WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  WT/TPR/249 
29 October 2009 
 (09-5376) 
Trade Policy Review Body  
  
 
TRADE POLICY REVIEW MECHANISM 
 
Report of the Trade Policy Review Body for 2009
 
 
Chairperson:  H.E. Mr. István Major (Hungary) 
 
 1. The Trade Policy Review Mech anism (TPRM) was established in 1989 on a provisional basis 
and confirmed by Annex 3 of the Marrakesh Agreem ent establishing the WTO.  Since then the Trade 
Policy Review Body (TPRB) has appraised the operation of the TPRM three times.
1  The third 
appraisal, conducted in 2008, found that the TPRM f unctioned effectively and that its objectives, as 
defined in Annex 3, were being achieved.  The appraisal also introduced a number of procedural 
improvements, subsequently incorporated in revi sed Rules of Procedure for Meetings of the TPRB2, 
thus continuing a process by Members of keeping the Mechanism under frequent review. 
2. This Report by the Trade Policy Review Body provides a brief assessment of the TPRM, and 
reports on the reviews of Members conducted in 200 9.  Tables are annexed showing the Members that 
will have been reviewed up to the end of 2009, the geographical coverage of the reviews conducted to 
date, as well as the proposed programme of reviews for the year 2010. 
Objectives of the TPRM  
3. Annex 3 of the Marrakesh Agreement states the objectives of the TPRM as: "to contribute to 
improved adherence by all Members to rules,  disciplines and commitments made under the 
Multilateral Trade Agreements and, where applicable , the Plurilateral Trade Agreements, and hence to 
the smoother functioning of the multilateral trading system, by achieving greater transparency in, and 
understanding of, the trade policies and practices of Members". 
4. In this regard, the TPRM is re quired to periodically review the trade policies and practices of 
all Members.  By the end of 2009, the TPRM will ha ve conducted 305 reviews since its formation, at 
224 review meetings (Annex I).  The reviews ha ve covered 136 of 153 Members, representing some 
97% of the share of world trade.  The trade policies and practices of one Member were reviewed for 
the first time during 2009.3 
5. The Trade Policy Review Body will have c onducted 21 reviews in 2009 (Annex II).  The 
Secretariat reports for the reviews of Guatemala, Fiji, Niger and Senegal were prepared with the 
assistance of consultants, under the close supervis ion of Secretariat staff.  Dutch and German 
financing in support of TPRs proved invaluable in pr eparing the reviews of Georgia, Guatemala, Fiji, 
                                                      
1 WTO documents WT/MIN(99)/2, 8 October 1999, WT/MIN(05)1, 21 September 2005, and 
WT/TPR/229, 11 November 2008. 
2 WTO document WT/TPR/6/Rev.2. 
3 This was Georgia. WT/TPR/249 
Page 2  
 
  Maldives, Mozambique, Niger, Senegal,  SACU, Solomon Islands, and Zambia.
4  The Secretariat's 
reports continue to be prepared in close consulta tion with the authorities of the Member under review. 
6. Procedures for the reviews conducted in 2009 ha ve generally run smoothly.  Responses to 
requests for documentation and questionnaires have normally been provided at or close to the 
requested dates.  In line with recent practice, th e Secretariat has attempted to reduce the burden on 
Members under review of providing responses by using,  to the extent possible, alternative sources of 
documentation, including Members' official web-sites or  other authentic sites on the Internet.  It has 
not been possible to do this for all Members under review, and requests for documentation continue to 
be followed up with a detailed questionnaire when  sufficient information is not available from 
alternative sources.  Secretariat visits to capitals  have continued to be productive, and comments 
provided on Secretariat drafts have been pertinent;  close contact with the Member under review  is 
necessary to help ensure the factual accuracy an d clarity of the documentation prepared for the 
Review.  The result is that the quality, content, and style of the reviews have been maintained. 
7. The reviews conducted in 2009 were relatively evenly spaced throughout the period, reducing 
pressure of preparation on the Membership for revi ew meetings at close intervals.  Efforts also 
continue to be made to avoid clashes with other meetings at the WTO;  nevertheless, clashes do 
happen. 
8. The Trade Policy Review programme for 2010 comprises 19 review dates for 21 Members 
(Annex III). 
9. The TPRB intends to continue to  provide an evenly spaced programme of reviews in 2010, 
thereby avoiding a concentration of reviews a nd delays that have occurred in the past. 
Value of the TPRM  
10. As envisaged in Annex 3, the TPRM conti nues to be a valuable forum for achieving 
transparency in, and understanding of, the trade policies and practices of Members, thus contributing to the smoother functioning of the multilateral tradi ng system.  It provides a forum in which Members 
may openly discuss and provide an objective analysis of each others' trade policies and practices.  The 
reports prepared by the Secretariat provide a factua l and independent review of the trade policies and 
practices of individual Members under review and ar e, in general, appreciated by both the Member(s) 
under review and the overall Membership.  By pr oviding an overall picture of the institutional 
interaction in trade policy formulation and implem entation and the effect of policies on different 
sectors, the reports have also served as an input to trade policy formulation in some cases.  In 
addition, several developing and least developed c ountry Members have found the reviews valuable in 
highlighting their infrastructural constr aints and technical assistance needs.  
11. While carrying out an assessment of the Member s' trade policies and practices, the review 
process also discusses the economic impact of trade measures, and places the trade and economic regimes of individual Members within the broader cont ext of developments in their region.  Given the 
growing importance of regional trade agreements a nd groupings, the analysis in the reports has proved 
useful in discussing the wider impact of recent econom ic developments in certain regions, as well as 
the more general question of the impact of regionalism on the multilateral trading system.  
                                                     
 
4 The Kingdom of the Netherlands and the Federal Republic of Germany make financing available 
under the DDA Global Trust Fund to undertake reviews of the "poorest and most vulnerable" countries and to 
facilitate the trade-policy review process to better adapt to the requirements of these countries.  WT/TPR/249 
 Page 3 
 
 
  Points emerging from the 2009 reviews  
12. While each review highlights the specific issues and measures concerning the individual 
Member, certain common themes emerged during the c ourse of the reviews conducted in 2009.  These 
included: 
• transparency in trade policy-making and implementation; 
• economic environment and trade liberalization; 
• implementation of the WTO Agreements; 
• regional trade agreements and their relati onship with the multilateral trading system; 
• tariff issues, including peaks, escalation, preferences, rationalization and the gap 
between applied and bound rates; 
• customs clearance procedures; 
• import and export restrictions and licensing procedures; 
• the use of contingency measures such as anti-dumping and countervailing duties; 
• technical and sanitary measures and market access; 
• standards and their equivalence with international norms; 
• trade-related intellectual property ri ghts legislation and enforcement; 
• government procurement policies and practices5; 
• state involvement in the economy and privatization programmes; 
• trade-related competition and investment policy issues; 
• incentive measures such as s ubsidies and tax forgone; 
• sectoral trade-policy issues, particularly liberalization in agriculture and certain 
services sectors; 
• GATS commitments;  
• special and differential treatment, including market access and implementation, 
particularly for customs valuation, TRIPS and TRIMs;  and 
• technical assistance in implementing the WTO Agreements and the experience with 
Aid for Trade, and the Enhanced Integrated Framework. 
Coverage of least developed countries (LDCs)  
13. The Trade Policy Review Body's Report to the Singapore Ministerial Meeting suggested that 
greater attention be paid to the coverage of LDCs  in the preparation of the TPRB timetable, and the 
1999 Appraisal of the operation of the TPRM also drew attention to this matter.  The TPRB has 
continued to review a steady number of least developed Members.  Of the 32 least developed 
Members of the WTO, 27 will have been reviewed by the end of 2009.6,7 
14. Trade Policy Reviews of LDCs have increasingly performed a technical assistance function 
and have been useful in increasing understanding of the trade policy structure in place and its 
relationship with the WTO Agreements.  The revi ews have also enhanced understanding in these 
countries of the WTO Agreements, enabling better compliance and integration in the multilateral 
                                                      
5 This has been discussed even in cases where Me mbers are not party to the plurilateral Agreement on 
Government Procurement. 
6 The least developed countries reviewed since th e establishment of the M echanism are:  Angola, 
Bangladesh (three times), Benin (twice), Burkina Faso (twice), Burundi, Chad, Central African Republic, 
Djibouti, Gambia, Guinea (twice), Haiti, Lesotho (three times), Madagascar (twice), Malawi, Maldives, Mali 
(twice), Mauritania, Mozambique (twice), Niger (twice) , Rwanda, Senegal (three times), Sierra Leone, the 
Solomon Islands (twice), Tanzania (t wice), Togo (twice), Uganda (three  times), and Zambia (three times). 
7 The least developed country Members of the WTO yet to be reviewed are:  Cambodia, Democratic 
Republic of Congo, Guinea-Bissau, Myanmar, and Nepal.   WT/TPR/249 
Page 4  
 
  trading system;  in some cases, better interaction between government agencies has been facilitated by 
the reviews.  The reports' wide coverage of Memb ers' policies also enables Members to identify any 
shortcomings in policy and specific areas where further technical assistance may be required. 
15. Since 2000, the preparation of reviews of LDCs has responded more systematically to 
technical assistance needs.  The review process fo r an LDC now includes a seminar on the WTO and, 
in particular, the trade policy review exercise and th e role of trade in economic policy;  such seminars 
have been held during 2009 for the review proc ess of Benin, Burkina Faso, The Gambia, Mali, 
Malawi, Niger, Senegal, and Solomon Islands.  In addition, similar exercises were conducted in the 
preparation of the reviews of other Members, in cluding Albania, Armenia, Croatia, the Dominican 
Republic, Guyana, and SACU countries.  The Secretar iat Report for an LDC review includes a section 
on technical assistance needs and priorities, as iden tified in cooperation with the Member concerned, 
with a view to feeding this into the Enhanced In tegrated Framework process.  The seminars and the 
technical assistance section in the Secretariat reports involve close cooperation with the WTO's 
Development Division and Institute for Tr aining and Technical Cooperation Division. 
16. Following specific requests by some Members, the Secretariat also organized ex-post 
seminars to discuss the outcome of the trade policy review process with domestic stakeholders.  Such 
seminars were conducted in Came roon, on behalf of CEEAC (the six CEMAC countries - Cameroon, 
Chad, Congo, Gabon, Equatorial Guinea, and Cent ral African Republic - plus the Democratic 
Republic of Congo, and Sao-Tomé-and-Principe), th e Dominican Republic, and Guyana (to take place 
in November). 
Monitoring of trade and trade-related measures
 
17. Annex 3 (D) of the Marrakesh Agreement establishing the TPRM calls for Members, in 
between reviews, to provide information on signifi cant trade policy changes.  The WTO Secretariat 
has monitored on a regular basis during the year the trade and trade-related de velopments of Members 
and Observer Governments in the context of the financial and economic cr isis.  Reports by the 
Director-General were discussed at  Informal Meetings of the TPRB.8  The WTO Secretariat has 
closely consulted with all delegati ons to gather complete, up-to-date and accurate information on their 
trade and trade-related measures, and has received good cooperation. 
18. Members and Observer Governments welcomed this exercise and appreciated the 
methodology developed by the Secretariat to prepare the Director-General’s reports.  They found this 
exercise to be valuable in providing additional tr ansparency to trade policy developments around the 
world and a useful instrument to highlight the need to resist protectionism, in particular during this 
period of global crisis. 
19. The information and analysis contained in the Director-General’s monitoring reports will be 
consolidated and presented in his Annual Overview  of Developments in the International Trading 
Environment, as called for by paragraph G of Annex 3.  This report is expected to be discussed by the 
TPRB in November 2009.9 
Conclusion  
20. The Trade Policy Review Mechanism provid es a forum in which Members discuss each 
others' trade policies in a transparent and frank manner .  The forum is unique in that the separation of 
                                                      
8 These reports were subsequently distributed in documents WTO/TPR/OV/W/1, dated 20 April 2009, 
and WT/TPR/OV/W/2 dated 15 July 2009. 
9 The Annual Overview was suspended over the pa st years due to duplication with other WTO main 
publications, such as the World Trade Report and the Annual Activities Report.  WT/TPR/249 
 Page 5 
 
 
  the TPRM from the compliance and dispute settlement aspects of WTO work allows an open debate.  
The 21 reviews conducted in 2009 have been satisf actory, and have met deadlines agreed with the 
Members. The reviews have been relatively evenly spaced throughout  the period, giving adequate 
time to Members to prepare for the meetings.  The discussants have continued to play a very useful 
role in assisting the discussion during the reviews.  The programme for 2010, similarly, aims to avoid 
delays and concentration of reviews. 
21. The TPRM continues to function effectively in me eting its transparency goals.  However, as 
the Membership of the WTO increases, the pressure  on the TPRB to review more Members grows.  
This, and the limited resources available to the Secr etariat to prepare the reviews, makes it important 
to keep the Mechanism functioning as effectively as po ssible within these constraints.  In particular, 
continued cooperation between Members and the Secretar iat in preparing the reports is essential, as is 
the respect of deadlines, in order to maintain th e standard and quality of the reports, and in the 
successful reviews of Members by the TPRB. WT/TPR/249 
Page 6  
 
  Annex  I
  
TRADE POLICY REVIEWS  
WTO Members reviewed, 1989-2009  
Europe/Middle East Asia/Pacific Africa America 
Austria1 Australia (5) Angolab Argentina (3) 
Bahrain (2) Bangladeshb (3) Beninb,2 (2) Antigua and Barbuda2 (2) 
Bulgaria1 Brunei Darussalam (2) Botswana2 (3) Barbados (2) 
Cyprus1 China (2) Burkina Fasob,2 (2) Belize 
Czech Republic1 (2) Chinese Taipei Burundib Bolivia (3) 
European Communities (9) Fiji (2) Cameroon2 (3) Brazil (5) 
Finland1 Georgiaa Chadb Canada (8) 
Hungary1 (2) Hong Kong, China (5) Central African Republicb Chile (4) 
Iceland (3) India (4) Congo Colombia (3) 
Israel (3) Indonesia (5) Côte d'Ivoire Costa Rica (3) 
Liechtenstein2 (3) Japan (9) Djiboutib Dominica2 (2) 
Norway (5) Korea, Rep. of  (5) Egypt (3) Dominican Republic (3) 
Poland1 (2) Kyrgyz Republic Gabon2 (2) Ecuador 
Qatar Macao, China (3)  Gambiab El Salvador (2) 
Romania1 (3) Malaysia (4) Ghana (3) Guatemala (2) 
Slovak Republic1 (2) Maldivesb (2) Guineab  (2) Grenada2 (2) 
Slovenia1 Mongolia Kenya2 (3) Guyana (2) 
Sweden1 (2) New Zealand (4) Lesothob,2 (3) Haitib 
Switzerland2 (5) Pakistan (3) Madagascarb (2) Honduras 
Turkey (4) Papua New Guinea Malawib  Jamaica (2)  
United Arab Emirates Philippines (3) Malib,2 (2) Mexico (4) 
Jordan Singapore (5) Mauritaniab
 Nicaragua (2) 
Oman Solomon Islandsb (2) Mauritius (3) Panama 
 Sri Lanka (2) Morocco (4) Paraguay (2) 
 Thailand (5) Mozambiqueb (2) Peru (3) 
  Namibia2 (3) St.Kitts and Nevis2 (2) 
  Nigerb,2 (2) St.Lucia2 (2) 
  Nigeria (3) St.Vincent & Grenadines2 (2) 
  Rwandab Suriname 
  Senegalb,2 (3) Trinidad and Tobago (2) 
  Sierra Leoneb United States (9) 
  South Africa2 (4) Uruguay (3) 
  Swaziland2 (3) Venezuela (2) 
  Tanzaniab,2 (2)  
  Togob (2)  
  Tunisia (2)  
  Ugandab,2 (3)  
  Zambiab (3)  
  Zimbabwe  
39 Members  
(56 reviews)  25 Members 
(80 reviews) 39 Members 
(82 reviews)  33 Members 
(87 reviews)  
( ) Number of reviews completed where this is greater than one. a First review in 2009. 
b Least developed Member. 
1 Now included in European Communities (EC). 
2 Joint review but counted as individual Members for statistical purposes from 2009. 
 
Reviews conducted at end-2009   = 305 reviews at 224 review meetings 
WTO Members reviewed   = 136 out of 153 Members 
Least-developed WTO Members reviewed   =     27 
Share of world trade of WTO Members reviewed 
(excluding significant double counting and intra-EC trade) =  around 97%  WT/TPR/249 
 Page 7 
 
 
  Annex II  
Trade Policy Reviews conducted in 2009 
 
 
Membera Meeting date 
(scheduled) Review cycle (years) 
Guatemala (2) 04/02/2009 6 
Japan (9) 18/02/2009 2 
Brazil (4) 09/03/2009 4 
Fiji (2) 25/03/2009 6 
EC (9) 06/04/2009 2 
Mozambique* (2) 22/04/2009 6 
Solomon Islands* (2) 06/05/2009 6 
New Zealand (4) 10/06/2009 6 
Morocco (4) 24/06/2009 6 
Guyana (2) 08/07/2009 6 
Zambia* (3) 27/07/2009 6 
Chile (4) 07/10/2009 6 
Maldives* (2) 26/10/2009 6 
Botswana (SACU) (3) 04/11/2009 6 
Lesotho (SACU)* (3) 04/11/2009 6 
Namibia (SACU) (3)  04/11/2009 6 
South Africa (4) / (SACU) (3)  04/11/2009 6 
Swaziland (SACU) (3)  04/11/2009 6 
Niger* (2) 11/11/2009 6 
Senegal* (3)  11/11/2009 6 
Georgia  08/12/2009 6 
 
* Least developed country. 
a Figures in brackets indicate number of reviews. 
 
 
   
Annex III
 
Proposed programme of reviews for 2010 
 
Two-year cycle Chin a, United States 
Four-year cycle Malaysia, Chines e Taipei, Hong Kong, China  
Six-year cycle Albania;  Armenia;  Belize;  Benin*;  Burkina Faso*;  Croatia; 
El Salvador;  Gambia*;  Honduras;  Jamaica;  Malawi*;  Mali; Papua New Guinea;  and Sri Lanka.  
 * Least developed country. 
__________