excluding air transport, and a fourth by explicitly excluding 
maritime handling services.  For other Members, the exclusion of maritime transport is implicit from 
the coexistence of commitments on maritime hand ling and handling in general.  Lastly, other 
Members have not qualified their commitments sect orally and have made no handling commitments 
under the heading of maritime transport.  In th e latter case, their general commitments under the 11.H 
heading also apply to maritime transport.   
57. The issue of implicit or explicit linkage to commitments on auxiliary maritime services 
becomes even more acute for the three other aux iliary services in heading 11.H, given the lack of 
precise correspondence between the CPC-W/120 cl assification system, on the one hand, and 
comparable activities defined differently (freight forwarding, maritime agencies, customs clearance 
services, container depots) or in a modified wa y (storage and warehousing services) in the model 
maritime schedule, on the other.   
58. The regimes governing handling services appear to be fairly liberal.  Nine Members 
considered that it was technically impossible to  provide this service under mode 1, two Members 
which made commitments in this subsector did not bind the mode.  One Member has a requirement, for mode 2 as well, on the commercial presence of  legal persons and a residence requirement for 
natural persons.  Other Members bound mode 1 without  any restrictions.  Only one Member with 
commitments in the subsector did not bind mode 2. 
59. With regard to mode 3, all Members which made commitments in the subsector bound them 
without limitations, with the exception of four.  Of these four Members, one imposed a requirement to create a company under domestic law with a majority of directors who are nationals of the country or 
residing there or, for natural persons, a partners hip requirement combined with a nationality or 
residence requirement.  Another Member indicated that, for maritime transport alone, the land needed 
was a scarce resource that could be limited and awar ded by means of a concession procedure;  a third 
imposed an obligation to set up a joint venture withou t any foreign ownership limitation;  and a fourth 
required a joint venture limited to 50 per cent foreign ownership.  Mode 4 does not have any 
sector-specific limitations. 
60. Secondly, with regard to storage and warehousing services
, a total of 34 Members have made 
commitments.  These include six schedules, covering 18 Members, that explicitly exclude maritime 
transport-related warehousing services from thei r commitments.  One Member limited its 
commitments solely to road transport-related wa rehousing services while at the same time excluding 
certain products (including militar y products, dangerous goods and waste);  anot her excluded fisheries 
and agricultural products;  and one limited its co mmitments solely to activities carried out by 
approved customs brokers.  Twenty-seven Members did not bind trade under mode 1, referring in 23 
cases to the technical impossibility of providing this service cross-border. One Member has a 
requirement, for mode 2 as well, on the commercia l presence of legal persons and a residence 
requirement for natural persons.  Other Members bound mode 1 without any limitations.  All but one 
Member which made commitments in the subsec tor bound mode 2 without any limitations.  As 
regards mode 3, one Member imposed a requireme nt to create a company under domestic law with a 
majority of directors who are nationals of the co untry or reside there or, for natural persons, a 
partnership requirement combined with a nationa lity or residence requirement, and two Members 
indicated that, for maritime transport alone, the la nd needed for this activity was a scarce resource that 
could be limited and awarded by means of a con cession procedure.  Two Members did not bind this 
mode, three imposed joint venture requirements,  one with a 51 per cent limitation on foreign 
ownership and, lastly, another Member imposed a requirement to set up a company under domestic S/C/W/317 
Page 18  
 
  law combined with an 80 per cent limitation on fo reign ownership.  Mode 4 does not have any 
sector-specific limitations. 
61. Thirdly, with regard to freight transport agency services
, 28 Members have made 
commitments.  Four of these specifically excluded maritime transport-related services.  Two Members limited their commitments to freight forwarding, one of them solely for air transport.  One Member 
excluded certain products (including military pro ducts, dangerous goods and waste), as well as local 
pick-up and delivery services.  Another Member c onfined its commitments to activities by approved 
customs brokers.  Lastly, one Member excluded freight inspection.  All Members which made commitments in this subsector bound mode 1 without limitations, except for four.  The latter did not 
bind this mode or, in one case, imposed a commerc ial presence requirement for legal persons, and a 
residence requirement for natural persons.  Mode  2 was bound without restrictions, except by two 
Members, which imposed a commercial presence requirement. 
62. As regards mode 3, there are various types of limitations.  One Member requires three years' 
of previous experience, another accepts operations only if through subsidiaries or legal persons under 
domestic law, with a foreign ownership component limited to 49 per cent, while another operates 
composition and partnership requirements for the board s of directors.  Again, one Member indicated, 
for maritime transport alone, the possibility of la nd scarcity and of a concession procedure.  Three 
Members imposed joint venture requirements, one with foreign ownership limited to 51 per cent.  
Two Members requires the creation of firms unde r domestic law combined in one case with a 
requirement that directors must be nationals.  Other Members with commitments in this subsector bound mode 3 without limitations.  There are no sector-specific limitations for mode 4. 
63. Lastly, as regards other supporting and auxiliary transport services
, a total of 24Members 
have undertaken commitments.  Among these, several ha ve in one way or another limited the sectoral 
scope of their commitments.  For example, three Members specifically excluded maritime transport-related services, four Members excluded local pick-up and delivery services, two limited 
their commitments to the activities of approved customs brokers alone, another excluded certain 
products (including military products, dangerous  goods and waste), two others limited their 
commitments to trans-shipment services alone, anot her solely to packing, crating, unpacking and 
de-crating services and freight inspection, all in the case of air transport only.  Three Members focused exclusively on freight inspection services, while one Member excluded freight inspection 
services.  Another Member limited its commitments to weighing services for transport purposes, while one Member limited them to freight br okerage services, bill auditing and freight rate 
information services and freight inspection services. 
64. Only two Members considered that providing such services was unfeasible under mode 1, 
while one Member required a commercial presence and a second also a commercial presence for legal 
persons, but combined with a residence requirement  for natural persons, and these limitations also 
apply to mode 2.  All other Members which have made commitments in this subsector bound mode 1 
without limitations.  The same applies to mode 2, except for two Members - in addition to the 
Member previously mentioned - which im posed a commercial presence requirement. 
65. As is the case for transport agencies, there are some differences in the limitations imposed 
under mode 3.  One Member has made it a requirement  to operate solely throug h subsidiaries or legal 
persons under domestic law, with a limitation of 49 per cent on foreign ownership;  another made it a 
requirement to set up a company under domestic law w ith a majority of directors who are nationals of 
the country or reside there or, for natural pers ons, a partnership requirement combined with a 
nationality or residence requirement.  Four Memb ers made joint ventures compulsory, two with 
limitations on foreign ownership of  49 and 51 per cent, respectively.  One Member made three years 
of previous experience a condition.  Another Me mber indicated again that the land needed for 
maritime transport was a scarce resource that could be awarded by means of a concession procedure.   S/C/W/317 
 Page 19 
 
 
  One Member referred to the general legislation on establishment without specifying any restrictions 
which it might contain.  Lastly, one Member indi cated that such services must be supplied by a 
corporation, association or partnership, that one o fficer or member of a partnership must hold a valid 
customs broker's licence and that this licence could only be obtained by its own citizens.  All other 
Members which made commitments in this su bsector bound mode 3 without any particular 
limitations.  Mode 4 does not have any sector-specific limitations. 
66. There are also some commitments defined sui generis , even though they appear under 
heading 11.H in the schedules of commitments.  For example, one Member made commitments on 
customs clearance services, another on container de pot services, two others on free zone services and 
another on support services for air transport.  While two of these definitions are identical to the terms 
used in the model schedule on maritime tran sport, they now apply to all transport. 
67. Lastly, there is one "multimodal" MFN exempti on concerning auxiliary services for all modes 
of transport.  It concerns storage and warehous ing services, freight forwarding services, container 
stations and depots services and, more curiously, intern al transport by truck, and the intention is to 
protect bilateral agreements guaranteeing reciprocal access to these services if it is not always 
possible to obtain full access at the multilateral level.  The exemption is for an indefinite period, but it 
is explicitly stated that the situation will be regul arly reviewed according to developments in market 
access.  A second exemption is "semi-modal" and concerns handling and storage services relating to 
maritime and river transport alone.  It provides cove r for reciprocal treatment under relevant  bilateral 
agreements. 
C. RELATED FREIGHT LOGISTICS SERVICES  
68. This second category, as defined in document TN/S /W/20, is divided into  two sub-headings: a 
series of freight transport services needed for the tr ansport of freight by a supplier of integrated 
logistics services, included under the services in heading 11 (transport services)42, and an additional  
list of "other related logistics services", coveri ng distribution services, courier services, testing and 
technical analyses services.   
69. The following Table of correspondence shows the services selected in the proposal in 
document TN/S/W/20, relevant comment s and references to documents.   
 
                                                      
42 This is very close to the concept of "contract logistics", except that the commitments undertaken in 
these sectors also apply to operators specializing in each of the modes of transport but not providing any 
integrated logistics services. S/C/W/317 
Page 20  
 
  Table 6:  Related logistics services in the proposal in document TN/S/W/20 
Selected sectors Correspondence or comments Documents setting out the 
commitments 
(1) Freight transport services   
11.A Maritime transport services  Services identified under maritime 
transport negotiations  Document S/C/W/ 315 
11.B. Inland waterways transport 
services  Services identified under maritime 
transport negotiations  Present document 
11.C. Air transport services   
b. Air freight transport CPC 732 (Currently excluded from 
GATS, subject to Annex on Air 
Transport Services)  
c. Rental of aircraft with crew CPC 734 (Currently excluded from 
GATS, subject to Annex on Air Transport Services)  
e. Supporting services for air 
transport CPC 746 Document S/C/W/59, of 
5 November 1998, pages 14-18, 
and document S/C/W/270, 
pages 16, 35 and 60 
11.E Rail transport services   
b. Freight transport CPC 7112 
c. Pushing or towing services CPC 7113 
e. Supporting services for 
railway transport44 CPC 743 Document S/C/W/61, of 
28 October 1998, pages 10-1343 
11.F Road transport services   
b. Freight transport CPC 7123 
c. Rental of commercial 
vehicles with operator CPC 7124 
- without operator CPC 83102 
e. Supporting services for road 
transport CPC 744 (excluding CPC 7441, bus 
station services) Document S/C/W/60, of 
28 October 1998, pages 16-20. 
2010 Background Note on road 
transport 
(2) Other related logistics 
services   
1.F.e Testing and technical 
analyses services  CPC 8676 Present document 
2.B Courier services  CPC 7512 2010 sectoral document on 
postal and courier services 
4.A Commission agents' services  CPC 621 
4.B Wholesale trade services  CPC 622 
4.C Retail trade services  CPC 631, 632, 6111, 6113, 6121 
(including inventory management of 
goods, assembling, sorting and 
grading of goods, break-bulk, re-distribution and delivery services) 2010 sectoral document on 
distribution services 
 
70. Some of the services listed in Table 6 have been or will be the subject of other Background 
Notes or documents prepared for the Air Transpor t Reviews. The following remarks will thus focus 
on other subsectors (river transport, testing and t echnical analyses services) that have not been 
described elsewhere.  Table 7 deals with river transport . 
                                                      
43 Since this document was prepared in 1998, the following commitments on freight trans port (11.E.b.) have been 
made by countries or territories that s ubsequently acceded to the WTO:  China, Georgia, Kyrgyz Republic, Moldova, Saudi 
Arabia, Chinese Taipei, Ukraine, Viet Nam.  For railway pushi ng or towing services (11.E.c. ):  Georgia, Kyrgyz Republic, 
Moldova, Saudi Arabia;  and for supporting services for railway transport (11.E.e.):  Croati a, Kyrgyz Republic, Moldova, 
Saudi Arabia, Ukraine.  
44 The headings 11.C.e. (supporting services for air tran sport), 11.E.c. (railway pushing or towing services), 
11.E.e. (supporting services for railway tr ansport) and 11.F.e. (supporting services for road transport), which are listed 
separately in document TN/S /W/20, have been replaced by transport services in order to simplify the table.   S/C/W/317 
 Page 21 
 
 
  Table 7:  Specific commitments on in land waterway transport services 
Country or 
territory Passenger 
trans-
portation 
services Freight 
trans-
portation 
services Rental of 
vessel with 
crew Main-
tenance 
and repair 
of vessels Pushing 
and 
towing 
services Supporting 
services for 
transport 
by inland 
waterways Total 
China  X     1 
Côte d’Ivoire X X    X 3 
Czech Republic X X X X X X 6 
EC 12   X    1 
Gambia X   X X  3 
Hungary    X   1 
Japan     X X 2 
Latvia X X X X X X 6 
Lithuania   X    1 
Moldova X X X X X X 6 
Myanmar X      1 
Niger X X     2 
Peru X      1 
Sierra Leone X X X X X X 6 
Slovak Republic X X X X X X 6 
Switzerland X X X X X X 6 
Ukraine X X X X X X 6 
Viet Nam X X     2 
Total* 13 11 9 9 9 9 60 
* Counting EC 12 as one 
 
71. A large percentage of Members which made  commitments on river transport excluded 
transport per se , either of passengers or freight.  The co mmitments covering river transport services 
other than passenger and freight transport  are fairly  liberal.  Where transport services are covered, in 
general the commitments are somewhat restricted.  Only mode 2 shows no limitations.  While four 
Members made commitments on mode 1 without lim itations, this mode has not been bound by six 
other Members and has been limited to ports open to  international traffic by a seventh Member.  The 
mode 3 regime seems to be more varied.  Four  Members which have made commitments on river 
transport per se  to varying degrees have not  bound this mode, two require an authorization for 
providing services, and in one case such an authoriza tion may be provided in a discretionary manner.  
Two Members have scheduled joint venture re quirements and one Member has an ownership 
requirement, which is extended to Members of  the Mannheim Convention on Navigation on the 
Rhine.  Lastly, four Members have full commi tments on commercial presence.  The commitments 
under mode 4 do not have any sector-specific limitations. 
72. Ten Members have listed MFN exemptions fo r inland waterway transport.  With two 
exceptions, these concern access to a given network of  navigable waterways and the related traffic.45  
One exemption concerns a reciprocity regime for rental of vessels and another, in more general terms, 
                                                      
45 The relevant network is formed by the three rivers, the Rhine, the Maine and the Danube, and the 
neighbouring canals, which are in fact governed by ancient plurilateral conventions, 1819 for the Mannheim 
Convention on the Rhine and 1856 for the Paris Convention on the Danube.  The entry into force of the 
consolidated schedule of 25 and then 27 Members of the European Union should lead to a reformulation of these exemptions and a lowering of their number.  Another MFN exemption relating to traffic rights concerns 
the basin of the Mekong. S/C/W/317 
Page 22  
 
  is intended to cover "procedures, charges and regu lations applicable to vessels of the countries 
concerned".  Lastly, one exemptions has a limited dura tion of eight years and is due to expire in 2016. 
73. In general, the commitments made by Members on testing and technical analyses
 services are 
fairly liberal.46  Eight of the 54 Members which made comm itments limited their scope, but each time 
in a different way:  by excluding testing of vehicl es or analyses leading to the preparation of official 
documents, or biological analyses, or analyses undertaken in relation to government-financed 
projects.  Others limited the scope of these analyses to a specific sector, agriculture and raw materials 
in one case, agriculture alone in another, pe troleum analyses in a third case and pharmaceutical 
analyses in a fourth instance. 
74. Mode 2 has been bound without limitations except in five cases.  Mode 1 has remained 
unbound in 11 cases.  In two cases, the requirement to  be registered with an international accreditation 
system has been listed as a limitation in mode 1.  In all other cases, mode 1 has been bound without 
any limitations. 
75. There is a greater variety in the mode 3 regi me.  In two cases, it is not the subject of any 
commitment.  Five Members imposed joint vent ure requirements and one Member combined a 
transitional joint venture requirement with mini mum capital requirements and required previous 
experience in the country of origin.  Three Memb ers imposed a combined authorization regime, in 
two instances with a local content, local employme nt requirement and training requirement.  Three 
Members restricted the supply of these services to natural persons alone.  Lastly, one Member required joint operations with a local partner thro ugh an agency and another Member imposed an 
economic need test. 
76. As regards mode 4, there are some sector-speci fic entries:  a total absence of commitments in 
one case, an economic needs test in another case, and the requirement of a university degree or professional experience in the case of further four Members. 
D. N
ON-CORE FREIGHT LOGISTICS SERVICES  
77. The authors of document TN/S/W/20 include three services under this third 
heading: Computer and related services, for whic h the commitments are described in the Background 
Note on this sector (S/C/W/300 of 22 June 2009, pages 7-8);  packaging services;  and management 
consulting and related services.  The following Table summarizes the commitments concerned. 
Table 8:  Specific commitments on management consul ting and related services  and packaging services 
Country or territory Management 
consulting 
services Services related 
to management 
consulting  Packaging 
services 
Albania X X X 
Argentina X   
Armenia X X  
Australia X X  
                                                      
46 The sector has been scheduled by Albania, Armenia, Austria, Bulgaria, Cambodia, Canada, Cape 
Verde, China, Colombia, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Dominican Republic, Estonia, European Union (EC12), Finland, FYROM, Gabon, Georgia, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Japan, Jordan, Korea (Rep. of), Kuwait, 
Kyrgyz Republic, Latvia, Lesotho, Liechtenstein, Lith uania, Madagascar, Malawi, Moldova, Mongolia, Nepal, 
Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Sierra Leone, Slovenia, South Afri ca, Swaziland, Switzerland, 
Chinese Taipei, Thailand, Tonga, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, Viet Nam, and Zambia. 
  S/C/W/317 
 Page 23 
 
 
  Country or territory Management 
consulting 
services Services related 
to management 
consulting  Packaging 
services 
Austria X X X 
Brazil X X  
Bulgaria X  X 
Burundi X  X 
Cambodia X X X 
Canada X X X 
Cape Verde X X  
Chile X   
China  X  X 
Colombia X   
Croatia X X  
Cuba X   
Czech Republic X X X 
Dominican Republic X   
Ecuador X X  
Estonia X X  
EC 12 X X X 
Finland X X  
FYROM X X X 
Gambia X X  
Georgia X X X 
Hong Kong, China X   
Hungary X  X 
Iceland X X X 
Indonesia  X  
Israel X X  
Jamaica X   
Japan X X X 
Jordan X X X 
Korea, Rep. of X X X 
Kuwait X X X 
Kyrgyz Republic X X  
Latvia X X X 
Lesotho X X  
Liechtenstein X X X 
Lithuania X X  
Malaysia X   
Mexico X X  
Moldova X X X 
Mongolia X   
Morocco X   
Nepal X  X 
Norway X X X 
Oman X X X 
Panama X X  
Papua New Guinea X   S/C/W/317 
Page 24  
 
  Country or territory Management 
consulting 
services Services related 
to management 
consulting  Packaging 
services 
Poland X   
Qatar X   
Romania X X  
Saudi Arabia X X X 
Sierra Leone X X X 
Singapore X   
Slovak Republic X X X 
Slovenia X X  
South Africa X X  
Swaziland X   
Sweden X X  
Switzerland X X X 
Chinese Taipei X X X 
Thailand X  X 
Tonga X X  
Trinidad and Tobago X   
Turkey X  X 
Ukraine X X X 
United Arab Emirates X   
United States X X X 
Uruguay X X  
Venezuela X   
Viet Nam X X  
Total* 72 48 32 
* Counting EC 12 as one 
 
78. Only six Members of the 72 which made co mmitments on management consulting services 
narrowed down their sector scope.  As in many othe r sectors, mode 2 provides for the most liberal 
regime as only five Members have not bound it and only one qualified it by excluding government-financed projects.  One Member impos ed accreditation and citizenship requirements for 
certain professions and certain provinces.  As re gards mode 1, ten Members have not made any 
commitment, two Members inscribed the same limi tations as under mode 2, and all other Members 
have made full commitments. 
79. Again, Mode 3 presents a more varied picture.  It has been left unbound by seven Members..  
Six Members scheduled the requirements of a unive rsity degree and previous professional experience 
of three years plus, in two cases an economic needs test.  There is also one case of joint operation 
requirement through an agency, three joint ventur e requirements (with variable limits on foreign 
ownership), in one case accompanied by a require ment to set up a company under domestic law.  
Lastly, one Member inscribed a requirement to obt ain local certification.  Commitments under mode 4 
have no sector-specific limitations, except one case without any binding.  
80. As regards services related to management consulting services
, only five of the 48 Members 
concerned narrowed the sectoral scope of their commitments.  Modes 1 and 2 provide for a particularly liberal regime as all but one Member have undertaken full commitments.  Similarly, only 
one Member has not made commitments under mode 3.  Other Members scheduled, respectively, a 
registration requirement, a foreign-ownership ce iling, and a joint venture requirement.  The  S/C/W/317 
 Page 25 
 
 
  commitments under mode 4 do not have any secto r-specific limitations, apart from six Members 
which inscribed requirements related to educa tion (university degree), previous professional 
experience and, in two cases, economic needs tests.  An additional six Members have not made any 
commitment under this mode. 
81. Packaging services  have always been scheduled, in 32 cases, without modifications of 
sectoral coverage.  Mode 2 has been left unboun d in only two cases, while all other Members 
committed without limitations.  In contrast, nine Members refrained from scheduling commitments on 
mode 1, with the other Members binding it without  limitations.  Mode 3 has drawn full commitments 
in all but three cases where Members have scheduled foreign ownership limitations (twice) and a joint venture requirement.  Mode 4 does not have any sector-specific limitations. 
82. There are no specific MFN exemptions in these three sectors. 
__________