WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  WT/COMTD/AFT/W/9 
10 October 2008 
 (08-4836) 
Committee on Trade and Development 
Aid for Trade  
 
 
 
WTO WORK PROGRAMME ON AID FOR TRADE 
 
RESULTS OF THE SYMPOSIUM ON MONITORING AND EVALUATION 
15-16 SEPTEMBER 2008 
 
"IDENTIFYING INDICATORS FOR MONITORING AID FOR TRADE" 
 
Background Note by the Secretariat  
 
 
I. INTRODUCTION 
1. The aim of the symposium was to help identif y suitable indicators for monitoring the WTO 
work programme on Aid for Trade on the basis of th e results of the first Global Review of Aid for 
Trade in November 2007 when it was suggested inter alia  that future monitoring should aim to begin 
tracking progress in the implementation and the impact of Aid for Trade. 
2. Background material for the monitoring exercise was provided in the note for the symposium 
(WT/COMTD/AFT/W/8), which drew attention in particular to the following: 
• With regard to monitoring, the 2006 Task Force on Aid for Trade recommended that 
beneficiary countries should "report on trad e mainstreaming in national development 
strategies, such as PRSPs, the formulation of  trade strategies, Aid-for-Trade needs, donor 
responses, and implementation and impact".  Donors should "report on funds dedicated to Aid 
for Trade, how they intend to meet their annou nced Aid-for-Trade targets, the Aid-for-Trade 
categories covered, and their progress in mainstreaming trade into their aid programming".  International agencies should "report regularly  on their Aid-for-Trade activities, progress and 
impact".
1 
• In his December 2006 report on how the Task Force recommendations should be 
implemented2, the Director-General proposed that monitoring take place on three levels 
covering, respectively, a global assessment of Aid-for-Trade flows, individual donor and 
agency progress on additionality and effectiveness, and in-country assessments of whether 
trade needs are being met, financial resour ces are being provided, and Aid for Trade is 
effective on the ground. 
• The Director-General proposed also that th e WTO's role should be largely limited to 
providing "outputs" – evaluating information a nd disseminating results and best practices – 
while relying on the experience in this area of other agencies and organizations in addition to 
                                                      
1 WT/AFT/1, Recommendations of the Task Force on Aid for Trade . 
2 JOB(06)/262, Follow-up to the Aid-for-Trade Task Force Recommendations, WTO Monitoring and 
Evaluation , Report by the Director-General. WT/COMTD/AFT/W/9 
Page 2  
 
  resources on the ground to provide the necessary "inputs" for the monitoring exercise – 
including data, information and case studies. 
3. The Director-General's 2008 Aid-for-Trade Ro admap that was presented to the Committee on 
Trade and Development (CTD) in February 2008 se t out several tasks for improving the quality of 
information available for the monitoring exercise.
3 
4. One is to update the donor/agency and the partner (recipient) country questionnaires on Aid 
for Trade and to find ways to increase partner count ry involvement in the preparation of, and response 
to, these questionnaires.  At the symposium, the OE CD Secretariat reported on steps that were being 
taken to revise the questionnaires so as to improve the quality, the timeliness and the usefulness of the 
information that can be provided for the monitoring exercise in the WTO.  Following consultations by 
the OECD Secretariat with member governments and other stakeholders a new draft of the partner 
country questionnaire will be discussed at an info rmal meeting of the CTD on 13 October.  Once 
finalized, the questionnaires will be circulated to  capitals, arrangements  will be made among the 
intergovernmental organizations represented on the Director-General's Aid-fo r-Trade Advisory Group 
to assist, on request, developing countries and LDCs  to fill out the questionnaires, the responses will 
be summarized by the OECD and WTO Secretariats, and the results will be presented as a 
contribution to the monitoring exercise in the WTO. 
5. A second task is to examine how information on Ai d for Trade that is collected in the context 
of WTO Trade Policy Reviews (TPRs) can contribut e to the monitoring exercise, and how input from 
the work carried out under the Enhanced Integrated Framework (EIF) can be used so as to provide 
more detailed supplementary information on various aspects of progress being made by individual 
LDCs to implement their Aid for Trade strategies.  The WTO Secretariat is handling this task and will 
report on its conclusions to the CTD in due course. 
6. A third task contained in the Director-General's  Roadmap is to identify a cluster of indicators 
to benchmark progress in building trade capacity.  This was the main focus and objective of the symposium. 
II. MONITORING PROGRESS IN BUILDING TRADE CAPACITY 
7. In selecting indicators for use in the Aid-for-Tra de monitoring exercise in the WTO, a number 
of factors should be kept in mind. 
8. One is that the indicators should be used to provide factual information about the 
implementation and impact of the Aid-for-Trade wo rk programme, not to try to point to possible 
causation between different variables or to make nor mative statements about what the proper state of 
affairs ought to be.  It is the responsibility of WTO Members through the m onitoring exercise in the 
CTD and the global review to analyse the situati on on the basis of the indicators and to draw any 
conclusions that they think are appropriate. 
9. A second is that the monitoring exercise that was agreed to by the General Council on the 
basis of the recommendations of the Ai d-for-Trade Task Force needs to be  well focused if it is to be 
manageable and meaningful.  It needs to cover, at  a minimum, flows of Aid for Trade, their use in 
terms of progress made in building trade capacity in  developing countries, in particular LDCs, and 
their trade impact in terms of improvements in the trade performance of the recipient countries.  The 
Task Force recommended that it cover also a number of process issues that are related to successful 
collaboration between donors and beneficiaries, such as mainstreaming trade into national 
                                                     
 
3 WT/COMTD/AFT/W/6.  WT/COMTD/AFT/W/9 
 Page 3 
 
 
  development strategies in the case of beneficiari es, and mainstreaming trade into aid programming in 
the case of donors.   
10. The matter of coverage of the monitoring exerci se is one for Members to decide, but there is 
widespread support for keeping the exercise well-targ eted at the key variables that are considered 
central to the success of the Ai d-for-Trade work programme, to base it on a limited number of 
indicators, and to aim for simplicity and clarity even at the expense of being less than comprehensive, 
particularly since the mandate for the General C ouncil at the global reviews is to provide political 
guidance to the Aid-for-Trade work programme, not  to engage in a complex technical debate. 
11. There seemed to be general support at the sy mposium for breaking the monitoring exercise 
into three main elements, as follows, so as to be gin tracking progress in the implementation and the 
impact of Aid for Trade in building trade capacity at the global, the regional and the country levels: 
• Aid-for-Trade flows .  Data on financial flows allow th e supply-side of the Aid-for-Trade 
equation to be monitored, and provide a context within which to analyse factors that affect 
the demand for Aid for Trade and factors that affect the success of the process of matching 
supply with demand at the individual country and/or regional level. 
 
• Aid-for-Trade resource use and trade performance .  This is the demand side of the Aid- 
for-Trade equation.  The working hypothesis is  that building trade capacity is a necessary 
condition for increasing international compe titiveness and improving the trade performance 
of developing countries, particularly the LDCs.  However, building trade capacity is usually 
not a sufficient condition.  Trade policies and pr o-trade development policies matter as well.  
These can exercise a strong influence over (a) whether a recipient country is successful in 
attracting additional Aid for Trade, and (b) whet her the increased trade capacity that results 
from the investment of Aid for Trade is used effectively to improve trade performance.   
 
• Assessing trade development needs, integrating them into the design of national 
development strategies, and building collabo rative partnerships between donors and 
beneficiaries .  The process of matching resources with needs is crucial to the successful 
implementation of the Aid-for-Trade work programme.  It is up to each country/region to 
make its case for attracting additional flows of Aid for Trade to help build up its trade 
capacity, and to back up its case with improve ments, where necessary, in its trade and 
development policy framework and in its nati onal or regional Aid-for-Trade strategy.  
International development organizations can assist developing countries, and low-income 
countries in particular, to play their part in constructing a successful relationship with their 
donor partners.  Responsibility for building a co llaborative partnership for accessing Aid for 
Trade is shared by donors and recipient countries/regions.   
 
III. SELECTING INDICATORS FOR  MONITO RING THE AID FOR TRADE WORK 
PROGRAMME 
12. Two types of indicators are needed to conduct the monitoring exercise.   
13. "Macro" indicators provide the means of monitoring overall progress at the global level, of 
benchmarking the main trends in Aid for Trade and of making comparisons across countries and regions.  There is a good range of  off-the-shelf indicators of th is kind available from databases 
collected and published by intergovernmental organiza tions, that can be accessed in a relatively easy 
and consistent way.   
14. 
"Micro" indicators are suited to monitoring progress at a more detailed level, for example 
through case studies of Aid-for-Trade programmes at th e level of individual co untries and sub-regions WT/COMTD/AFT/W/9 
Page 4  
 
  to help better understand what works and what do es not work when it comes to mobilizing Aid-for- 
Trade resources, and to take account of the impor tance of differentiating one case from another in 
terms of national and regional priorities.  The Di rector-General's Aid-for-Trade Roadmap for 2008 
makes provision for case studies to be conducted at na tional and sub-regional reviews that are being 
organized by the Regional Development Banks.  Mate rial from these reviews will form an important 
source of information for conducting the monitoring exer cise at the time of the next global review, as 
will the material gathered from the responses of  individual Members to the Aid-for-Trade 
questionnaires that have been prepared by the OECD. 
1. Aid-for-Trade flows 
Illustrative list of indicators 
Macro: OECD CRS database. 
Micro:
  Reports from individual donors and beneficiaries (e.g., E.U. AfT 
Monitoring Report; U.S. MCC country profiles); 
 Reports on Aid-for-Trade grants and loans, as well as technical 
assistance and training activities, of multilateral and regional development banks and other  development agencies.  (e.g., 
World Bank "Business Warehouse" database). 
 
15. The symposium confirmed that the OECD DA C's existing data collection and reporting 
system (the Creditor Reporting System, or CRS) s hould continue to be used as the principal data 
source and core indicator on Aid-for-Trade flows for monitoring purposes in the CTD and in future 
global reviews.  The 2006 Task Force noted that the CRS is well placed to provide a global assessment of Aid-for-Trade flows, and CRS data were  used successfully at the 2007 Global Review.   
16. There was broad support for complementing the CRS data on Aid-for-Trade flows with 
material from individual donors, recipient countries and international financ ial institutions on their 
specific Aid-for-Trade activities so as to present a fuller picture of what Aid-for-Trade flows are 
taking place and what additional resources are being delivered, as well as to increase the transparency 
of donor targets and actual disbursements.  In the cas e of donors, for example, it has been noted that 
the data they supply to the OECD for inclusion in  the CRS database do not always equate with the 
data that they themselves collect on their Aid-for-T rade activities, in part because of the different 
ways in which trade-related ODA is defined by different donors, particularly in the area of 
infrastructure and other trade-related needs.  That  point applies also to multilateral and regional 
agencies.
4  An additional point in the case of the agencies is that much of their assistance is in the 
form of non-concessional loans to middle-income developing countries as well as in the form of 
technical assistance, project preparation, etc.  This  is reported to the OECD, but it is not included in 
the CRS calculation of global Aid-for-Trade fl ows since the financing does not qualify as ODA. 
17. It was suggested at the symposium that the CTD should take up the issue of additionality, to 
try to clarify the concept and to find a better indicator that might capture it.  
                                                      
4 There has been no support for trying to agree on a common definition of ODA for trade-related 
infrastructure for everyone to apply in the context of the WTO's Aid-for-Trade work programme, in part 
because it is felt that this would turn out to be a very re source-intensive exercise with probably limited value.  A 
more practical conclusion for purposes  of the monitoring exercise in the WTO is therefore to complement the 
CRS data, as the core indicator, with reports on Aid-for-Trade flows from individual donors and agencies to 
supplement the information contained in their responses to the questionnaires.  WT/COMTD/AFT/W/9 
 Page 5 
 
 
  2. Resource use and trade performance 
Macro: Logistics Performan ce Indices (World Bank); 
 Doing Business database  "Trading Across Borders" Index (World 
Bank/IFC); 
 Trade Performance Indices (ITC); 
 World Trade Indicators; 5 main "macro" indicators (World Bank); 
 Trade Profiles (WTO); 
 World Investment Report;  FDI flows data (UNCTAD); 
 Country Policy and Institutional Assessment database (WB); 
 African Competitiveness Report  "Competitivess Profiles" (AfDB, 
WB and WEF). 
Micro: Case studies of national and regional/sub-regional AfT projects 
and programmes (e.g. COMESA-EAC-SADC Regional Trade 
Facilitation Programme; Mauritius 10-year AfT compliant reform agenda). 
 
18. The relationship between trade capacity-building and trade performance lies at the heart of the 
WTO's Aid-for-Trade work programme, and the sy mposium took up the recommendation made at the 
first Global Review that future monitoring should start to track progress in implementation and the 
impact of Aid for Trade.  It focused on identifying  macro-level indicators of the progress that is being 
made in building trade capacity in developing co untries, especially the LDCs, and the consequent 
trade impact in terms of improvements in the trad e performance of these countries.  Key elements of 
trade capacity-building that were highlighted for th e monitoring exercise were infrastructure and trade 
logistics, including trade facilitation.   
19. It was noted that the relationship between th e investment of Aid-for-Trade resources in 
capacity-building on the one hand, and trade performance on the other, was complex, given the 
number of other factors that can affect a country 's trade performance.  Two factors that were 
highlighted as worthy of monitoring in that regard  were a country's domestic regulatory environment, 
including its openness to trade, and trad e policies affecting its exports.   
20. The symposium recognized the importance of complementing macro-indicators of capacity-
building and trade performance with micro-indicators drawn from case studies of national and regional or sub-regional Aid-for-Trade projects and programmes.  A point made in that respect was 
that it was more important to assess the impact of  Aid for Trade in terms of whether the specific 
national or regional strategies and priorities under wh ich it is invested are meeting their objectives, 
rather than whether it contributes to cutting a per ceived regional or global deficit in trade capacity 
such as infrastructure or adjustment.  WT/COMTD/AFT/W/9 
Page 6  
 
  3. Assessing needs, integrating them into national development strategies, and building 
collaborative partnerships between donors and beneficiaries 
Macro: Compilation of responses to OECD donor and partner-country 
questionnaires; 
 Surveys of PRSPs (e.g., UNDP study); 
 Other evidence of mainstreaming (DTISs from EIF). 
Micro: Individual responses to donor and partner-country questionnaires; 
 Progress in implementation of DTIS projects in individual LDCs;  
 Case studies of national and regional/sub-regional AfT projects 
and programmes (e.g., EPA/FTA programmes). 
 
21. Targets for this element of the monitoring exer cise were identified by the 2006 Task Force, 
which recommended that recipient countries, th rough their National Aid-for-Trade Committees, 
should " report on trade mainstreaming in national d evelopment strategies, such as PRSPs, the 
formulation of trade strategies, Aid-for-Trade needs [and] donor responses ", and donors should 
report on " their progress in mainstreaming trade into their aid programming ".  The symposium 
endorsed these as key variables that  needed to be monitored regularly, in particular the trade 
mainstreaming objectives of both donors and recipient countries. 
22. The micro-level, case-study approach for indivi dual countries and/or sub-regions was felt to 
be critically important for this element of the mon itoring exercise, particularly given the wide variety 
of factors that affect each recipient country's s ituation when it comes to setting priorities and seeking 
donor or agency support, and since it is at this le vel that the key conditions are established that allow 
progress to be made in advancing national Aid-for-Tra de strategies.  For that reason, it was felt that 
this part of the monitoring exercise may best be  conducted around in-depth ex aminations of national 
and regional experience and of best practices, selec ting different candidates for examination at Global 
Review.    
23. An important source of information available to  the WTO for this part of the monitoring 
exercise will be the responses to the donor and partner (recipient) country questionnaires that are being prepared by the OECD.  The results will be summarized by the OECD and WTO Secretariats and presented to the CTD and the next global review.   
24. In addition, the WTO Secretariat will draw on material available on in-country assessments 
on Aid for Trade from the TPR reports and from work  carried out under the EIF to prepare a summary 
of country and sub-regional experiences for consider ation in the CTD, including evidence of countries 
mainstreaming trade into their national developmen t strategies for which additional inputs will be 
sought from the World Bank and ITC.  A UNDP-sponsor ed survey of 72 PRSPs (those available up to 
April 2008) drew considerable interest at the sy mposium as a tool for monitoring the mainstreaming 
of trade into national development strategies, but as was noted this is not an exercise that will be 
repeated on a regular basis.  It was suggested th at the CTD could give more thought to how such 
information might be collected periodically, although without engaging the WTO or other agencies in a time- and resource-intensive exercise of constructing new databases. 
__________