RESTRICTED  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  S/C/W/334 
22 February 2011 
 (11-0902) 
Council for Trade in Services  
  
 
ENGINEERING SERVICES 
  
Background Note by the Secretariat
1 
  I. INTRODUCTION 
1. This Note has been prepared at the request of  the Council for Trade in Services, with a view 
to stimulating discussions in the Council on engineer ing services.  It focuses on  developments and  
issues considered to be most relevant to the GATS.   It is not intended to provide a comprehensive 
account of the sector. 
2. A certain overlap exists between the scope of this Note and the Background Note on 
construction and related engineering services (S/C /W/302 of 15 September 2009).  The current focus 
is on engineering services as professional services, i.e. services provided by qualified engineers, and not on the economic activities of physical construc tion and related engineering works, although these 
are obviously closely inter-related.  The reader is invited to refer to the Note on construction and 
related engineering services for an overview of the latter activities.  
3. The Note is organized as follows.  The follo wing section describes the sector and discusses its 
classification for the purposes of the GATS.  Section III discusses the economic importance of the sector, particularly with regard to trade flows.  S ection IV elaborated on the tradability of engineering 
services, discusses regulation and trade restrictions in the sector, and presents an overview of empirical studies seeking to quantify relevant trade restrictions and their impact.  The final section 
describes the specific commitments in this sector. 
II. DESCRIPTION OF THE SECTOR 
4. Engineering has been defined as "the applicati on of science to the optimum conversion of the 
resources of nature to the uses of hu mankind" (Encyclopaedia Britannica 2011).
2  It is a broad 
discipline, which is often broken down into sever al sub-categories according to different areas of 
work. The main branches include civil engineering (the design and constructi on of public and private 
works, infrastructure, bridges, and buildings), aeros pace engineering (the design of aircraft, spacecraft 
and related topics), chemical engi neering (the conversion of raw materials into usable commodities), 
electrical engineering (the design of electrical sy stems, such as transformers, as well as electronic 
goods), computer engineering (the design of software  and hardware-software integration), mechanical 
engineering (the design of physical or mechanical systems, such as engines, powertrains, kinematic 
                                                      
1 This document has been prepared under the Secret ariat's own responsibility and without prejudice to 
the positions of Members and to their rights and obligations under the WTO. 
2 Alternatively, the profession has been defined by the U.S. Engineers Council for Professional 
Development as the "creative application of scientific principles to design or develop structures, machines, 
apparatus, or manufacturing processes, or works utilizing them singly or in combination; or to construct or operate the same with full cognizance  of their design; or to forecast th eir behaviour unde r specific operating 
conditions; all as respects an intended function, econ omics of operation and safety to life and property." S/C/W/334 
Page 2  
 
  chains and vibration isolation e quipment), and industrial engineering. Within each of these divisions 
numerous niches cater to specific technology areas.
3   
5. The influence of engineering in modern life is undeniable – it is the backbone not only of 
construction, but also of mineral-extracting industries and numerous manufacturing activities.4  
Engineers design and participate in the construction of key infrastructure, such as buildings, roads, 
bridges, sewers, electricity and communication grid s, satellites), vehicles ( cars, ships, aeroplanes), 
power plants (nuclear power plants, coal and gas st ations, wind farms, hydroelectric plants), products 
used in everyday life (medicines, cleaning produc ts, televisions, computers and mobile phones) and 
many more.5  With the rapid advancement of technology,  many new fields have gained prominence 
over the last years, such as computer, software, a nd genetic engineering.  Widespread public concern 
about water and air pollution and increasingly exte nsive environmental quality degradation saw the 
emergence of environmental engineering as a sep arate discipline, devoted to understanding the 
impacts of human activities on public health, e nvironmental quality, and natural resources and 
developing the scientific basis for identifying, analyzing, solving, mitigating, or managing 
environmental problems caused by human activities.   The development of new – environmentally-
friendly – sources of energy, the improvement of th e quality and quantity of available water supplies, 
and the development of new medicines are among the most important engineering challenges of this 
century.6 
6. Engineering services are not easy to classify.  A distinction is usually made between 
construction related and no n-construction related services, with the latter composed of many services 
which are hard to identify.  The nature of engin eering services has been captured by the 1997 North 
American Industrial Classification System (N AICS): "this industry comprises establishments 
primarily engaged in applying physical  laws and principles of engineer ing in the design, development, 
and utilization of machines, materials, instrume nts, structures, processes, and systems. The 
assignments undertaken by these establishments ma y involve any of the following activities: 
provision of advice, preparation of feasibility studies , preparation of preliminary and final plans and 
designs, provision of technical services during the construction or installation phase, inspection and 
evaluation of engineering projects, and related ser vices."  Combined with numerous industrial sectors 
for which these services can be provided (e.g. auto motive, aerospace, electrical, chemical, to name a 
few), this explains the difficulties usually enc ountered in defining the "horizontal range" of 
engineering services (Goldhammer 2008). 
                                                      
3 According to the U.S. Accreditation Board for E ngineering and Technology (ABET), the institution 
that accredits all engineering schools in the United Stat es, there are 26 different engineering programmes. See 
the 2009-2010 Criteria for Accrediting Engineering Programs, at " http://www.abet.org/Linked%20Documents-
UPDATE/Criteria%20and%20PP/E001%2009-10%20EAC%20Criteria%2012-01-08.pdf ".  As pointed out by 
the U.S. National Academy of Engineering, "changes in the engineering profession and engineering education have followed changes in technology and society. Disciplin es were added and curricula were created to meet the 
critical challenges in society, and to  provide the workforce required to integrate new developments into the 
economy" (NAE, 2004). 
4 For an exhaustive list of the areas in which professional engineers commonly practice, see Hurford 
(2006).  
5 The U.S. National Academy of Engineering considers the following as the greatest engineering 
achievements of the 20th century: electrification, automobiles, airplanes, water supply and distribution, 
electronics, radio and television, agricultural mechanization, computers, telephony, air conditioning and 
refrigeration, highways, spacecraft, internet, imaging, household appliances, health technologies, petroleum and 
petrochemical technologies, laser and fibre optics, nu clear technologies, and hi gh-performance materials. 
6 See the U.S. National Academy of Engineering discussion of the Grand Challenges for Engineering at 
http://www.engineeringchallenges.org .  See also NAE (2004) for an overview of how engineering has adapted 
to advances in biotechnology, nanotechnology, information and communication technology, materials science 
and photonics.  S/C/W/334 
 Page 3 
 
 
  7. In the "Services Sectoral Classification List" (MTN.GNS/W/120), engineering services are 
listed as subsectors (e) and (f) of professional services (sector 1.A).  The two subsectors correspond to 
the UN Provisional CPC classification at the four-digit level. 7 
(a) Engineering services (CPC 8672) 
 This item covers: (i) advisory and consultativ e engineering se rvices (86721), (ii) engineering 
design services for the construction of founda tions and building structures (86722), (iii) 
engineering design services for mechanical and electrical installations  for buildings (86723), 
(iv) engineering design services for the cons truction of civil engineering works (86724), (v) 
engineering design services for industrial pr ocesses and production (86725), (vi) engineering 
design services n.e.c. (86726), (vii) other e ngineering services during the construction and 
installation phase (86727), and (viii) ot her engineering services (86729). 
 
(b) Integrated engineering services (CPC 8673) 
 This item covers the following engineering serv ices related to turnkey projects: (i) integrated 
engineering services for transportation infrastruct ure turnkey projects (86731), (ii) integrated 
engineering and project manage ment services for water suppl y and sanitation works turnkey 
projects (86732), (iii) integrated engineering services for the construction of manufacturing 
turnkey projects (86733), and (iv)  integrated engineering servic es for other turnkey projects 
(86739). 
 8. As indicated in the Provisional CPC, "design servi ces for industrial products" are classified in 
86726 (engineering design services n.e.c.), while the engineering aspect of "construction project 
management services" is classified in 8672 and, for turnkey projects, in 8673 (integrated engineering 
services).   
9. The Provisional CPC also contains class 8675 (engineering related scientific and technical 
consulting services), which has been erroneously in cluded in the W/120 as part of "F. Other Business 
Services", without the word "engineering".  CP C 8675 includes such services as (i) geological, 
geophysical and other scient ific prospecting services (86751), ( ii) subsurface surveying services 
(86752), (iii) surface surveying services (86753), and (iv) map-making services (86754).  According to a 
clarification inscribed under Division 88 of the Pr ovisional CPC, class 8675 also includes "mineral 
prospecting services, oil and ga s field exploration and geophysica l (e.g. seismic) and geological 
surveying services".  Arguably, the latter would al so include the services provided by surveyors or 
topographical engineers.  
10. Interestingly, research and development services  on engineering have been classified in the 
Provisional CPC as part of "Resea rch and experimental development se rvices on natural sciences and 
engineering" (CPC 851) which in turn has been incl uded as "R&D services on natural sciences" in the 
document W/120.  The exclusion of R&D in engineer ing from the usual classi fication of engineering 
services is noteworthy, since in many sectors the engineering component of companies' R&D costs can 
be quite large, and the internati onalization of R&D activities has been  one the important trends of the 
last decade.
8  
                                                      
7 United Nations, Provisional Central Product Classification, Series M. No. 77, 1991.  The coding 
system of the CPC is hierarchical and purely decimal.  The classification consists of sections (identified by the 
first digit), divisions (identified by the first and second digits), groups (identified by the first three digits), 
classes (identified by the first four digits) and subclasses (identified by all five digits, taken together).   
8 A survey conducted in the Canadian auto parts sect or shows that engineering represents as much as 
70 per cent of these companies' R&D costs (Prism Economics and Analysis, 2003). S/C/W/334 
Page 4  
 
  III. ECONOMIC IMPORTANCE OF THE SECTOR  
11. Engineering activities are very often combined with architectural and construction services.  In 
some countries there is a tradition that major constr uction firms have integrated  departments which carry 
out design and other consulting engineering activities (e.g. France), while in others engineers work 
independently (e.g. the Netherlands, the Nordic countries, and the United Kingdom).  This close 
association with other activities makes it difficult to measure the economic importance of, and trade and 
investment flows in, the pure engine ering component.  In most national statistics, engineering is in fact 
absorbed in the broader categories of business servi ces or construction activitie s.  Engineering exports 
and imports are sometimes included in the trade fi gures for construction services, and often combined 
with architectural and other technical services.
9   
12. Table 1 presents data on trade in architectural, engineering and other technical services in 2008 
and 2009 for selected economies.  These figures shoul d be interpreted with ca ution, however; while 
including services other than engineering, these da ta are usually partial, to avoid disclosure of 
information from individual companies.  Drawn from Balance-of-Payments information, it is not 
possible to separate mode 1 (e.g. el ectronic transmission of a specific  industrial design) from mode 4 (an 
engineer doing some specific work, in the premises of the foreign customer).10  The European Union 
(EU27) appears as the largest expor ter and importer.  Countries such  as the United States, Canada, 
Australia, and Norway also appear as important traders.  Interestingly, emerging economies such as Brazil, India and the Russian Federation have also  become large exporters and importers of these 
services.  China should have probably been included  among the top exporters a nd/or importers if data 
had been available.   
13. The world market for these services seems to be significant in any case: global spending on 
engineering services was estima ted at US$750 billion in 2006 (roughly 2 per cent of world income), and 
was expected to increase to  more than US$1 trillion by 2020 (B ooz Allen Hamilton & NASSCOM, 
2007).  Major industries contributing to the growi ng demand of engineering services include the 
aerospace, automotive, chemical, i ndustrial machinery, oil & gas, u tilities, construction, and medical 
sectors. 
14. Engineering activities form a thriving part of the business services sector. For example, a total 
of EUR49.8 billion turnover was produced in engine ering design services, in 2004, in 16 selected 
European countries for whic h detailed product data were available (Eurostat, 2008).
11  I n  A u s t r a l i a ,  
engineering consulting revenues to talled $18.5 billion in 2006/07, equivalent to 1.85 per cent of 
Australia's GDP (Consult Australia). In Canada, operating revenues of engi neering services firms 
reached $15.3 billion in 2006 (Engineers Canada 2009) .  The industry is significant in emerging 
economies as well.  In Singapore, for example, it represents 1.2 per cent of GDP and employs 35,000 
people (SEDB, 2009).   
15. Beyond the global engineering giants (e.g. Si emens, ABB, WorleyPa rsons, Aecom, Fluor, 
Arcadis, Jacobs, SNC-Lavalin), national markets are characterized by the prevalence of small- and 
medium-sized firms.  For example, 96 per cent of the 16,600 firms that compos e the Australian industry 
in 2006/07 employ less than 20 peopl e (ACEA 2009).  In 2005, in the EU  Member States for which data 
                                                      
9 Following the IMF Balance-of-Payments Manual, data on engineering services are usually collected and 
presented – if at all – together with architectural and other technical services, within the bigger category 
"Miscellaneous business, professional, and technical servi ces" (part of other business services).  In the Manual on 
Statistics of International Trade in Services 2010, engi neering services is identified as a separate item.   
10 For further details on the measurement of services trade, see Maurer et al. (2008). 
11 Engineering design services incl ude integrated engineering services  for turnkey projects, services 
that in large part feed into large-scale building proj ects, but exclude project management services, and other 
architectural and engineering services (such as techni cal advisory and consulting services, surveying and map-
making services, and geological and geophysical services).  S/C/W/334 
 Page 5 
 
 
  were available, 74 per cent of the enterprises active in the architecture, engineering and technical testing 
sector employed a single person while 22 per cent em ployed between two and ni ne persons (Eurostat, 
2008).  High labour intensity is a distinguishing featur e of engineering firms, with qualified employees 
and partners usually accounting for over half of employment (Nguyen-H ong, 2000).  Salaries of 
personnel, most of them highly qualifie d people, form the bulk of the costs.   
16. The sector has a strong in ternational focus.  A voluntary survey on busines s services carried out 
by Eurostat in 2005 (reference year 2004) covering 15 EU-27 economies as well as Norway revealed  
that architectural and engineering services were (together with market research and polling services) the strongest export items.  Indeed, architectural and engineering services represented close to 17 per cent of total turnover, far higher than the share of servic es such as advertising and accounting, bookkeeping and 
auditing, which ranged from 6.6 to 7.2 per cent (E urostat 2007).  The strong role of architectural and 
engineering services may re flect several factors.  In particular, they are less dependent on the service 
provider's permanent presence in a market (e.g. on e-time projects) and on in-d epth knowledge of local 
preferences.  The technical nature of the service – essentia lly universal – may be more important than a 
market's idiosyncratic elements.  Interestingly, mo st of the European exports (12 per cent of total 
turnover) have extra-EU ma rkets as a destination.  Exports of architectural, engineering and other 
technical services have remained one  of the main EU exports of "other  business services", reaching 14 
per cent of the total in 200 8 (WTO, 2011, paragraph 146). 
17. A significant portion of the global engineering serv ice providers are large multinational firms.  
The same Eurostat survey referred to above showed  that over 70 per cent of the architectural and 
engineering services exported by European c ountries in 2004 was produced by relatively large 
enterprises (i.e. companies with more than 250 empl oyees).  In 2009, almost 47 per cent of the revenue 
generated by the top 200 international engineering firms came from projects outside their respective 
home countries (US$52.45 billion).  The bulk came fro m petroleum (33 per cent), transportation (17 per 
cent), and building projects (16 per ce nt), located mainly in Europe (24 per cent), Asia/Australia (21 per 
cent) and the Middle East (18 per cent).  European co mpanies led the trend, grabbing 39 per cent of that 
total, closely followed by American firms, with 35 per cent.   
18. The supply of engineering services by affiliates in foreign markets also seems to be 
significant although data are scarce.
12  Architectural, engineering, and related services supplied by 
U.S. affiliates abroad rose by 19 per cent on average per year betwee n 2006 and 2008, reaching 
US$22.6 billion in 2008.  This increase was due to strong growth in geographically widespread 
projects in infrastructure, power, and oil and gas (WTO, 2011, paragraph 161).13  
19. The engineering sector is sensitive to the economi c cycle, as it provides design and development 
services to a wide range of industrial sectors, and as it is positioned ups tream of the building and 
construction industry.  The impact of the 2007- 2008 economic boom and the global recession that 
followed can be seen in a survey on the Top 200 In ternational Design Firms co nducted by Engineering 
News Record (ENR).14  The Top 200 as a group generated US $52.62 billion in design revenue in 2008 
from projects outside their respective home countries, a rise of 22.4 per cent over 2007’s US$42.99 
billion.  However, this boom came to a halt in late summer 2008, when the US housing bubble burst, 
inflicting economic distress on fi nancial institutions.  The resulti ng credit crunch caused projects 
                                                      
12 See S/C/W/329 for a discussion on da ta availability for trade in services. 
13 To the Secretariat's knowledge, some 15 European countries report data on the turnover of foreign 
affiliates engaged abroad in other business activities and in R&D services. However, little information is 
available on specific sub-sectors. See S/C/W/329/Add.1, paragraph 162. 
14 "Design firms" is a broad categ ory that includes different type s of firms: architect, engineer, 
engineer-contractor, architect-engineer, engineer-architect, environmental, geotechnical engineer, landscape architect, and planer. Firms classified themselves under each of these cate gories for the purposes of the ENR 
survey. S/C/W/334 
Page 6  
 
  around the world to be cancelled or deferred, sendi ng the engineering industry into a recession.  The 
export performance of the Top 200 companies was similar in 2009 (US$52.45 billion in revenue).  
However, they were more severely affected in  their domestic markets, where they generated 
US$59.37 billion in revenue, a 7.4 per cent fall from the revenue achieved in 2008 (US$64.14 billion).  
Overall, the Top 200 total design revenue droppe d 4.2 per cent between 2008 and 2009 (see Tables 2, 
3 and 4). 
IV. TRADABILITY, REGULATION AND RELEVANT TRADE RESTRICTIONS 
A. D
OMINANT MODES OF SUPPLY15 
20. Engineering services are primarily supplied through the temporary presence of professionals 
abroad  (mode 4).  In spite of the increasing use of Internet to supply certain services, personal contact 
between suppliers and customers, and, hence, an on-site presence, is essential for the installation and 
commissioning of production equipment (e.g. in cons truction), for project management, and for the 
supply of continuous advice to users of engin eering services.  This temporary movement of 
professionals is also necessary within engineeri ng companies, when some specialized knowledge may 
be required for a specific project.  Mode 4 is partic ularly important for engineering related to housing, 
major civil infrastructure projects, urban transporta tion systems, electrical power systems (generation 
and distribution), oil and gas extraction, mining and metallurgy, and environmentally-related work 
(e.g. environmental impact assessments, environmental treatment systems). 
21. The establishment of a commercial presence in foreign markets  (mode 3), either through 
subsidiaries, branch offices or strategic partners hips, is another importa nt mode of supplying 
engineering services.  A permanent presence in anot her markets allow engineering companies to have 
access to more projects in the host country and in neighbouring countries, and to ensure continuous 
after-sales support.  Although R&D is usually a core  function undertaken at head offices, there is 
evidence that large companies are encouraging their various facilitates to become centres of expertise 
in particular areas of engineering, thus increasing intra-corporate transferees. 
22. The spread of high-speed Internet connections, that make it possible to send large data files 
over distance, has had a significant effect on the wa y engineering work is organized worldwide.  
Engineering occupations are the most amenable to  remote employment (McKinsey Global Institute, 
2007).  Services like electronic design, applied r esearch, and aerospace design can be done more 
economically outside developed countries and the r esults transmitted electronically back to those 
developed countries, thus enhancing the e xport potential of developing countries in cross-border 
trade  (mode 1).  For example, new semiconductors can be designed in China or India and used to 
manufacture chips anywhere in the world (NAE 2004).16 
23. Outsourced engineering services predominate in aerospace, automotive, and 
electric/electronic machinery design manufacturing, but are also common in such industries as 
telecom, transport, and energy (PriceWaterhouseCoopers 2005).17  While more than a decade ago, 
                                                      
15 For an analysis, from a business perspective, of modalities of importing and exporting engineering 
work, see Prism Economics and Analysis (2003).   
16 For a discussion, from a business perspective, of the advantages and disadvantages of non-equity 
modes of market entry (i.e. exports and contractual, tem porary, agreements), and equity modes of market entry 
(e.g. joint-ventures, wholly-owned subsidiaries), see Brandl (2010). 
17 Often the terms offshoring and outsourcing are confused. Offshoring refers to the process of sourcing 
and coordinating tasks and business functions across natio nal borders (e.g. payroll services provided from one 
location offshore to all the companies' locations worldwid e). Outsourcing, by contrast, deNotes the delivery of 
products or services by an external provider – i.e. one outside the boundaries of the firm.  Offshoring may include both in-house (captive or international insourcing) and outsourced activities; outsourcing, in turn, may 
occur both domestically (onshore) and abroad (offshore).  See Manning, Massini and Lewin (2008).  S/C/W/334 
 Page 7 
 
 
  engineering work being outsourced typically cons isted of lower-end services like creating digital 
models and drawings and sending these back to the buyer who then incorporat ed these in his designs, 
engineering work currently outsourced involves a substantial portion of the actual design activity 
(Booz Allen Hamilton & NASSCOM, 2006, PriceW aterhouseCoopers, 2005, and Manning, Massini, 
and Lewin, 2008).  
24. Over the last years, access to qualified pe rsonnel globally has become the second most 
important offshoring driver after labour cost savings; and new product development (in which 
engineering services play a predominant part) was the second most frequently offshored business 
function after IT.18   
25. Companies choose between two basic offshoring models: setting up a captive unit or hiring a 
third-party services vendors (Lewin and Peeters, 2006).  Captive units are mostly used by large 
multinational firms, which set up branches or subsid iaries abroad (e.g. in India), and keep their 
engineering activity in-house.  Captive units may even become the multinati onal's design-engineering 
centre.   Third-party services vendors are local (e.g . Indian) companies, unrelated to the outsourcing 
company, which is hired by the latter for specific projects; the results will then be sent back (i.e. 
exported) by the vendor to the outsourcing firm.  According to the survey conducted by the 
Offshoring Research Network (ORN), 62 per cent of offshore processes in engineering services are outsourced to third-party services vendors, while 38 per cent is carried out by captive units (Lewin 
and Peeters, 2006).
19 
26. India remains the preferred destination for en gineering offshoring.  However, China has 
emerged as an important location for engineering, as more companies co-locate engineering groups 
alongside manufacturing operations (M anning, Massini, and Lewin 2008). 
B. NEED FOR REGULATION  
27. Asymmetric information between service supp liers and service consumers provides the most 
important rationale for the economic regulation of professional services, and hence of engineering.  
Engineering services, as professional services in general,  are considered by the economic literature as 
"credence goods", the quality of which can be asc ertained only at some cost after purchase and 
consumption, and eventually might never be fully assessed.  They basically feature high pre-buying and high post-buying costs of quality detection.  Ultimately, consumers must have faith in the 
professionals that provide the service, and/or the process regulating the profession, hence the name "credence" goods. 
28. Two aspects of information asymmetry are c onsidered as being potentially deleterious: 
adverse selection and moral hazard (Paterson et al. 2003).  On the one hand, adverse selection may 
result from the declining quality of services.  Lack of information on produc t quality (which can be 
revealed only after purchase, if at all) could result in customers being prepared to pay only an average 
                                                     
 
18 These are the most salient results of the Offsho ring Research Network (ORN) survey, which tracks 
offshoring activities of more than 1,600 U.S. and European companies of all size. See also Manning, Massini 
and Lewin (2008).  In the 2006 survey, nearly three-quarters of the companies that establish or expand product 
development offshore reported that "access to qualifie d personnel" was the most important driver of their 
offshoring strategy, and almost 70 per cent of survey respondents select an offshoring location based on the 
availability of needed expertise. Acce ss to qualified personnel has increased substantially (by 70 per cent in the 
last two years) as a major reason for establishing or expanding innovation, product development and product extensions offshore. 
19 The Offshoring Research Network (ORN) was established by the Center for International Business 
Education and Research (CIBER) at Duke University  and Booz Allen Hamilton.  See, in addition,  
PriceWaterhouseCoopers (2005) for examples of the use of each of these models to outsource engineering 
services in India. S/C/W/334 
Page 8  
 
  price for an unknown (hence presumed average) quality, prompting producers of higher-quality 
services to abandon the market, thus reducing the av erage quality supplied by those remaining.  On 
the other hand, professionals may be faced with mo ral hazard, in cases where their own income goals 
run counter to the objectives of the clients, a nd where the asymmetry of information on the price-
quality relationship stands in the way of fair bargaini ng. In such a situation th ere is a risk that the 
professional over-prices the service to the client, or s upplies a higher quality than necessary to satisfy 
the client's needs.  
29. The informational problems affecting the supply of professional services have motivated  
regulatory action, by way of (minimum) quality standards, enforced through qualification and 
licensing requirements and procedures. Both qualif ication and licensing requirements are ex-ante 
quality control mechanisms.  In most countries, engi neering is considered an "accredited" profession.  
Suppliers are required by law or re gulation to have minimum qualifica tion and be licensed before they 
can provide engineering services or indeed use the title of "engineer".  Qualification requirements usually include obtaining a university or another high er educational degree, completing some practical 
training, and passing a professional examination; in a number of countries, all three requirements are a 
precondition for obtaining a licence to practise.  In addition, licensing requirements may typically 
include other conditions such as knowledge of the local language, good reputati on, and residency or 
nationality.  Membership in professional associations is frequently voluntary in the case of engineering services. 
30. The problem of information asymmetry has tr aditionally been used as a justification for 
conduct regulation, including fee setting or price co ntrols (fixed or recommended), restrictions on 
advertising, indemnity insuran ce, and the requirement of specific forms of business establishment.
20   
31. Some additional regulatio ns usually apply to e ngineering firms, not just the professionals.  
These include local presence requirements to supply specific engineering work; limitations on foreign 
ownership; minimum number of local directors and/or  staff; partnership, association or joint-venture 
requirements; and restrictions on hiring local professionals. 
32. As mentioned, such regulations are frequently intended to ensure th e quality of the service, 
the integrity of service providers, and the protec tion of consumers.  For example, nationality 
requirements may not only serve as a trade negotiating tool but help ensure familiarity with local 
rules;  residency requirements may facilitate consumers' redress in case of professional malpractice, and promote suppliers' adherence to professional disci plines; restrictions on incorporation have the 
stated aims of limiting company type structures wh ich can reduce personal liab ility of professionals in 
case of malpractice;  licensing and qualification requi rements are to ensure standards of competence, 
performance and accountability; and fee and advertisi ng restrictions are designed to limit competition 
which may lead to lower prices and reduced service quality (OECD, 1996). 
33. By the same token, regulations can also redu ce competition in the market, and eventually 
affect the price and quality of services.  Rec ognising the potentially restrictive nature of these 
measures, international fora, such as the OECD , have advanced alternative approaches to the 
regulation of professional services, including engineer ing (OECD, 2000).   In addition, the level of 
restrictiveness – as well as the economic effects – of  particular restrictions on engineering services 
have been studied for certain economies.  These studies, however, differ in their methodology and 
coverage of restrictions, and are also economy-specific. 
                                                     
 
20 In the literature on regulation a distinction is usually made between entry regulations , which include 
mainly barriers to becoming a member of the profession (e.g. licensing and qualification requirements, 
quantitative limits on the number of  suppliers of professi onal services, and exclusive rights granted to suppliers 
in certain areas), and conduct regulation , which includes restrictions on prices and fees, advertising, and forms 
of business (Paterson et al, 2003,  and Conway and Nicoletti, 2006).  S/C/W/334 
 Page 9 
 
 
  C. LEVELS OF RESTRICTIVENESS  
34. The most comprehensive effort to date to identify and quantify regulations applying to 
engineering services (among many other sectors) has been carried out by the OECD, which has developed a range of indicators of product market regulation.  These indicators cover entry and 
conduct regulations in the engineering profession a nd have been estimated for the years 1996, 2003 
and 2008 for OECD countries, and for 2008 for candida te countries for accession to the OECD (Chile, 
Estonia, Israel, the Russian Federation, Sloveni a), as well as Brazil and China. The indicators are 
described in detail in Conway and Nicoletti (2006) , who used a slightly modified version of the 
methodology introduced in Paterson et al. (2003) to  review the regulation of liberal professions 
(including engineering) in the EU Member States.  All data used to estimate the professional services 
indicators in 2003 and 2008 were collected via the OECD Regulatory Indicators Questionnaires or 
taken from Paterson et al. (2003).  The 1996 indi cators of professional services were based on an 
earlier OECD study (1996).
21 
35. The 2008 indicators show that, for the great majo rity of countries in the sample, compared to 
legal, accountancy, and architecture, engineering is the profession with relatively lower regulatory 
hurdles.  On a scale of 0 (least restrictive) to 6 (most restrictive), Luxembourg recorded the highest 
index (4), followed by China (3.2), and Canada and Italy (both with 2.9). Some 14 OECD members 
appear with indices below 1, reflecting ve ry open regulatory environments.   
36. The replies to the questionnai res reveal additional information on actual regulations.22  Quotas 
or economic needs tests are hardly used to restrict  the number of foreign professionals or firms in the 
sector – only China and Slovenia appear to apply such restrictions.  The legal form of business is not 
restricted to any particular type in any of these co untries.  In other words, engineers appear free to 
organize their practices as sole practitioners, limite d liability partnerships, public limited companies 
or private companies.  
37. No price regulation for engineers exists in the majority of countries in the sample (22).  
Exceptions are maximum prices for all engineering se rvices in Canada and Italy, and minimum prices 
for some services in Germany, Greece, Luxembourg and Turkey.  There are non-binding 
recommended prices for all engineering services in Korea, Portugal and Switzerland, and for some services in Hungary, Slovak Republic, Slovenia and China.  There are no particular regulations governing advertising and ma rketing by the profession in most of the countries reviewed.  However, 
advertising and marketing of engineering services is  regulated in Czech Republic, Hungary, Italy, 
Japan and the United States, and prohibited in  Chile, China, Israel and Luxembourg.  
38. Qualification requirements vary.  Licensed e ngineers are generally required to have a 
minimum period of university or higher education (mos tly four to five years, but with a maximum of 
eight or ten years), often coupled with additiona l years of compulsory professional experience (from 
half a year to a maximum of five) and/or a professional examination.  Some countries complement the initial education requirement (e.g. the University  degree) with compulsory professional practice, 
others make it mandatory for indivi duals to take a professional exam after obtaining the University or 
higher education degree, and other jurisdictions apply the three requirements – initial education, 
practice, and exam – in conjunction. 
                                                     
 
21 The questionnaires, the replies to the questionnaires, and the indicator values are publicly available 
at:  http://www.oecd.org/document/24/0,3746,en_2649_34323_35858776_1_1_1_1,00.html . 
22 In the case of engineering services, no replies are available from Brazil, and only a partial reply is 
available from the Russian Federation. S/C/W/334 
Page 10  
 
  39. Additional information on the entry and conduct re gulation in engineering services in recently 
acceded EU Member States (Cyprus, Czech Republic , Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, 
Poland, Slovak Republic and Slovenia) can be foun d in European Commission (2004), which extends 
the fact-finding exercise carried out by Paterson et al. (2003) for the other EU Member States.
23  In 
general, the engineering profession appears subject to stricter entry regulations (but hardly any 
conduct regulation) in most recent EU Member States than in the original EU Member States.  
40. Additional work by the OECD includes the FDI Regulatory Restrictiveness Index, which 
includes engineering services among other sectors.  Restri ctiveness is measured on a 0 to 1 scale, with 
the former representing full openness and the latter a pr ohibition of FDI in the sector concerned.  The 
index combines the following measures: foreign equity limitations (from 0 to 99 per cent); FDI 
screening and approval requirements; restrictions  on the boards of directors or on managers 
(nationality, residency or licensing requirements), restrictions on the movement of natural persons 
supplying services (from no entry to three or four years of stay); and input and operational restrictions (e.g., domestic content of more than 50 per cent).  The information is drawn from the OECD Code of 
Liberalisation of Capital Movements, compleme nted by additional sources, such as the GATS 
commitments, the sectoral studies by the Australian Productivity Commission, and the Investment 
Reports developed in the APEC context.  Regulat ory data on specific FDI measures are not publicly 
available.  Nonetheless, composite indicators for engineering (and the other three professional 
services covered) are included in Golub (2003) for the period 1998/2000 and in Koyama and Golub 
(2006) for 2005/2006.
24   These indices tend to confirm the pattern observed from the OECD product 
market regulation indicators, with lower levels of  regulation in the engin eering sector, compared to 
the other professions (Geloso-Grosso and Shepherd, 2008). 
D. EFFECTS ON PRICE AND QUALITY  
41. Empirical research shows the negative effects that rigid regulation of engineering services 
may have on consumers.  For example, excessive regulation of advertising and licensing has, in 
certain cases, led to lower quality and higher pri ces in professional services markets. Conversely, the 
loosening of anti-competitive restrictions has had positive effects on prices and quality. 
42. In a pioneering work, Nguyen-Hong (2000) qu antified restrictions affecting trade in 
engineering services (among other professions) in 34  economies, both develope d and developing.  He 
constructed both a foreign and a domestic index of  restrictions affecting engineering services – the 
former covering restrictions that affect only domest ic suppliers, and the latter capturing, in addition, 
all relevant restrictions applying to foreign servi ce suppliers.  He then developed estimates of the 
effects of restrictions in an econometric analysis of engineering service firms' price-cost margins. 
43. The indices already foreshadowed what subse quent studies and surveys would confirm:  
engineering services are subject to fewer restrictiv e measures compared to other professions, such as 
legal and accountancy, although restric tions on engineering vary in type and extent across countries.  
He then analyzed the effects of trade restrictions (foreign barriers to establishment, foreign barriers to 
ongoing operations, and domestic barriers to esta blishment) on the price-cost margins of 84 
engineering service companies in 20 economies, wh ile correcting for industry- and firm-specific 
influences on firm performance. The results suggest  that barriers to foreign establishment and ongoing 
operations are significant and positive determinants of  the price-cost margins of engineering service 
firms.  Restrictions on foreign supply of engin eering services tend to allow firms in the domestic 
market to raise their prices significantly above cost s.  Using these econometric results, restrictions on 
                                                      
23 The work by Paterson et al. (2003) also inspir ed the OECD work on product market regulation. 
24 The publicly available information regarding the 20 10 update of the OECD FD I restrictiveness index 
does not include a specific index for engineer ing services. See Kalinova et al. (2010).  S/C/W/334 
 Page 11 
 
 
  foreign supply of engineering services (as measured by the foreign index) are estimated to raise the 
price of engineering services from between 1 and 15 per cent in the 20 economies studied. 
44. Foreign barriers to establishment appear to play a significant role in raising prices in a number 
of economies – between 10 and 15 per cent in some cases.  Foreign barriers to ongoing operations 
tend to have smaller impacts.  Th e low to moderate price impacts reflect the open trading environment 
for engineering services in many economies. The results  suggest that removal of restrictions can still 
achieve further reductions in prices, especially in economies in which substantial barriers to trade in 
engineering services remain.  Costs increases stem from qualification requirements, compulsory membership of professional bodies, and, to a lesser extent, restrictions on firms' incorporation.   
Estimates of the cost impact of domestic barriers to establishment range from 1 to 7 per cent for the 
20 economies examined. Although the estimated cost  increases are relatively small for most 
economies, they indicate scope for further savings.  
45. Using an econometric model of the performance of engineering firms, Dee (2003, quoted and 
summarized in OECD, 2003) estimated the effects of trade restrictions in engineering on firm 
profitability in South-East European countries (Alb ania, Bulgaria, and Moldova ).  The results suggest 
that barriers to establishment and to on-going operations imposed on foreign engineering service 
suppliers tend to have a rent-creating effect, incr easing prices relative to costs by up to 3 per cent, 
while domestic (non-discriminatory) barriers to est ablishment raise costs of engineering services by 
around 2 per cent. The effects in these South-East European (SEE) countries were smaller than those 
found in developing, and even in some developed co untries used as comparators.  This is because the 
former countries tended to have less stringent di scriminatory regulations on the establishment of 
foreign engineering firms at the time. 
46. Dihel and  Shepherd (2007) also estimated restrictiveness indices both for the engineering 
sector overall and for each GATS mode of supply for the following countries: Argentina, Brazil, Chile, China, Indonesia, Malaysia, Mexico (onl y Mode 3), Philippines, Portugal (only Mode 3), 
Russia, Singapore and Thailand.   Using econome tric techniques, and incorporating both the 
aggregate and modal restrictiveness indices, they also calculated tax equivalents of the restrictions by 
comparing price-cost margins under current policy settings with hypothetical values for completely open regimes, while all other influential factors were  kept constant.  They tentatively conclude that 
trade barriers in the engineering sector have, in the aggregate, cost-increasing effects.  
47. With a somewhat different approach, Moln ar and Bottini (2008) compared competitive 
pressures prevailing in the architecture and engi neering sector (taken as one) in selected OECD 
countries.  Competitive pressures were measured by wa y of mark-ups, in order to infer the relative 
restrictiveness of economic regulation in different ma rkets.  It is hypothesized that lower mark-ups 
would reflect high competitive pressures, and theref ore a less restrictive regulatory environment, 
while higher mark-ups would probably be due to more restrictive regulation.  Except for a few 
countries, mark-ups in the architectural and engineering services (as in other professions) are 
relatively higher than in other sectors, reflecting lack of competition.  According to the authors, 
"unnecessary regulation and the lack of recognition of qualifications may give a particular boost to firms' pricing power in this sector."    
48. Industry surveys have also focused on the impact of trade barriers on the costs of doing 
business in foreign markets. A survey conducted by E ngineers Australia (Hurford 2006) showed that 
the most restrictive trade barriers include the require ment that directors of foreign firms be themselves 
registered engineers, the inabilit y to gain registration for the engineering firm or its employees, 
residency and citizenship requirements, the non-r ecognition of foreign qualif ications, restrictive 
foreign ownership requirements, long and onerous  visa requirements, rest rictive work permit 
regulations, and mandatory requirements for me mbership in professional associations.  These 
restrictions are often overcome by employing lo cally licensed engineers to sign off documents, S/C/W/334 
Page 12  
 
  joining forces with local partners, or working in engineering areas where a licence is not required.  
However, small- and medium-sized engineering fi rms usually find it difficult to overcome many of 
these requirements, and  thus loose export opportunities.
 25 
V. EXISTING COMMITMENTS AND RECOGNITION MEASURES UNDER THE 
GATS 
49. As a result of the Uruguay Round and subse quent accessions, 78 Members (counting EU12 as 
one) made commitments in engineering services, 50 in integrated engineering services and 47 in 
related scientific and technical consulting services (Table 5).   
50. Table 6 provides an overview of the level of commitments in these sectors, distinguishing 
between full commitments (no limitations), partial commitments (those made with certain 
limitations), and no commitments (unbound).26  In the case of market access, 44 per cent of Members 
made full commitments for the supply of engineering services through commercial presence (mode 3), while 50 per cent made full commitments for the supply on a cross-border basis (mode 1).  The percentages of full commitments are lower for the supply of integrated engineering services: 33 per 
cent for commercial presence and 39 per cent for cro ss-border supply.  As could be expected, the 
shares decline when horizontal commitments ar e taken into account.  With the exception of 
architectural services, the level of commitments compares favourably with most other professional services, reflecting again a more open regulatory environment for engineering services compared to such services as legal or accountancy.   
51. Concerning the types of measures applied, the most commonly observed market access 
limitations specific to the sector (i.e. without taki ng into consideration horizontal limitations) were 
limitations on the type of legal entity allowed fo r the establishment of service suppliers (mode 3), 
followed by limitations on the participation of fore ign capital.  Restrictions on the number of natural 
persons to be employed are as common as in virtuall y all other sectors, reflecting the horizontal nature 
of the measures employed.  With regard to nationa l treatment limitations, the most prevalent were 
references to licensing, standards and qualificati ons across all modes of supply.  Nationality and 
residency requirements are also frequent. 
52. MFN exemptions specific to engineering servi ces have been taken only by the Dominican 
Republic, Jordan (geological engineering), and Ven ezuela.  However, a few MFN exemptions listed 
for professional services also cover engineers (Costa Rica, Honduras, Panama, and Turkey).  Most of 
these exemptions have been taken to ensure r eciprocal conditions of access in other markets. 
53. Only Malaysia has made additional commitments,  indicating that the competence test prior to 
registration with the releva nt professional body will be taken in English.  
54. Lack of recognition of qualifications are usua lly dealt in a bilateral or regional context, 
through mutual recognition agreements (MRAs).  A large number of Members have notified MRAs 
under GATS Article VII:4, which requires notifica tion of existing recognition measures.  Recent 
research covering the 35 MRAs notified by 18 Me mbers up to mid-2009 (Marchetti and Mavroidis, 
forthcoming 2011), shows that due to the frequent inclusion of more than one agreement in each 
notification, a total of 119 MRAs ha ve been notified (106 bilateral and 13 plurilateral).  Many of these 
MRAs deal with engineering services.  While only 17 of the MRAs notified specifically mention the 
                                                     
 
25 For another industry survey of barriers to international trade, covering architecture, engineering and 
technical consulting services jo intly, see Eurostat (2008).   
26  Such a broad categorization is necessarily crude  and provides only a rudimentary picture of the 
commitments made by Members.  In particular, a partial commitment could encompass a minor limitation or a 
commercially very significant measure.  S/C/W/334 
 Page 13 
 
 
  recognition of qualifications in the engineering profession, 54 MRAs do not make reference to any 
profession in particular, but rather, to professional services in general. While only 17 of the MRAs 
notified specifically mention the recognition of qualif ications in the engineering profession, 54 MRAs 
do not make reference to any profession in particular , but rather, to professional services in general.   
_______________S/C/W/334 
Page 14  
 
  REFERENCES 
 
 Baker & McKenzie, and Booz & Company (2008), "A  White Paper On Engineering Design Services 
Outsourcing", 26 September.  
 
Booz Allen Hamilton & NASSCOM (2007) "Globali zation of Engineering Services: The Next 
Frontier for India". Available at http://www.boozallen.com/media/file/Globalization_of_Engineering_Services.pdf  
Brandl, Kristin (2010), "Perspectives on Globalization and the Danish Architecture & Engineering 
Industry", Centre for Strategic Management  & Globalization, Copenhagen Business School, 
September.  Cattaneo, Olivier, Linda Schmid, and Michael Engman (2010), "Engineering Services: How to 
Compete in the Most Global of the Professions", in Cattaneo, Engman, Sáez, and Stern (eds.) 
International Trade in Services – New Trends and Opportunities for Developing Countries, The 
International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank.  
 Centre for Strategy & Evaluation Services (CSES, 2001), "Barriers to Trade in Business Services" 
Final Report, prepared for the European Commission, January. 
 
Consult Australia, "The Engin eering Industry", available at 
http://www.consultaustralia.com .au/content/default.aspx?ID=56
 
 Conway, P. and G. Nicoletti (2006), “Product Mark et Regulation in the Non-Manufacturing Sectors 
of OECD Countries: Measurement and Highlights”,  OECD Economics Department Working Papers, 
No. 530, OECD.  Dee, P. (2003), "Services Liberalisation in South East European Countries", Asia Pacific School of 
Economics and Government, Australian National University.  
Department for Business, Enterprises and Regulatory Reform (United Kingdom) (2008), 
"Competitiveness and Productivit y of the UK Design Engineering Sector", February. 
 Dihel, N. and B. Shepherd (2007), “Modal Esti mates of Services Barriers”, OECD Trade Policy 
Working Papers, No. 51, OECD. 
 
Engineering News Record (2010), "The Top 200 In ternational Design Firms" (authored by Peter 
Reina and Gary J. Tulacz), 26 July.   Engineers Canada & Canadian Council of T echnicians and Technologists (2009), "Canada's 
Consulting Engineering Sector in the International Economy", March. 
 
European Commission (2004), "Report on Competition in Professional Services", Brussels, 9 February 2004, COM(2004) 83 final.   European Commission (2004), "Stocktaking Exer cise on Regulation of Professional Services – 
Overview of Regulation in the New EU Member States", Brussels, COMP/D3/MK/D(2004). 
 Eurostat (2007), "Exports of business services" (author ed by Pekka Alajääskö), in Statistics in Focus, 
No. 74/2007, Eurostat.    S/C/W/334 
 Page 15 
 
 
  Eurostat (2008), "Architecture, engineering and t echnical testing" (authored by Walter Sura), in 
Statistics in Focus, No. 42/2008, Eurostat.  García Goñi, Manuel (2008), "La Internacionalización de los Servicios de Ingeniería en España", in 
Información Comercial Española (ICE), Revist a de Economía, No. 844, Septiembre-Octubre. 
 
Goldhammer, Bernhard (2008) "ISIC Rev. 3.1 7421/Rev.4 7110 Architectural and engineering 
activities and related technical consultancy", Federa l Statistics Office, Germany, paper presented at 
the 23
rd Voorburg Group Meeting, Aguascalientes, Mexico, 22 to 26 September.  
 
Golub, S.S. (2003), "Measures of Restrictions on  Inward Foreign Direct Investment for OECD 
Countriesl", OECD Economics Department Working Paper No. 357.   Hamdani, Daood (2001), "Capacity to Innovate, In novation and Impact: The Canadian Engineering 
Services Industry", Research Paper No. 11, Scien ce, Innovation and Electronic Information Division, 
Statistics Canada, Ottawa, March. 
 Hurford, Kathryn (2006), "Global Reach: Suppor ting the professional mobility of Australian 
engineers", Institution of Engineers Australia.  Institute for Advanced Studies (2003), "Economic im pact of regulation in the field of liberal 
professions in different Member States – Regula tion of Professional Services", Research Report 
prepared for the European Commission (DG Competi tion), Final Report, Part 1, Vienna, January.  
 Kalinova, Blanka, Angel Palerm a nd Stephen Thomsen (2010), "OECD' s FDI Restrictiveness Index: 
2010 Update", OECD Working Pape rs on International Investment, No. 2010/3, OECD Investment 
Division.  
 Koch, C. (2004), "Can knowledge management beco me global? - Consulting engineering companies 
in the knowledge economy", in Journal of Construction Research, Vol. 5, No. 1.  
 Koncz-Bruner, Jennifer and Anne Flatness  (2010), "U .S. International Services Cross-Border Trade 
in 2009 and Services Supplied Through Affiliates in 200 8", in Survey of Current Business, Bureau of 
Economic Analysis, October.  Koyama, T., and S. S. Golub (1996), "OECD's FDI Regulatory Restrictiveness Index: Revision and 
Extension to More Economies", OECD Econom ics Department Working Paper No. 525. 
 
Kulkami, Vivek (2009), "Offshore to win and not sh rink!",  in Jayashankar M Swaminathan (editor) 
"Indian Economic Superpower: Fiction or Futu re?", World Scientific Series on 21st Century 
Business, Vol. 2, World Scientific Publishing, 2009.   Lewin, Arie Y. and Carine Peeters (2006), "Offshoring Work: Business Hype or the Onset of 
Fundamental Transformation?", in Long Range Planning vol. 39, pp. 221-239.  
 Lynn, Leonard, and Hal Salzman (2009), "The 'N ew' Globalization of Engineering: How the 
Offshoring of Advanced Engineering Affects Competitiveness and Development", in Economics, 
Management, and Financial Markets,  Vol. 4, No. 1, March 2009.  
 
Marchetti, J. and Petros Mavroidis (forthcomi ng 2011), "I Now Recognize You (and Only You) As 
Equal – An Anatomy of Mutual Recognition Agre ements in the GATS", in Ioannis Lianos and 
Okeoghene Odudu (eds.) The Regulation of Trade in Services in the EU and the WTO – Trust, 
Distrust and Economic Integration, Cambridge University Press. S/C/W/334 
Page 16  
 
   
Maurer, Andreas, Yann Marcus, Joscelyn Magdel eine, and Barbara D'Andrea (2008), "Measuring 
Trade in Services" in A. Mattoo, R. Stern, and G.  Zanini (eds.) A Handbook of International Trade in 
Services, Oxford University Press.  
McKinsey Global Institute (2007), "The Emerging Global Labor Market", April. Available at 
http://www.mckinsey.com/mgi/publications /emerginggloballabormarket/index.asp. 
 Molnar, Margit and Novella Bottini (2008) "How larg e are competitive pressures in services markets? 
– Estimation of mark-ups for selected OECD countries", paper presented at the OECD Trade and 
Agriculture Directorate OECD Technical Work shop on Trade Barrier Assessment Methodology, 
Paris, 12 December 2008.  National Academy of Engineering (NAE, 2004), "The Engineer of 2020: Visions of Engineering in 
the New Century", The National Academies Press, Washington D.C. 
 
Nguyen-Hong, D (2000), Restrictions on Trade in  Professional Services, Productivity Commission 
Staff Research Paper, Ausinfo, Canberra.  OECD (1996), "International trade in professiona l services: Assessing Barriers and Encouraging 
Reform", OECD, Paris 
 
OECD (2000), "Competition in Professional Services", Directorate for Financial, Fiscal and Enterprise Affairs, Committee on Competition Law and Policy, DAFFE/CLP(2000)2.   OECD (2003), "Barriers to Trade in Services in  South Eastern European (SEE) Countries – How 
Much Do They Matter?", OECD Centre for Coop eration with Non-members, Trade Directorate, 
document prepared for the OECD Forum on Trade in  Services in South Eastern Europe, held in 
Bucharest, 24-25 June 2003, CCNM/TD/SEE(2003)4/FINAL (29 October).  Paterson, I., M. Fink, A. Ogus, et al. (2003), “Econo mic Impact of Regulation in the Field of Liberal 
Professions in Different Member States” (report commissioned by the European Commission – DG 
Competition), Institute for Advanced Studies, Vienna.  
 PriceWaterhouseCoopers (2005), "Global Integr ation through Knowledge Process Offshoring". 
Available at http://www.pwc.com/en_IN/in/asset s/pdfs/global-integration-through-kpo.pdf. 
 
PriceWaterhouseCoopers (2009), "International Mobilit y in the Engineering & Construction Industry: 
Analysis and insight on trends and best practice". Available at http://www.pwc.com/gx/en/engineering-c onstruction/international-mobility 
 Prism Economics and Analysis (2003), "Engineerin g Work in Canada: The Import and Export of 
Engineering Work: Evidence and Analysis from a Qualitative Study". Report prepared for the 
Canadian Council of Professional Engineers. Publicly available at 
"http://www.ogrady.on.ca/Downloads/Papers/T he%20Import%20and%20Exp ort%20Of%20Engineeri
ng%20Work.pdf " 
 Rosenbaum, A. (2002), "Price Indexes for Engineering Services - Measuring Output Prices for 
Engineering Services in the United States", U.S. Bu reau of Labor Statistics, paper presented at the 
17
th Voorburg Group Meeting, Nantes, France, 24-27 September.  
  S/C/W/334 
 Page 17 
 
 
  Rustomjee, Zavareh (2007), "Engineering Services Tr ade: the Case of South Africa", paper presented 
at the OECD Sixth Services Experts Meeting Domestic Regulation and Trade in Professional Services, Paris, 27-28 March.  Singapore Economic Development Board (SEDB, 2 009), "Engineering Services – Factsheet 2009", 
available at www.sedb.com
.  
 WTO (2011), "A Review of Statistics on Trade Flows in Services – Overview of Trade Flows in Commercial Services 2000-2010", Note by the WTO Secretariat, document S/C/W/329/Add.1 (7 January 2011).  
 
   
_______________ 
 
 S/C/W/334 
Page 18  
 
  ANNEX 
 
 
Table 1. Trade in Architectural, En gineering and Other Technical Serv ices, Selected Economies, 2008-
2009 
(US$ million)       
Exporters 2008 2009  Importers 2008  
2009 
European Union (27) (1) 53,694 48,952  European Union (27) (1) 33,471 31,496 
Extra-EU 31,351 28,648  Intra-EU 21,493 20,336 
Intra-EU 22,342 20,305  Extra-EU 11,938 11,115 
United States (2) 5,914 5,687  Russian Federation 4,245 3,787 Brazil 5,595 5,583  India 3,397 3,846 Canada 4,787 4,287  Canada 3,016 2,850 Russian Federation 3,250 3,215  Brazil 2,918 3,200 Norway 3,034 2, 732  Kazakhsta n 1,853 2,270 
Singapore (3) 2,601 ..  Australia 1,579 .. India 2,024 1,411  Singapore (3) 1,286 
..
Australia 1,599 ..  United States (2) 1,089 1,052 Korea, Republic of 425 361  Norway 761 707 Hong Kong, China (4) 410 ..  Colombia 645 849 Croatia 372 314  Korea, Republic of 486 630 Ukraine 310 452  Venezuela, Rep. Bol. 431 437 Colombia 271 217  Croatia 303 232 Argentina 167 156  Ukraine 281 212 Serbia, Republic of 137 131  Argentina 200 185 Kazakhstan 120 118  Serb ia, Republic of 125 128 
Venezuela, Rep. Bol. 71 72  Hong Kong, China (4) 103 
..
FYROM 57 40  Pakistan 80 149 Pakistan 55 36  Belarus 75 74 Mozambique 48 91  Bangladesh 69 63 Belarus 43 53  FYROM 50 52 Bangladesh 34 17  Mozambique 46 115 Swaziland 23 25  Swaziland 44 59 Paraguay 19 22  Namibia 44 45 
       
             
Sources : IMF Balance-of-Payments statistics, (1) Eurost at, (2) Survey of Current Business - October 2010  
(US Bureau of Economic Analysis), (3) International trad e in services 2008 (Singapore De partment of Statistics), 
(4) OECD.       
Note:  Data sorted by year 2008 in descending order.      
       
  S/C/W/334 
 Page 19 
 
 
   
Table 2:  The 2009 Top 200 international design firms 
Volume  
Domestic International Total 
US$ bill. % Chg. US$ bill. % Chg. US$ bill. % Chg.  
Revenue 
59.4 -7.4 52.4 -0.3 111.8 -4.2 
Type of work (revenue) 
 US$ million Per cent of total 
Building 8,504.6 16.2 
Manufacturing 404.1 0.8 
Industrial 3,851.3 7.3 
Petroleum 17,507.8 33.4 
Water 2,755.7 5.3 
Sewer/waste 1,762.8 3.4 
Transportation 8,985.5 17.1 
Hazardous Waste 2,090.4 4.0 
Power 4,469.6 8.5 
Telecommunications 209.9 0.4 
Other 1,906.7 3.6 
Countries/Regions 
 Number of firms Revenue (US$ mill.) Per cent of total 
Canada 76 5,607.4 10.7 
United States 54 6,243.8 11.9 
Latin America 125 3,161.1 6.0 
Caribbean Islands 65 422.5 0.8 
Europe 135 12,430.9 23.7 
Middle East 166 9,530.4 18.2 
Asia/Australia 164 10,972.5 20.9 
Africa 134 4,075.8 7.8 
Artic/Antarctic 5 4.0 0.0 
Source :  Engineering News Record, 26 July 2010. 
Note : "Design firms" is a broad category that includes different types of firms: architect, engineer, engineer-contractor, 
architect-engineer, engineer-architect, environmental, geotec hnical engineer, landscape architect, and planer. Firms classified  
themselves under each of these categories for the purposes of the ENR survey. 
 S/C/W/334 
Page 20  
 
  Table 3. Market Shares of the To p 200 International Design Firms 
INTERNATIONAL REVENUE 
Firm Nationality Number of firms 
US$ mill.  % 
AMERICAN 70 18,169.6 34.6 
CANADIAN 8 3,969.4 7.6 
EUROPEAN 61 20,303.7 38.7 
 British 8 6,097.2 11.6 
 German 8 1,372.2 2.6 
 French 7 1,918.6 3.7  Dutch 7 5,975.9 11.4 
 Italian 12 863.6 1.6 
 Other 19 4,076.1 7.8 AUSTRALIAN 8 3,784.6 7.2 
JAPANESE 12 1,279.7 2.4 
CHINESE 21 2,045.3 3.9 KOREAN 6 272.2 0.5 
ALL OTHERS 14 2,620.0 5.0 
ALL FIRMS 200 52,444.4 100.0 
Source:  Engineering News Record, 26 July 2010 
Note : "Design firms" is a broad category that includes different types of firms: architect, engineer, engineer-contractor, 
architect-engineer, engineer-architect, environmental, geotec hnical engineer, landscape architect, and planer. Firms classified  
themselves under each of these categories for the purposes of the ENR survey. 
 
 
Table 4. Revenue of the Top 200 International Design Firms 
Domestic International Total  
US$ billion % Chg US$ billion % Chg US$ billion % Chg 
2008 64.1 +11.9 52.6 +22.4 116.8 +16.4 
2009 58.4 -7.4 52.4 -0.3 111.8 -4.2 
Source :  Engineering News Record 
Note : "Design firms" is a broad category that includes different types of firms: architect, engineer, engineer-contractor, 
architect-engineer, engineer-architect, environmental, geotec hnical engineer, landscape architect, and planer. Firms classified  
themselves under each of these categories for the purposes of the ENR survey. 
 
  
Table 5. Summary of Specific Commitments  
  Engineering  Integrated  Related Scientific and  
Members Services Engineering Services Technical Consulting 
Services 
Albania X X X 
Antigua and 
Barbuda X     
Argentina X     
Armenia X X   
Australia X X X 
Austria X X X 
Barbados       
Belize       
Botswana X X   
Brazil X     
Brunei Darussalam       
Bulgaria X X   
Burundi       
Cambodia X X X  S/C/W/334 
 Page 21 
 
 
    Engineering  Integrated  Related Scientific and  
Members Services Engineering Services Technical Consulting 
Services 
Canada X X X 
Cape Verde X X X 
Chile X     
China X X X 
Colombia       
Congo RP       
Costa Rica     X 
Côte d'Ivoire X     
Croatia X X X 
Cuba X     
Cyprus       
Czech Republic X X X 
Djibouti X     
Dominican Republic X X X 
Ecuador X   X 
El Salvador X     
Estonia       
European Union X X X 
Finland X X X 
FYR Macedonia X X X 
Gambia X X X 
Georgia X X X 
Guinea       
Guyana X     
Haiti       
Hong Kong       
Hungary X X X 
Iceland X X X 
India X     
Indonesia X X   
Israel X X X 
Jamaica X     
Japan X X X 
Jordan X   X 
Korea RP X X X 
Kuwait X X X 
Kyrgyz Republic X   X 
Latvia X X X 
Lesotho X X X 
Liechtenstein X X X 
Lithuania X X X 
Malawi       
Malaysia X X   
Maldives       
Mexico X     
Moldova X X X 
Mongolia X   X S/C/W/334 
Page 22  
 
    Engineering  Integrated  Related Scientific and  
Members Services Engineering Services Technical Consulting 
Services 
Morocco X     
Namibia     X 
Nepal X X X 
New Zealand X     
Norway X X X 
Oman X X X 
Pakistan X X   
Panama X X X 
Papua New Guinea X     
Peru X     
Poland X     
Qatar       
Romania X     
Rwanda       
Saudi Arabia X X X 
Senegal X     
Sierra Leone X X X 
Singapore X   X 
Slovak Republic X X X 
Slovenia X X   
Solomon Islands X     
South Africa X X X 
Swaziland X X   
Sweden X X X 
Switzerland X X X 
Chinese Taipei X X X 
Thailand X     
Tonga X X   
Trinidad and 
Tobago       
Turkey X     
Ukraine X X   
United Arab 
Emirates X   X 
USA X X   
Venezuela X X X 
Viet Nam X X X 
Zambia       
Total 78 50 47 
Source :  WTO     
  S/C/W/334 
 Page 23 
 
 
  Table 6. Level of commitments (percentage by mode of supply) 
Cross-border Consumption 
Abroad Commercial 
Presence Natural Persons 
 Full Part. No Full Part. No Full Part. No Full Part. No 
MARKET ACCESS 
Engineering Services 50 18 32 54 17 29 44 35 21 10 68 22 
Integrated 
Engineering Services 39 7 54 41 7 52 33 16 51 7 43 50 
NATIONAL TREATMENT 
Engineering Services 41 26 33 51 19 30 44 34 22 13 61 26 
Integrated 
Engineering Services 35 10 54 39 8 53 38 9 53 10 38 52 
Note 1:  Percentage may not add up to 100 due to rounding.   
Note 2:  Basis of total is selected sector.  
Note 3:  Does not take acc ount of horizontal limitations 
 
  
__________