RESTRICTED  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  S/C/W/319 
11 August 2010  
 (10-4281) 
Council for Trade in Services  
  
 
POSTAL AND COURIER SERVICES 
 
Background Note by the Secretariat
1 
  
This Note has been prepared at the request of  the Council for Trade in Services, with a view 
to encouraging discussions in the Council on the sector of postal and courier services.  It provides 
background information and updates the previ ous Background Note on trade in these services 
(S/C/W/39).  This Note focuses on issues and developm ents considered to be most relevant to the 
GATS.  It is not intended to provide a comprehensive account of the sector;  many of the observations 
contained in the previous Note remain pertinent today. 
 
 
_______________ 
 
                                                     
 
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. S/C/W/319 
Page 2  
 
   
I.
 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................... .3 
II. DEFINITION OF THE SECTOR...........................................................................................3  
III. GATS COMMITMENTS.........................................................................................................5  
IV. ECONOMIC AND TRAD E PROFILE ..................................................................................7  
A. TRADE STATISTICS ......................................................................................................................7  
B. MARKET TRENDS AND ECONOMIC IMPORTANCE .......................................................................9  
1. An overview of the postal and courier markets .....................................................................9  
2. Basic postal delivery services and designated postal operators..........................................12  
3. Express de livery ............................................................................................................... .......14  
V. POLICY TRENDS IN THE SECTOR..................................................................................16  
A. RESTRUCTURING OF POSTAL OPERATORS .................................................................................17  
B. LIBERALIZATION .......................................................................................................................19  
1. Reserved areas and universal service obligations ................................................................19  
2. Liberalization of reserved areas ............................................................................................20  
VI. BARRIERS TO TRADE ........................................................................................................24  
  S/C/W/319 
 Page 3 
 
 
  I. INTRODUCTION  
1. Postal and courier services form a key part of  the global communications infrastructure, with 
high economic and social importance.2  In recent decades, postal services have undergone radical 
changes — from a regulatory, operational and tec hnological perspective — throughout the world.  
Traditionally, the postal sector has been characterized by state-owned monopolies providing basic 
mail services and privately-owned courier compan ies supplying expedited delivery services.  The 
depiction of the sector in the Services Sectoral  Classification List and in various schedules of 
commitments also reflects this more traditional picture.   Today, such a distinction is put into question 
by the radical changes that the sector has undergone  and is still experiencing.  Traditional postal 
operators and private delivery companies, including global express delivery firms, are competing in a 
new business environment, using new technologies and expanding into new business segments.   
2. Market-oriented reforms have been undertaken by most WTO Members, although to different 
degrees.  Many public postal operators have been corporatized and/or privatized, and the scope of 
postal monopolies reduced and in some cases abolishe d.  Further, a number of Members have taken 
measures to enhance the performance of the trad itional mail operator and enhance the delivery of 
basic mail, alongside a competitive private delivery market.  While many liberalization initiatives 
have succeeded, experience also highlights the importance of properly addressing certain basic regulatory issues.   
3. In addition, technological changes have led ope rators to face new forms of competition from 
other communication services (e.g. e-mails), but also presented new opportunities, for example the greater reliance on just-in-time shipment of goods by express delivery companies.  This is a rapidly 
growing area that is playing a key role in supply chain management and logistics, as well as in 
international trade.  
4. This Note is structured as follows.  The following section discusses the definition of the 
sector in a GATS context.  Section III provid es an overview of GATS commitments and MFN 
exemptions in the sector.  Section IV then re views recent trade and economic developments, and 
section V highlights trends in governments' appr oach to the sector, in particular as regards 
liberalization and regulatory frameworks.   Section VI concludes by discussing some key barriers to 
trade in the sector.
3  
II. DEFINITION OF THE SECTOR 
5. Generally speaking, postal and courier services comprise the basic and express delivery of 
such items as parcels, packages, documents, letters , and printed material.  In the Services Sectoral 
Classification List (MTN.GNS/W/120), postal services are listed under 2.A and courier services under 
2.B, within Communication Services (Sector 2).  The scope of both postal and courier services is further defined through references to the CPC Prov.  These CPC categories are reproduced in Table 1.  
                                                     
 
2 For the purpose of this Note, postal and courier services include express delivery services. 
3 This Note does not address Members' offers in  the ongoing negotiations nor commitments undertaken 
in preferential trade agreements.  Neith er does it discuss in any detail classification issues.  These topics have 
been addressed elsewhere, including in JOB(06)/10;  S/C/W/39;  and Zhang (2008).  The Note focuses on the 
sector as a whole even if the emphasis of the negotiations, according to the negotiating proposals and the plurilateral request, is on services provided under competition, rather than on those reserved to exclusive 
suppliers, usually certain basic delivery services.     S/C/W/319 
Page 4  
 
  Table 1 : Definitions for Postal and Cour ier Services under the CPC Provisional 
 
CPC Prov. code  Explanatory note   
7511 - Postal Services 
• 75111 - Postal services 
related to letters  Services consisting of pick-up, transport and delivery services of letters, 
newspapers, journals, periodicals, broc hures, leaflets and similar printed 
matters, whether for domestic or foreign destinations, as rendered by the 
national postal administration. 
• 75112 - Postal services 
related to parcels  Services consisting of pick-up, transport and delivery services of parcels 
and packages, whether for domestic or foreign destinations, as rendered by 
the national postal administration. 
• 75113 - Post office 
counter services  Services rendered at post office counters, e.g. sales of postage stamps, 
handling of certified or registered le tters and packets, and other post office 
counter services. 
• 75119 - Other postal 
services Mailbox rental services, "poste restante" services, and public postal 
services not elsewhere classified. Exclusion: Services related to postal giro and postal savings accounts are 
classified in class 8111 (Services of monetary intermediaries). 
7512 - Courier Services  
• Subclass: 75121 - 
Multi-modal courier services  
 Services consisting of pick-up, transport and delivery services, whether for 
domestic or foreign destinations of letters, parcels and packages, rendered 
by courier and using one or more modes of transport, other than by the 
national postal administration. These services can be provided by using either self-owned or public transport media. 
Exclusions: Courier services for mail by air are classified in subclass 
73210 (Mail transportation by air). 
• Subclass: 75129 - Other 
courier services  Other courier services for goods, not elsewhere classified, e.g./trucking or 
transfer services without storage, for freight. 
 
 6. As often noted, the particularity of this sectoral  classification is that it distinguishes between 
postal and courier services on the basis of the nature of the service providers rather than that of the 
services provided.  Indeed, the key characteristic of postal services when compared to courier services 
in this classification is that they are rendered by national postal administrations.  As noted in 
JOB(06)/10, Members' negotiating proposals in the sector highlight the inadequacy of such 
classification, often underscoring the resulting un certainty concerning commitments' coverage of 
identical services that are supplied on a competitive basis by both public and private companies.  
Indeed, the distinction in the classification based  on the status of the designated postal operator 
appears increasingly out of step with commercial and regulatory realities (see next section):  both 
private companies and traditional postal operators now  tend to offer a wide array of services, and the 
vast majority of public postal operators comp ete with private companies in most services.
4   
7. Accordingly, some proposals have been made for improved classifications, including in the 
plurilateral request in this sector.  These proposal s, despite differences, generally advocate covering 
all relevant competitive delivery services, notwithstandi ng the nature of the supplier.  They thus seek 
to ensure that activities of the designated postal opera tors (DPOs) outside thei r reserved areas can be 
subjected to commitments.  The proposals also te nd to focus on the nature of the services provided, 
cover explicitly express delivery or high-value servi ces – which are sometimes defined for       
precision –, and suggest that schedules should specify with clarity any reserved areas.  
                                                      
4 CPC ver. 1 and CPC ver. 1.1 also distinguish between postal and courier services on the basis of 
whether the services are provided by the national postal administration or not.  The CPC ver. 2 distinguishes between postal and courier on the basis of whether th e services are rendered under a universal service 
obligation.    S/C/W/319 
 Page 5 
 
 
  8. The CPC and the W/120 do not expressly spell out  the dividing line between postal-courier 
services on the one hand and transport services on the other hand.  Definitions  of postal and courier 
services in CPC 7511 and 7512 refer to the transport of such items as letters and mail.  CPC 7512 
explicitly excludes mail transportation by air (CPC 73210)5, but does not provide such exclusions for 
other specific transport services categories.  Furt her, CPC 75121 specifies that courier services "can 
be provided by using either self-owned or public transport media".   
9. While it is understood that in principle th ere is no duplication among CPC categories, a 
number of CPC transport categories refer to the transport of mail.  In the transport services categories of the CPC prov., CPC 71129 (falling under 11.E.b - fre ight transportation by rail (CPC 712) in the 
W/120) includes mail transportation by railway.  CPC 71235 (under 11.F.b - freight transportation by 
road) covers mail transportation by any other land mode of transport other than railway.
6   
10. While CPC 7511 and 7512 include such "auxilia ry services" as mailbox rental services or post 
office counter services, financial or telecommuni cation services rendered by postal operators would 
be governed by relevant commitments in these are as, namely sectors 2.C and 7 of the W/120, and not 
postal-courier services.  Accordingly, these othe r services provided by postal operators are not 
discussed in this Note, even if these often form an important part of the operators' overall activities. 
11. Finally, as indicated in the previous Secretariat Background Note, basic delivery services 
supplied under monopoly by a designated postal opera tor would be covered by the GATS as long as 
they are supplied on a commercial basis, which is usually the case.   
III. GATS COMMITMENTS 
12. A total of 54 WTO Members have commitments on courier services and/or postal services.7  
As shown in Table 2, most of these Members have  commitments solely in courier services; only 12 
Members have commitments on postal services.   
13. The number of Members that had undertaken commitments in these sectors at the end of the 
Uruguay Round was limited – 32 in postal and/or  courier services.  The accession process has 
contributed in great part to the tally of commitm ents in the sector.   Twenty-two out of the 25 
Members that have gone through accession unde rtook commitments in the sector.   
 
Table 2:  Summary of Specific Commitments 
 
Countries 02.A.: Postal 
Services 02.B.: Courier 
Services 
Albania X X 
Argentina   X 
Armenia   X 
Austria   X 
Barbados   X 
Botswana   X 
Brazil   X 
Cambodia   X 
                                                      
5 Naturally, even if the CPC Prov. mentions air tran sport services, air transport of freight does not fall 
within the scope of the GATS, as per the Annex on Air Transport Services. 
6 No mention is made of mail transportation in CPC categories pertaining to water transport, but these 
CPC categories do not feature exclusions relati ng to such items as mail or letter deliveries. 
7 As of 1 July 2010.   S/C/W/319 
Page 6  
 
  Countries 02.A.: Postal 
Services 02.B.: Courier 
Services 
Canada   X 
Cape Verde   X 
China   X 
Croatia   X 
Cuba   X 
Czech Republic   X 
Djibouti X X 
Dominica   X 
Estonia   X 
FYR Macedonia X X 
Gambia X X 
Georgia   X 
Grenada   X 
Hong Kong, China   X 
Israel X X 
Jordan   X 
Kyrgyz Republic X X 
Latvia   X 
Lesotho   X 
Lithuania   X 
Mexico   X 
Moldova X X 
Mongolia X X 
Nepal   X 
Norway   X 
Oman   X 
Papua New Guinea   X 
Philippines   X 
Poland   X 
Qatar   X 
Saudi Arabia   X 
Senegal X X 
Sierra Leone   X 
Singapore   X 
Slovak Republic   X 
Slovenia   X 
South Africa   X 
Chinese Taipei  X 
Tonga X X 
Turkey X X 
Ukraine X X 
United Arab Emirates   X 
Uruguay   X 
United States    X 
Venezuela     X 
Viet Nam   X 
Total 12 54 
 Note: This updates the corresponding Tabl e in S/C/W/39 by adding acceded Members  S/C/W/319 
 Page 7 
 
 
  14. Members that have undertaken GATS commitmen ts in postal and courier services have 
scheduled relatively few sector-specific market access or national treatment limitations (e.g., limitations on foreign capital participation).  While Members have tended to re ly, in general terms, on 
the W/120 classification, namely the distinction betw een postal and courier services, they also limited 
commitments through annotations in the sectoral co lumn, for example by excluding the delivery of 
certain items (e.g., letters or items above a ce rtain weight) or more generally excluding monopoly 
areas.  This is particularly true for the few Members with commitments on postal services (CPC 7511). 
15. Further, some schedules include additional annotat ions in the sectoral column with respect to 
modes of transport, for example limiting a commitm ent to land-based services or specifying "except 
as specified for transportation services".
8      
16. Only the commitments of Ukraine, a recently acceded Member, use a classification that does 
not draw a distinction between serv ices provided by DPOs and those provided by others, in line with 
most recent classification proposals made in the on going negotiations.  Further, only the schedules of 
Ukraine and Viet Nam include a definition of express delivery services.    
17. Postal and courier services have attracted only one MFN exemption, from Turkey with 
respect to reciprocity for pricing of letter mail.   
18. No WTO Member has any MFN exemption as regard s terminal dues, an issue highlighted in a 
submission by the UPU to the Special Session of  the Council for Trade in Services in 2002.9  Since 
2001, a transitional system for terminal dues w as introduced, which includes different rates for 
developing and industrialized economies.10  The long-term goal, as per the Universal Postal 
Convention, is to move towards a system where terminal dues are aligned with country-specific costs 
of delivery.     
IV. ECONOMIC AND TRADE PROFILE 
A. TRADE STATISTICS  
19. Balance-of-payments (BOP) statistics only captu re a fraction of the industry's general 
involvement in trade.  Almost 100 economies (counting each EU Member State) report BOP data on 
postal and courier services, but such data exclude mail  transport by air transport enterprises, storage of 
goods, and mail preparation services.11  Table 3 shows, on the basis of available BOP data, top 
exporters and importers of pos tal and courier services.   
 
 
                                                      
8 GATS/SC/26 and GATS/SC/120. 
9 WTO (2002).  Terminal dues relate to the remuneration system used by postal operators for the 
exchange of cross-border letter post mail.  Traditionally, the national postal operator receiving mail from abroad would deliver it within its territory, free of charge.  The assumption was that the costs of delivering such 
inbound international mail would be balanced.  However, th at is not always the case.  The terminal dues, which 
were introduced in 1969, represen t the amount charged to foreign national operators for access to one's own 
delivery network.  See also Campbell (2002) and Adrenale (2010), pp. 31-36. 
10 Some commentators have questioned the MFN consistency of this scheme:  WTO (2002);  
Perrazzelli and Vergano (2000);  TMC Asser Instituut (2004);  and Luff (2002).   
11 See UN et al. (2002), p. 40.  While the IMF, through the BOP Manual (now 6th revision), provides 
guidelines on classification for statistical purposes, individual countries may use their own.   S/C/W/319 
Page 8  
 
  Table 3: Major exporters an d importers of postal and courier servi ces (balance-of-payments basis 2007)  
(Million US dollars and percentage) 
 
 20. The Table highlights that the European Union is both the top exporter and importer, whether 
intra-EU trade is accounted for or not.  Among EU  Member States, the largest exporters are the 
Netherlands, Germany, and the United Kingdom.  The United States accounted for 52 per cent of the 
EU's extra-EU-27 exports of pos tal and courier services in 2008, followed by Switzerland (9 per 
cent), China (7 per cent) and Norway (5 per ce nt).  The United States also accounted for a 
preponderant share (67 per cent) of the EU's impor ts (extra-EU-27) in 2008.  Developing countries' 
share of extra-EU-27 exports increased from 16. 8 per cent to 19.2 per cent between 2004 and 2008.
12     
21. Available data (for around 50 economies) suggest that trade in postal and courier services 
increased by  12.5 per cent per year between 2000 and 2007, reaching approximately US$15 billion in 
2007.  
22. As is well known, BOP data cannot fully capture trade in services as defined in the GATS, 
due mostly to the non-inclusion of supply through commercial presence.  Only a handful of Members 
report foreign affiliates statistics (FATS) – the best  proxy for mode 3 trade – on postal and courier 
services.  In the case of Germany, for example, the turnover of foreign affiliates of German companies 
stood at US$23.4 billion for postal and courier ac tivities in 2006 – in comparison with US$37.6 
billion for telecommunications.  In comparison, Ge rmany's cross-border exports in postal-courier 
services reached US$1.4 billion in 2007.  In the case of  the United States, sales of affiliates abroad in 
                                                      
12 Data by trade partner from Eurostat.   Ra
nk Exporters Value Share 
in 15 
econo
-mies Annual 
% 
change Ra
nk Importers Value Share 
in 15 
econo-
mies Annual 
% 
change 
1 European Union 
(27)  7,887  69.6 11 1  European Union 
(27)  7,745  69.7 12 
 Extra-EU(27)  3,163  27.9 14  Extra-EU(27)  3,191  28.7 19 
2 Indiaa  1,144  10.1 ... 2 Canada 864  7.8 25 
3 Canada  874  7.7 -3 3 Hong Kong, China 739  6.7 2 
4 United Statesb  323  2.8 1 4 United Statesb 563  5.1 -7 
5 Hong Kong, 
 China  310  2.7 16 5 India 357  3.2 ... 
6 Australia  307  2.7 -11 6 Australia 350  3.1 46 
7 Norway  130  1.1 60 7 Korea, Rep. of 232  2.1 -42 
8 Russian Fed.  87  0.8 36 8 Norway 93  0.8 13 
9 Argentina  76  0.7 10 9 Argentina 51  0.5 13 
10 Korea, Rep. of  65  0.6 -70 10 Costa Rica 38  0.3 27 
11 Venezuela  43  0.4 30 11 Russian Fed. 27  0.2 59 
12 Azerbaijan  33  0.3 10 12 Honduras 16  0.1 14 
13 South Africa  26  0.2 8 13 South Africa 16  0.1 7 
14 Brazil  17  0.1 6 14 Turkey 11  0.1 -79 
15 Honduras  15  0.1 7 15 Pakistan 10  0.1 -23 
 Above 15 11,337  100.0    -  Above 15 11,112  100.0    - 
                    
a India apparently reports flows for postal-courier by esti mating that these account for half of the"communication 
services" BOP category, which al so includes telecommunications.   
b  Only covers postal services.  For the United States, data  on courier services are incl uded under air transport freight.  
which in 2007 was estimated at US$11,077 million for exports and US$6,376 million for imports in 2007. 
 Note: Based on data available to the Secretariat.  As some  major traders in communication services do not report postal 
and courier services separately, they may not appear in the list.   S/C/W/319 
 Page 9 
 
 
  the courier and messengers sector amounted to US$ 16.4 billion in 2007, more than twice the value 
five years before.13   
23. Although foreign direct investment (FDI) sta tistics do not reflect the operations of foreign 
affiliates, they should be considered an importa nt complement to FATS, as a rough indicator of 
services trade under mode 3.  Like for FATS, only a ha ndful of Members report data at this level of 
disaggregation.  That said, the data highlight the in ternationalization of the sector.  For example, the 
Netherlands' outward FDI stock in postal and courier activities was va lued at US$8.8 billion in 2008, 
while that of the United States stood at US$3.8 billio n, Germany's at US$1.6 billion, and France's at  
US$548 million.14    
B. MARKET TRENDS AND ECONOMIC IMPORTANCE  
24. Internationally comparable data on the whole sector  are scarce.  As noted before, distinctions 
are often drawn between designated postal operators and other supplie rs, even if these often provide 
similar services.15  However, a recent study prepared for the Universal Postal Union (UPU) traces key 
market trends across different types of operators.  This is further discussed below, before focusing to a 
greater extent on trends affecting, in particular , designated operators (sec tion IV.B.2) and express 
delivery services (section IV.B.3). 
1. An overview of the postal and courier markets 
25. The study prepared for the UPU focuses on comp anies participating in the delivery of mail 
and light-weight parcels and express service items.16  This market is estimated at US$500 billion 
worldwide, of which US$300 billion for the letter mail market and the remainder for the expedited 
and package market (see Figure 1).  Such data include services provided by designated postal 
operators as well as others.  The top four participants are estimate d to account for almost 60 per cent 
of each of these two market segments.  In terms of volume, 430 billion mail items were delivered, while the expedited and package services market handled 25 billion shipments.   
26. As illustrated in Figure 2, cross-border delivery represents a relatively small part of the total 
US$500 billion market, particularly in letter mail (4 pe r cent) rather than in the expedited and parcel 
market (23 per cent).  As indicated in Table 4, DP Os' share of cross-border shipments have decreased 
over the years, irrespective of the market segment.  In letter post, their share of the market decreased 
from 93 to 85 per cent in terms of revenue betwee n 1998 and 2008, while in expedited and parcel 
services, it went down from 19 to 16 percent.
17   DPO's share of the whole light-weight international 
market dropped from 48 to 37 per cent between 1998 and 2008.18  The decline in volumes handled by 
DPOs holds true for all regions.19  
27. DPO's market shares have been taken up by various private competitors, including the global 
express delivery companies – UPS, FedEx, TNT, DHL.  Table 5 shows the share of the international 
                                                      
13 See http://www.bea.gov  
14 For Germany and France, the figure is for 2007.  In cludes FDI in other EU Member States.   Source: 
OECD Foreign Direct Investment statistics, OECD.Stat (2010). 
15 Indeed, the UPU's postal statistics (e.g., on employment, operating revenue, number of posted items) 
cover only activities of designated postal operators, both those that are subject to exclusive rights as well as 
those under competition, whether in relation to post al services or not (e.g., financial services). 
16 Adrenale (2010).  The study is limited to express items, letters, and to parcels of less than 5 kg.   
Data from this study represent the aggregated data for 40 selected countries, which are representative of 85-90 
per cent of the market. 
17 Letter mail or letter post refer to basic delivery of items weighting less than 2 kg. 
18 Across all speed and service levels.   
19 Adrenale (2010), p. 21-22 S/C/W/319 
Page 10  
 
  outbound market for lightweight items held by DP Os for different regions, as well as those of other 
competitors, such as the four largest express comp anies, which are present in all regions.    
Figure 1:  The Worldwide Market for Letters and Documents, Express and Package Services (2008) 
Global Express & Parcel Market 
US$200 billion  
26%
18%4%3%2%
3%
43%
Intra=Europe Intra-Americas
Intra-Asia Americas-Europe
Americas-Asia Europe-Asia
MEA/RoW 
Global Mail Market  
US$300 billion  
23%
14%
9%
8%8%38%
USPS DPWN La Poste
Japan Post Royal Mail Others 
 
 
Note: USPS stands for United States Postal Services, DPWN for Deutsche Post World Net,  and MEA/RoW for Middle East 
and Africa/Rest of the World.  
Source :  Adrenale (2010).  S/C/W/319 
 Page 11 
 
 
  Figure 2:  The Cross-Border Market as a Share of the Total Global Postal and Package Market, 2008 
Global Letter Mail Market (US$300 billion)  Gobal Expedited & Package Market (US$200 billion) 
96%4%
Cross-border Domestic12%
11%
77%
Cross-border Lighter Weight International Heavier Weight Domestic
 
Source :  Adrenale (2010), p. 4. 
 
Table 4   Evolution of the Global Lighter- Weight International Market (US$ million) 
Cross-Border Demand Data   1998 2003 2008 
Designated Operators Revenues 9,172 10,587  11,482 
     Letters, Documents, Periodicals 6,976 7,986  7,899 
     Express and Parcels 2,196 2,601  3,583 
DOs' Volumes 5,396 5,385 4,845 
     Letters, Documents, Periodicals 5,301 5,284 4,721 
     Express and Parcels 95 101 124 
Other Postal & Competing Operators 1998 2003 2008 
Others Operators Revenues 9,771 13,800  19,541 
     Letters, Documents, Periodicals 533 929  1,399 
     Express and Parcels 9,237 12,871  18,142 
Others' Volumes 619 859 1,193 
     Letters, Documents, Periodicals 399 580 839 
     Express and Parcels 220 279 354 
DOs' Shares of Light-Weight 1998 2003 2008 
     Revenue,  per cent 48% 43% 37% 
     Volume,  per cent 90% 86% 80% 
Source : Adrenale (2010), p. 15  
 
 
Table 5: Competitors' Share of the International Outbound Market (in Terms of Revenue) for Light-
Weight Items, per Region, 2008 (per cent) 
 North 
America 
 Western 
Europe Asia Pacific Latin 
America Africa, Arabic 
Countries and 
Eastern 
Europe 
DPO 24% 24%  45%  25%  44%  
FedEx 32%   8%  16%  22%  8%  
UPS 18%   17%  8%  14%  8%  
TNT 5%  14%  6%  13%  11%  
DHLa 14%  27%  24%  18%  24%  
La Poste, GeoPost  6%     
Royal Mail  4%     
Others 6%   2%  8%  5%  
Note: a For Western Europe, the market share estimation is for DHL-D PWN, and that of "DPO" is for "DPO and others".   
Source : Compiled from Adrenale (2010), p. 22-31. S/C/W/319 
Page 12  
 
  2. Basic postal delivery services and designated postal operators  
28. Globally, basic postal delivery services are still largely provided by governments or public 
enterprises although, as seen in the next section, this situation has changed in certain countries.  These 
entities are also providers of universal services and often benefit from certain exclusive rights.  A major trend in the sector, however, has been incr easing competition.  Acco rding to the Universal 
Postal Union (UPU), the vast majority of public postal operators now face some form of competition 
from private companies.  While de jure  competition is uncommon, de facto competition is 
widespread.
20  The latest UPU data suggest that in mo re than two-thirds of economies, DPOs face 
competitors in the basic letter delivery segment.  For basic parcel delivery, this  is the case in more 
than 75 per cent of economies.  Nevertheless, acco rding to the UPU, the DPO faced no competition in 
the domestic basic letter delivery segment in 57 econom ies, and in the domestic basic parcel delivery 
in 23 economies.  Generally, competition is greater – and the DPOs' share of the market lower – in 
international delivery than in domestic services.21   
29. Operating revenue of DPOs worldw ide reached SDR 210.4 billion in 2008.22  Industrialized 
countries account for most of revenues and growth.  DPOs employ 5.6 million people worldwide, and 
operate 677'000 post offices.  Through such networ ks, which are often used to provide a broader 
range of services than postal ones, they can ha ve an important role in economic and social 
development.    
30. The basic letter delivery services provided by DPOs have encountered difficulties in recent 
years.  In developed economies, revenues and volum es have stagnated or declined – especially as 
regards international traffic – in light of competition from electronic messaging and other 
communication networks.23  The economic crisis has exacerbated this trend.  Its impact on postal 
operators has been strongest in the letter-post segme nt (5.9 per cent decline of domestic traffic during 
the fourth quarter of 2008) and in relation to DPO's express activi ties (with revenues dropping 7.8 per 
cent worldwide during the fourth quarter of 2008 compared to previous year's fourth quarter).24  
31. For the majority of postal administrations, the largest share of revenue still comes from traffic 
in letter post, although it has tended to diminish overall.  In light of the decline in the traffic of letters, 
especially those originating from individuals (e.g.,  personal letters), advertising mail as well as the 
delivery of goods bought on-line are representing mo re important revenue streams for DPOs, although 
they are facing competition there too.25  Traditional postal operators are also exploring opportunities 
in the area of hybrid mail, which responds to the tr end towards substitution of physical mail by such 
electronic alternatives as e-mails.  Hybrid mail most generally refers to messages sent electronically to 
the post office, which then prints and delivers them  in physical form.  Such emerging practices may 
help reduce cost and improve service quality in a nu mber of market segments (e.g., bill statements, 
                                                      
20 De facto  competition is where many suppliers operate in a market that the law nominally reserves to 
an exclusive supplier. 
21 Information provided by UPU.  DPOs' average market share was 94 per cent in domestic basic letter  
post services and 75 per cent in international basic letter post services.   
22 As noted earlier, UPU's postal statistics normally cover only activities of DPOs, not those of other 
suppliers providing similar services.  They also cover activities of DPOs beyond postal services. 
23 Globally, the number of international letter-post items declined by 5 per cent between 2004 and 
2008.  See http://www.upu.int  
24 UPU (2009a). 
25 For example, in the EU, the volume of direct mail  (or addressed advertisem ent) increased by about 
20 per cent from 2004 to 2006, simila r to developments in other deve loped economies.  A number of EU 
Member States have liberalized this segment, and volumes have tended to grow faster in th ese countries.  
Business originating mail, as opposed to consumer originating mail, of which direct mail forms a part along with transactional mail (e.g. bills), represents about 85 per cent of all ma il volumes in Europe  (Ecorys (2008), 
p. 109).  S/C/W/319 
 Page 13 
 
 
  bulk mail) since the message can be printed at a site  closer to the delivery point and because there is 
no mail collection phase and a facilitated mail sorting process overall.  According to the UPU, hybrid 
mail services were provided in more than 60 countri es, and involved over 2 billion items worldwide.  
Almost all of the world's hybrid mail was produced for local domestic delivery.26  The development of 
hybrid mail may prove important in developing countri es in the future, where it  could facilitate access 
to postal services and improve standards of delivery.27  Competitors of designated postal operators are 
also increasingly involved in hybrid mail solutions.28 
32. In contrast to letters, DPO's parcel delivery ac tivities have grown, both for the ordinary parcel 
delivery segment as well as the expedited or valu e-added one.  Globally, the number of domestic 
ordinary parcels delivered by DPOs increased by 26  per cent from 2004 to 2007, to 6.5 billion, while 
that for international delivery grew by 17 per cent.   DPOs' ordinary domestic parcel delivery service 
suffered the least from the crisis.   
33. Faced with lower revenues from letters and greater competition from express delivery 
companies, DPOs have sought to "upgrade" their basic parcel delivery business, which resulted in 
many countries in such traditional servi ces becoming "more 'express' in nature".29  Indeed, parcel 
delivery operators are trying to close the gap with express delivery firms in terms of quality and value 
for money, although they still tend to focus to a greater extent on domestic services.  Overall, 
traditional operators have been moving toward s increased competition and higher-end, more 
profitable products.  As a result, the traditional di stinction between parcel and express services is 
becoming less clear;  parcel companies, express operators and designated postal operators have 
broadened their product range to attract clients a nd compete against each other.  DPOs have also 
expanded into such other areas as logistics or financial services.   
34. For some traditional postal operators, movement  into value-added, competitive, delivery 
services have paid off in commercial terms.  For Deutsche Post (Germany) and TPG Post (Netherlands), express delivery activities represent a good part of total revenues.  A number of other 
traditional operators have struggled, however.  Th e United States Postal Service, for example, has 
faced serious financial difficulties, with operating losses of US$3.7 billion and a cumulative debt of 
US$10.2 billion in financial year 2009 (following lo sses of US$2.8 billion and US$5.3 billion in 2008 
and 2007, respectively) desp ite reductions of expenses.
30  Among the 134 DPOs for which UPU 
obtained data on financial results fo r 2008, 50 suffered operating losses.31     
35. Many developing economies, while experiencing a number of similar trends, are often facing 
different challenges.  According to the UPU (2007), characteristics of the postal sector environment in 
many developing economies include the following: ve ry low letter-per-capita ratios (e.g., less than 5 
per year in Africa);  poorly defined regulatory structures with de jure  reserved areas, but with 
considerable competition de facto  from private operators;  slow im plementation of postal reforms and 
inconsistent enforcement of regulatory regimes;  dominant operators' poor network capacity;  poor 
service standards (quality of services and access);  financial dependence on government;  and low 
                                                      
26 The last UPU survey in this area showed that th e top hybrid mail producer was Italy, with Europe 
accounting for preponderant part of the world's hybrid-mail.  Malaysia ranked  first in Asia-Pacific, and Tunisia 
first in Africa.   
27 See information on the website of the UPU's Postal Technology Centre: http://www.ptc.upu.int/  
28 Ecorys (2008), pp. 172-185. 
29 Ecorys (2008), p. 109. 
30 USPS 2009 Annual Report, The Challenge to Deliver; Creating the 21st Century Postal Service;  
"Global Postal Reform from a U.S. Perspective", Commissioner Mark Acton, United States Postal Regulatory Commission, Mail & Express Review, August 2009. 
31 http://www.upu.int/en/reso urces/postal-statistics/about-postal-statistics.html  S/C/W/319 
Page 14  
 
  priority with respect to government expenditures.
32 At the same time, post office networks can 
sometimes represent a way to provide access to cer tain basic services to the population.   
36. Some of these characteristics are reflected in Table A-1 (Annex).  In developing economies, 
there may be no delivery at home at all;  the majo rity of the African population has to collect mail 
from a postal establishment.  Sometimes, both the sender and the addressee may pay for postal 
services.  In some developing countries, international mail represents a far higher share of total mail 
volume than in developed economies.  Developing ec onomy characteristics are further reflected in the 
regulatory trends addressed in section V.   
3. Express delivery  
37. Over the last two decades, the express delivery industry has developed into a global industry  
"that provides value-added services with door-to-door collection and delivery."33  In contrast to 
ordinary delivery of letters, the express segment is  growing strongly.  Express delivery involves the 
expedited movement of documents, parcels and me rchandise goods.  Operators maintain control of 
the goods throughout the delivery process – often us ing tracking technologies – and offer additional 
services such as collection from a point designated by the sender, guarantee of delivery within a 
specific timeframe, confirmation of delivery, and cu stoms clearance.  The growth of this segment 
results from such trends as the expansion of electronic commerce (home shopping); business-to-
business developments favouring just-in-time systems that use small and frequent deliveries rather 
than bulk transport;  and globalization of supply chains that place a premium on information management and speed of delivery.  The types of  goods delivered by express companies are usually 
high-value/low weight items.  
38. The global express delivery industry has generate d sales revenue of US $175 billion in 2008, a 
20 per cent rise in real terms since 2003, higher than the growth rate of the global economy.  Estimations suggest that the industry's direct c ontribution to world GDP was in the order of US$80 
billion in 2008.
34  It directly employed 1.3 million peopl e worldwide, in addition to indirectly 
supporting many other jobs in the economy.  Like the whole sector, the express delivery segment has 
been negatively impacted by the economic crisis.35  The reduction in international trade has had a 
direct impact on global operators' revenues. 36  
39. As highlighted in Table 6, North America c onstitutes the largest express delivery market in 
terms of sales value, followed by Europe and Asia -Pacific, although the str ongest growth has occurred 
in developing countries.  Figure 3 shows that a great proportion of express deliveries are intra-regional.  Indeed, express deliveries across America, Europe and Asia-Pacific regions accounted for 
12 per cent of industry revenues.
37  The principal sectors using express delivery services include IT, 
telecommunications, pharmaceuticals, finance, and automotive & transport equipment industries.  Firms in high-tech, or knowledge-intensive, sector s may be relatively more dependent on express 
delivery services, reflecting the fact that they deal  with high-value items for which low stocks are 
essential, and items purchased on-line, where quick de livery to consumers is key.  Express delivery 
operators also play an important role in facilita ting e-commerce, and have benefited from the growth 
                                                     
 
32 See also Guislain (2004);  Walsh (2001). 
33 Ecorys (2008), p. 129. 
34 Value of sales less that of intermediate purchases from intermediaries, e.g., fuel. 
35 For example, TNT experienced a 25% drop in volume s of air express at the beginning of 2009 (TNT 
Annual Report 2009).   
36 Oxford Economics (2009);  UPU (2009a). 
37 Oxford Economics (2009).  S/C/W/319 
 Page 15 
 
 
  of on-line retailing.  It has been estimated that 35 per cent of all express deliveries in China derive 
from on-line purchases.38   
Table 6:  Regional Trends in the Express Delivery Industry, 2003-2008  
Revenue (US$ billion) Annual growth Global share  
2003 2008 2003-2008 2008 
North America 58 76 6% 43% 
Latin America and Caribbean  2 3 12% 2% 
Europe  35 49 7% 28% 
Asia Pacific  28 42 9% 24% 
Middle East and Africa  4 6 10% 4% 
Total  125 175 7% 100% 
Source : Oxford Economics (2009). 
 
 
Figure 3:  Size of the Express Delivery Market per Region, 2008  
Global express market = US$ 175bn in 2008
Intra Americas, 72
MEA-ROW, 11.2
Europe-Asia, 6.3Americas-Asia, 8Americas-Europe, 6.7Intra-Asia, 32.9Intra-Europe, 38.2
 
 Source : Oxford Economics (2009) 
 Note: MEA-ROW stands for Middle Ea st & Africa-Rest of the World.  
 
  
40. The top four global express delivery companies (UPS, FedEx, DHL and TNT) account for 
about 55 per cent of the global market.39  In addition, there is a large number of express delivery 
companies, often operating at smaller scale, either at the domestic or even local level, sometimes 
focusing on same-day deliveries or exclusively on land transport.  The four international market 
leaders, known as the integrators, will sometimes work with smaller expres s and courier operators 
focusing on the national market.  In Europe, for exam ple, it is estimated that about 50 per cent of the 
market is served by multiple small and medium size enterprises, while the other half is served by the 
                                                      
38 Oxford Economics. 
39 DHL is now part of Deutsche Post DHL S/C/W/319 
Page 16  
 
  six larger players with international networks (DHL, TNT, UPS and FedEx, Royal Mail and La 
Poste).
40 
41. The global operators own or control air transport fleets, and account for an important share of 
the world's air cargo services.  FedEx is the largest air line in the world in terms of freight tons flown, 
ahead of Air France-KLM Group, while UPS ranks third.41  FedEx also has the second largest fleet, 
behind Delta Airlines.42  Express companies have developed to the greatest extent the concept of hubs 
and invested massively in special fa cilities or dedicated airports abroad.43  Memphis, a FedEx 
international hub, is the world's largest cargo airport.44   
42. The express delivery industry plays, like such  sectors as transport and freight forwarding, a 
key and growing role in facilitating internati onal trade in goods, as well as more generally 
contributing to organising production more effici ently.  Express operators constitute an important 
component of international supply chains, and he lp improve the competitiveness of firms, which, 
especially in light of the growing importance of just-in-time manufacturing, outsourcing, and online sales, rely on effective delivery of goods to conn ect with their consumers/users or between different 
branches of their production units.   
43. Express delivery operators, especially those with  large international networks, play an 
important role in world trade by providing re liable (tracking) and time-sensitive delivery to 
companies.  They can assist companies seeking to expand into the global market, including SMEs or 
others that do not have their own transport deliver y infrastructure, by facilitating lean-inventory (i.e. 
more streamlined production processes, and reduced st orage costs) and global sourcing of inputs.  In 
that context, restrictions on express delivery services can carry significant costs, including by 
reducing the ability of companies involved in trade in  goods to fully take advantage of global markets, 
and by undermining a country's attractiveness as a trade platform and location for international 
production.  In turn, global express companies also  depend significantly on international trade, as 
restrictions to the flow of goods across borders limit business opportunities for exporting firms, which impacts on these express delivery operators.    
44. As noted earlier, DPOs, especially in developed economies, are also providing services that 
compete directly with those of express delivery operato rs.  They are doing so either by expanding the 
types of services offered to bring them closer to those of express companies, or establishing right-out subsidiaries, joint-ventures or acquiring private firm s to compete directly against express companies.  
Some transport companies also compete with th e express delivery operators, for example cargo 
operations of such airlines as United Airlines or C ontinental Airlines.  In turn, express delivery firms 
have also developed their businesses beyond the delivery  of documents and parcels to offer logistics 
and supply chain management services.   
V.  POLICY TRENDS IN THE SECTOR   
45. Since the last Background Note, postal reforms have led to increased competition worldwide, 
and have had an important impact on market de velopments observed in the preceding section.  
Market-oriented postal reforms have been undertaken in most countries, to different degrees:  public 
postal operators have been corpor atized and/or privatized, and th e scope of postal monopolies has 
been reduced or even abolished in some cases.  As a result, the traditional dividing line between 
private and public operators has become much less clear.  Key facets of market-oriented postal reform 
                                                     
 
40 Ecorys (2008), p. 110. 
41 Data for 2008.  Source: Airline Business , October 2009. 
42 For all types of aircrafts, whether for carrying freight or passengers.    
43 See WTO (2007), pp. 323-4. 
44 In terms of cargo tonnage, 2008.  Source: Airline Business , October 2009.  S/C/W/319 
 Page 17 
 
 
  relate, on the one hand, to the corporatization and privatisation of postal operators and, on the other 
hand, to the liberalization of postal markets and related regulatory develo pments.  This section 
reviews each aspect in turn.45     
A. RESTRUCTURING OF POSTAL OPERATORS  
46. In most countries, postal services had previously been supplied by the same state-owned 
entity that provided telecommunication services.  As a result of the worldwide telecommunication 
liberalization that started in the 1980s, most national postal operators were split from telecom 
operators and became autonomous public entities.  
47. A more substantial change for public pos tal operators subsequently came with 
corporatization, which involved transforming thei r legal status from a government department or a 
public entity into a state-owned enterprise with it s own budget.  In other words, the postal operator 
took the form and structure of a commercial enterp rise, independent from direct political control.  
Corporatization is normally associated with intern al reorganization whereby separate business units 
are set up within the same postal operator to provide  different services, e.g., mail, express, parcel, 
logistics or postal savings.  According to the lat est UPU data, 170 economies have corporatized their 
public postal operators, while 21 still run pos tal services through a government department. 
Corporatization is also sometimes accompanied by the establishment of an independent regulator:  
83 economies now have a separate regulat or supervising the postal market.46   
48. A study of ten important Asian developing economies between 1980 and 2005 highlights the 
extent of changes in the management and conduct of postal business.47  During that period, all 
economies reviewed – except China and India – had granted autonomy of management to their postal 
operators and commercialized their activities.48  Privatization was implemented in Malaysia and 
Singapore in 2003, and a majority of the economies re viewed partially liberalized the sector over the 
period (see next section).    
49. During the time span covered in that study, th e institutional evolution of the sector differed 
markedly between China and India, and the othe r economies reviewed, which opted for management 
autonomy and greater participation of the private sect or.  In the former countries, the domestic postal 
traffic handled by the postal operator tended to gr ow at a pace below that of the economy between 
2001 and 2005, while this was not the case for the second group of economies.  The two groups also 
differed markedly in terms of postal traffic perform ance: for the second group, domestic postal traffic 
per capita went from a yearly average of 34 items for the period 1981-85 to 67 for 2001-2005, while 
for the second group it declined fro m 12 to 9.  Further, the move towards structural separation and 
private sector participation coincided, for the sec ond group of economies, with greater profitability 
and economic viability of traditional operators.  Th eir profits per employee increased significantly 
between 1985 and 2005, unlike for India and China, which experien ced financial losses per employee 
over the period.49   
50. Corporatization has become mainstream in the postal sector, regardless of economies' level of 
development.  According to a report by the OECD, corporatization has typically led to substantial 
                                                      
45 This section relies in part on Zhang (2008). 
46 Information provided by UPU. 
47 Anson and Toledano (2008), pp. 69-70.   
48 The other economies reviewed are: Hong Kong, Ch ina;  Indonesia;  Malaysia;  the Philippines;  
Singapore;  Republic of Korea;  Thailand;  and Viet Nam.   A number of changes have taken place after 2005.  In 
particular, the China Postal Group Corporation was established as a public corporation after its separation from the State Post Bureau in 2006. 
49 Anson and Toledano (2008), pp. 71-77. S/C/W/319 
Page 18  
 
  improvements in profitability, service quality, pro ductivity, and efficiency of postal operators.
50    
That said, certain important DPOs have not been  corporatized, including the United States Postal 
Service, the largest DPO in the world in terms of mail volumes.51   
51. In some economies, the restructuring of the postal operator has gone beyond corporatization 
as steps have been taken to privatize the d esignated operators, moving from full government 
ownership to – at least partial – private ownership (see Box 1).   
Box 1: Examples of Privatization in the Postal Sector 
Germany partially privatized Deutsche Post in November 2000 through the sale of about one-third of 
equity.  This had been preceded by the creation of separa te departments for postal services, postal banking and 
telecommunications within the relevant ministry in 1989, as well as by the introduction of private sector 
management practices and new accounting practices.  In 2002, Deutsche Post AG achieved full ownership of 
DHL International.  They now form Deutsche Post DHL.  The government retained – through the KfW 
Bankengruppe – about 30 per cent of shares.   
 In the Netherlands, TNT NV, which encompassed the incumbent postal operator, has been fully 
privatized since 2006, with the government now maintaining no ownership stake in the company.  PTT Post had 
first been transformed into a public liability company in  1989, after which an IPO was done in 1994 (30 per cent 
share) and 1995 (additional 25 per cent), and the express carrier TNT was acquired in 1996.  The company now 
employs 163,200 employees and has a corporate revenue of €11.2 billion (2008), of which 58 per cent relates to 
express services.52  In Asia, the government of Malaysia decided in 2001 to sell all shares of Pos Malaysia  to a 
private investment holding, of which it held 32 per cent of ownership.  Pos Malaysia is listed on the Malaysian 
Stock Exchange since 2007.53  More recently, Post Danmark A/S was transformed into a public limited 
company (2002) and 22 per cent of its shares sold to a private investor (2005), while the Austrian Post Office 
started the privatization process through an IPO in 2006.54   
 
 
52. The general trend towards restructuring of postal operators has taken place as a result of 
increased competition, from private companies as well as from electronic means of communication.  
It may also stem from the stress put on public fina nces, the experience in reforming such other sectors 
as telecommunications, and the general desire to im prove service levels, modernize, and cope with 
important technological changes.55  In addition to corporatization,  privatization or liberalization, 
governments have undertaken a number of other initia tives to help advance these goals.  Major strides 
included the development of clearer and adapted universal service obligations, as well as allowing 
private sector participation through management cont racts, strategic partnerships, or franchising of 
postal outlets.56     
                                                      
50 OECD (2001). See also UPU (2006b). 
51 For recent regulatory developments, see Ecorys (2008), p. 1089.  The Postal Accountability and 
Enhancement Act, adopted in 2006, aims, for example, at allocating the institutional costs of the Postal Service 
appropriately between market-dominant and competitive products.     
52 ITA-WIK (2009), country fiches, p. 104. 
53 UPU (2006b); OECD (2001); Maruyama and Sano (2008); Crew, Kleindorfer and Campbell (2008).   
54 ITA-WIK (2009);  Crew, Kleindorfer and Campbell (2008).    
55 Guislain (2004) highlights the urgent need for reforms in many developing countries so as to 
improve the performance of the sector .  He argues that restructuring th e incumbent traditional operator and 
sectoral regulations could result in more reliable and efficient services and greater investment, while reducing the need for subsidies. 
56 See Ianni (2008).  S/C/W/319 
 Page 19 
 
 
  B. LIBERALIZATION  
53. Another fundamental aspect of postal reform in  recent times has been the elimination or 
reduction of exclusive rights.   
1. Reserved areas and universal service obligations 
54. For a long time, the provision of universal service was deemed possible only through the 
granting of exclusive rights, so as to compensate the relevant operator for engaging in unprofitable or 
less lucrative activities, for example  providing va rious postal services at uniform rates in low volume 
areas.  Under that approach, the profits made from the delivery of mail to high-volume areas were used to support loss-making delivery operations for low-volume areas.  Pursuant to the UPU Convention, UPU members have to ensure that qua lity basic postal services are provided throughout 
their territory at affordable prices.
57      
55. Over the past two decades, reforms have ta ken place in various countries to reduce the 
monopoly areas and enhance competition, while ma intaining universal service obligations.  
Liberalization, in terms of introducing greater co mpetition, was undertaken in order to provide postal 
operators with an important incentive for moving towards greater efficiency and innovation.  The 
experience of a number of countries suggests that it is possible to reap the benefits of competition 
while providing universal service.  Aside from the ma intenance of a well-defined reserved area, other 
ways to ensure the provision of universal service  may include subsidies to consumers, universal 
service funds, or cost-sharing (costs shared  under an agreement with local entities).58  As traditional 
postal operators have been restructured into co mmercial entities, governments have found it necessary 
to define the standards of universal postal service to be maintained.59  They also considered it 
important to ensure that monopoly rents of the uni versal service provider were not used to cross-
subsidize competitive activities outside the reserved area. 60    
56. Most countries have formally defined universal postal service, either in regulations or in 
concession contracts or licences.61  National definitions differ depending on social and economic 
needs.  Universal service is usually defined on the basis of the range of services covered (e.g., 
measured by weight), accessibility (access points), fre quency of clearance and delivery, quality of 
service (transit time), and price.  Letter post is a common component of universal service, although 
there are differences in weight limits and coverage  of supplementary services.  Most countries also 
cover basic parcel delivery, although again with di fferent weight thresholds.  With regard to the 
financing of the universal service, a great majority of countries chose to reserve certain postal services 
exclusively for universal service providers.  It should be noted that nowadays the scope of the 
reserved services is often narrower than the scope of the universal service.   
                                                      
57 See Article 3 of the UPU Convention.   
58 In those economies that have lib eralized the reserved areas, differe nt policies or mechanisms have 
been introduced to guarantee the provis ion of universal service.  In some cases (e.g., Singapore, Sweden, United 
Kingdom), the universal service provider is required to pr ovide that service under the terms of a licence or of an 
agreement with the government.  Th e provider does not benefit from a compensation system, as regulators' 
estimations were that the cost involved was offset by the benefits of scale and the advantage of being able to 
have a nationwide service.  In other countries, a special fund was set up to finance the provision of universal 
postal service.  See Zhang (2008), pp. 385-7. 
59 It can be recalled that the exis tence of GATS commitments does no t in itself affect standards of 
universal service.   
60 Zhang (2008), pp. 381-5.   
61 UPU, Results of the replies to the questionnaire on the universal postal service obligation , available 
on the UPU website: http://www.upu.int . S/C/W/319 
Page 20  
 
  57. Some analysts have questioned the idea of a monopoly-supported universal service obligation 
for mail in some developing countries.  Pointing to  low mail volumes in certain rural and poor areas, 
they suggest that governments instead encourage competition and promote access to a wider, bundled 
range of services, provided for example by post office franchises or various forms of private sector involvement, which would put lesser strain on public finances.
62  Some of these views have been 
contested, including on the grounds that increasi ng access could lead to more demand and volume 
growth.63   
58. Other analysts have suggested focusing universal  service obligations on residential and small 
business customers, thereby leaving operators grea ter commercial flexibility with respect to large 
commercial mailers, at least with respect to certain  aspects of universal service, e.g. price setting or 
delivery frequency.64  
2. Liberalization of reserved areas 
59. Competition has become a worldwide reality in delivery services.  While most countries still 
maintain certain exclusive rights for their unive rsal postal service providers, the coexistence of 
monopoly and competition is very common in the sector.  For example, in Peru more than 450 private 
operators are licensed to provide postal service s, while in Colombia 200 licensed "specialized 
operators" offer basic postal ser vices with value-added options.65  Further, in several developing 
countries, the scope of de facto  competition is broader than that of de jure competition, as a number of 
private courier companies provide services that are nominally reserved to postal incumbents.  
Generally, there is an increasing trend to reduce the scope of monopoly rights.   
60. Various countries have taken steps to reduce the scope of the reserved area and foster greater 
competition.  Further, nearly 20 countries have completely abolished monopolies in their postal 
sector.  Highly or fully liberalized markets include not only those of developed countries such as Germany, Finland, New Zealand, Norway, Swed en and the United Kingdom, but also a number of 
developing countries, such as Colomb ia, Peru, Singapore and Nicaragua.
66  
(a) EU postal reform   
61. A major liberalization effort, in view of  the importance of the changes made and 
contemplated, but also the size of the postal market and number of countries involved, is that of the European Union.  It covers various aspects of postal reforms that go beyond reduction of the reserved 
area.   
62. According to a report prepared for the European Commission, at the beginning of the 1990s, 
postal services were provided in many Member Stat es by "inefficient loss-making postal entities with 
a considerable lack of customer attention, resu lting in substantial heterogeneity of service quality", 
and where "postal monopolies often covered delivery of letter post items up to 2 kg and sometimes 
included even express services".
67  The first Postal Directive, adopted in December 1997, mandated 
the gradual opening of Member States' postal market s while maintaining universal service as well as 
an adequate regulatory framework.  The Directiv e set maximum limits for the services that may be 
reserved to the universal service provider(s) in each  Member State.  From 1996 to 2006, the reserved 
area was reduced three times and today only mail ite ms weighing less than 50 grams and costing less 
                                                      
62 Kenny (2005);  Guislain (2004). 
63 See Anson, Cuadra, Lindares, Ronderos and Toledano (2006).  In turn, Ianni (2008) argues that it has 
not been demonstrated that increas ing access leads to greater volumes. 
64 See, for example, Finger et al. (2005); and different views in Crew and Kleindorfer (2006).     
65 Ianni (2008), pp. 403-404. 
66 UPU (2009b). 
67 ITA-WIK (2009), p. XI.  S/C/W/319 
 Page 21 
 
 
  than 2.5 times the basic tariff are exempt from comp etition.  The third Postal Directive requires the 
majority of Member States (95 per cent of EU postal  markets in terms of volume) to abolish exclusive 
rights by 1 January 2011 and by 1 January 2013 for the rest.  Germany (2008), Finland (1991), 
Sweden (1992), the United Kingdom (2006), Estonia ( 2009) and the Netherlands (2009) have already 
abolished the reserved areas before th e date foreseen in the Directive.68  The Postal Directive is part of 
the European Economic Area (EEA), and the 'Second Postal Directive' has been transposed into 
national law by Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway.  EU candidate countries are at different stages in 
the transposition of the postal acquis .69  Further information on the EU postal reform is found in the 
Annex.   
63. As a result of regulatory changes and market  developments, according to the European 
Commission (2008b), the traditional postal operators in the EU have modernized, restructured and 
moved towards more market-driven and customer-oriented supply of services, greater efficiency and service quality.  For example, eviden ce suggests that greater competition has led to relatively greater 
mail volumes, the development of new value-a dded services and downward pressure on bulk prices.
70  
Traditional operators have also expanded in areas  beyond universal service provision.  Actual 
competition in the letter-post market has emerged, but  is developing slowly despite the liberalization 
steps undertaken.  More than the reduction in the reserved area from 100 to 50 grams, the development of competition stemmed in particular from the full liberalization of specific segments of 
the addressed mail segments, for example direct mail (e.g., Italy, Netherlands) or intra-city mail (Spain).
71   
64. The evolution of the EU postal regime also hi ghlights the importance of regulation, including 
the role of national regulatory authorities in monito ring developments and acting to prevent barriers to 
competition.  Research has suggest ed that for most countries involved, the Postal Directives, which 
provide flexibility in transposition into national law, can be seen as  a necessary, but not a sufficient 
condition for the development of competition.72  To complement the market opening flowing from the 
Directives, national regulatory authorities n eed to tackle or prevent the rise of de facto  barriers 
allowing a continuation of limited competitive pressure on incumbents.     
(b) Other examples of postal reform  
65. Various other countries around the globe have take n measures to reduce, or even eliminate, 
exclusive rights so as to foster greater competition in the sector.   
                                                      
68 At the same time, in 2007-2008, some have slowed their original plans to open their postal market 
before December 2010 and there have  been attempts to broaden the scope of the reserved area and the 
Commission had to intervene to prev ent it.  See Ecorys (2008).   
69 EC (2008b).   
70 Ecorys (2008). 
71 Market shares of new entrants have increased, bu t remain low, even where postal markets have been 
fully liberalized (e.g., 9 per cent in Sweden, 10 per cent  in Germany, but below 2 per cent in the majority of 
other EU Member States). That said, in various instance s, competitors have been able to establish profitable 
operations even on a small scale, e.g., CityMail in  densely populated areas of Sweden, EP Europost for 
unaddressed delivery across Germany (Finger, Alyanak, Rossel 2005).  In the United Kingdom, where there are 
no reserved areas, competition has developed in the upstream market, with competitors accounting for 20 per cent of the volume of addressed mail.  Further advances in terms of incorporation and privatization have 
occurred in recent years, for exampl e the German government reduced its shareholding in the German USP, 
while the Dutch government sold its remaining 10 per cent share and gave up its "golden share" in TNT.  Poland and the Czech Republic started in 2007 the process of  transforming the State ente rprise into a joint stock 
company.  All public postal  operators in the EU have been corpora tized, except in one Member State, Cyprus, 
where it is still a government department (ITA-WIK 2009).  The majority of universal service providers has remained State-owned (EC 2008b).     
72 Ecorys (2008). S/C/W/319 
Page 22  
 
  66. For example, in Australia, the reserved area of Australia Post, a state enterprise, was reduced 
in 1989 and 1994, limiting it to lette rs weighting equal or less than 250 grams and costing less than or 
equal to four times the standard letter rate.  Al so, the reserved area does not cover such items as 
outbound international letters or  advertising mail.  In Switzerland, as a result of amendments 
introduced to the Postal Law in 2003, the parcels market has been completely open to competition 
since 1 January 2004.  In Norway, the scope of th e reserved area was also reduced several times and 
Norway Post's current license (v alid from 1 January 2007 to 31 December 2010) grants only exclusive 
rights on sealed, addressed letter under 100 grams.   
67. New Zealand abolished the postal monopoly in  1998.  The universal postal service is 
guaranteed through an agreement (Deed of Un derstanding) between the government and the 
incumbent operator, New Zealand Post Limited, a state-owned commercial company.  The Deed of 
Understanding also requires New Zealand Post to give  access to the postal network, e.g., post office 
boxes, to third parties under certain conditions.  Access is privately negotiated and not fixed by the 
government.  Despite having no reserved area, New Z ealand Post had a market share of about 80 per 
cent in the basic letter market.
73  In Singapore, postal monopoly ended on 31 March 2007, and 
Singpost, the incumbent operator, continues to pr ovide universal service in a fully liberalized 
market.74 
68. In the United States, greater private sector pa rticipation has occurred through work-sharing 
arrangements, rather than as a result of liberalizat ion of the reserved area.  For example, private 
mailers may perform such work-sharing activities as  bar-coding and pre-sorting.  In recent years, 
about 80 per cent of mail delivered by USPS has been handled at some point of the network by a third 
party.  Some estimations suggest this amounts to tr ansferring about one-quarter  of USPS' workload to 
the private sector.75     
69. In developing countries, postal reform has gene rally not been as profound or rapid as in some 
OECD countries.  Many successful reforms have take n place, but in some cases new barriers have 
been erected, at least in comparison with the level of competition previously existing de facto .76  
General forces and motivations driving reforms ha ve been similar: promotion of competition, 
technological change, and desire to improve the qua lity of service, make better use of government 
assets, and encourage a better performance and economic  contribution of the whole sector.  Strategies 
pursued have differed, but tended to include do ses of liberalization, increased private sector 
                                                      
73 Estimation for 2007: Ecorys (2008), p. 1083.  See also Zhang (2008). 
74 UPU (2006b);  Zhang (2008).   
75 Ecorys (2008), pp. 1095-6.  Furt her, the exclusive rights of USPS as regards letters has been 
suspended for extremely urgent letters (express delivery), e.g., those whose price is six times higher than a first 
class letter of the lowest category.  That does no t extend to delivery to ma il boxes, where USPS enjoys 
monopoly rights. 
76 See, for example, the recent s ituation in China: see WTO (2010), as well as WTO, "Trade Policy 
Review of China", Report by the Secret ariat, 26 April 2010, WT/TPR/S/230, pp. 96-97.   In India, a legislative 
proposal put forward in 2006 and subsequently withdrawn in 2009 suggested, among other things, an expansion of the reserved area and a rollback of FDI levels with respect to private suppliers of delivery services 
(Mukherjee (2009)).  In Indonesia, the New Law on Post al Service (2009), while abol ishing the reserved area 
for Pos Indonesia for certain postal services, requires that  postal service suppliers (including courier and express 
delivery companies) be majority-owned by Indonesians.  It also requires that the collaboration between domestic 
and foreign suppliers (with minority ownership) be limite d to province or capital with international airport or 
harbour.  The New Law also provides that private sector operators contribute to the financing of the universal postal service, and that non-universal service operators give priority to the delivery of items falling under the 
universal postal service, subject to compensation determined by the government (WTO (2010), p. 85).  S/C/W/319 
 Page 23 
 
 
  participation, restructuring and improving the perfo rmance of the traditional operator, and regulatory 
reform.  Reform experiences have highlighted the importance of an effective regulatory framework.77  
70. In Argentina, in 1993, the exclusive rights of the incumbent operator were abolished.  Correo 
Argentino S.A., the state-owned operator, was provi ding a universal service, and had suffered losses 
of over US$150 million per year.  The government then  decided in 1997 to proceed to privatization 
through a 30-year concession arrangement, which was won by a local consortium.  Under the  
arrangement, Correo  was required to provide universal service, and to invest US$250 million in the 
postal infrastructure over ten years, as well as to  pay US$104 million per year for the concession 
rights.78  The concession was revoked in 2003 after rele vant conditions were not met.  Correo 
Argentino later filed for bankruptcy, and the governme nt took back full ownership of the company.  
Reasons for this turn of events may include the ec onomic problems that affected Argentina at the time 
or the level of concession fees, but also, according to the UPU, an inadequate regulatory framework, 
where liberalization was initiated first and the attempts  to regulate came later.   In particular, the 
framework did not permit enforcing licensing re quirements and curbing illegal postal operations, 
which made it difficult for the company to improve its commercial situation and take advantage of 
opportunities while meeting stringent universal service obligations in terms of prices and service 
quality.79   After the termination of the licence in 2003,  Correo continued to operate in a liberalized 
market, but the regulator undertook new actions to ensure competitive condition s and imposed stricter 
operating requirements and procedures.80    
71. Tanzania is another example of postal liberali zation.  The national market was characterized 
by low mail volumes – less than 1 mail item per capita  –, essentially concentrated in a few large cities.  
In the four years preceding the commercialization of the postal operator in 1997, mail volumes had 
fallen by an average of 22 per cent per year.  Perfo rmance of the operator in such areas as service 
quality was not monitored;  the operator was financ ially and institutionally dependent on the public 
telecom operator.  With World Bank support, Tanz ania undertook reforms aiming to make the postal 
operator financially viable.  The reform strategy aimed, first, at establishing an autonomous public 
operator and establishing a strong regulatory environment, second, at increasing accountability 
through performance contracts, and, third, at co mmercializing the operators' finances and operations 
to allow it to succeed in a competitiv e market.  After regulatory steps were taken – clear definition of 
the USO, separation from telecom operator – the reserved area was set at 500 grams, and the parcel and package segment was liberalized.    Competition has grown in the courier and parcel market, with 
47 international, regional and nati onal courier operators licensed as of 2009, as opposed to only two in 
2001.  The operator essentially has been self-financ ing, with operating costs below revenues between 
2000 and 2006.  The operator remains government-o wned, but has entered into some partnerships 
with the private sector, e.g., contracts with trans port companies for delivery and collection in remote 
areas.  This case highlights, among other things, the importance of proper sequencing as regards 
regulatory reform and advantages of greater competition.
81  
72. A number of other countries have undertaken reforms to improve the performance of their 
public postal operators, even if th ese did not involve liberalization of the reserved area as such.  Steps 
                                                      
77 See for example World Bank and UPU (2001) and Guislain (2004). 
78 Walsh (2001), p. 26. 
79 UPU (2004).  See also: "La privatización y regulaci ón del correo oficial arge ntino en perspectiva",  
Mariano Wiszniacki,  
http://perio.unlp.edu.ar/question/numeros_anteriores/ numero_anterior13/nivel2/articulos/informes_inve
stigacion/wiszniacki_1_informes_13verano06.htm  (accessed on 25 June 2010). 
80 See: Presentation by A. Javier Pérez (Argen tina) at the UPU Forum on Postal Regulation, 
12 November 2009. 
81 Ianni (2008), pp. 411-412;  Segni and Ianni (2004).   S/C/W/319 
Page 24  
 
  taken in that regard may include improvements to the regulatory framework, improved accountability 
and restructuring of the designated operator.
82   
VI. BARRIERS TO TRADE83 
73. The main formal trade restriction in the postal and courier arena is exclusive rights.  These 
may not be the main focus of the Doha negotiations in the sector, at least according to the plurilateral 
request or negotiating proposals, which rather focus on barriers within competitive areas.  That said, 
the granting of exclusive rights for the commercia l provision of services is a market access limitation 
under Article XVI.    
74. As noted in section V, several countries have  tended to reduce – or in some cases even 
eliminate – reserved areas.  Furthermore, in a number of cases, de facto  competition is greater than 
what is contemplated by law.  Gaps between what  the law provides and what is in effect permitted 
may create uncertainty about whether permitted situations of de facto  competition will persist in the 
future.       
75. In other cases, the reserved area is not clear ly delineated, which may cast doubt on whether 
certain services can be provided by all suppliers a nd leaves scope for discretion.  For example, some 
countries define the reserved area simply in terms of  the activities of the public provider, and in other 
cases there is a general reference to letters and/or parcels, but without indication of the weight, price 
or level of service contemplated (e.g., whether the monopoly relates to basic delivery or express 
services).   Yet in other cases, some monopoly rights  may be defined overly broadly in relation to 
universal service objectives.   
76. A number of other concerns in the sector revolve around the behaviour of the monopolies 
outside their reserved areas.  Thes e relate to fears of anti-competitiv e practices (e.g. cross-subsidies), 
and a variety of measures through which governme nts may maintain special treatment of like 
domestically-owned operators (e.g., price controls an d surcharges, customs treatment, etc).  The lack 
of an independent regulator, as well as of accounti ng separation, is also an important concern in a 
number of markets (e.g., postal entities sometimes license and regulate, or even tax their private 
competitors).  Another important barrier relates to overly burdensome licensing requirements for the 
competitive activities not involved in the provision of universal service.   
77. Further, suppliers are sometimes subject to di scriminatory measures similar to those found in 
other sectors, for example taxes, fees, as well as to investment restrictions such as foreign equity 
limits, joint-venture and local incorporation requireme nts.  Another barrier in the sector consists of 
preventing foreign delivery companies from conduc ting their own pick-up, delivery and customs 
clearance services.  This complicates the provision of  integrated services and reduces the efficiency of 
express delivery companies, thereby creating cost s for users.  In other cases, express delivery 
companies are barred from conducting domestic deliveri es – including domestic legs of international 
deliveries.  This may limit the viability of their presence in certain markets and, among other things, 
limit foreign direct investment.     
78. Finally, it can be noted that barriers and inefficiencies in a host of other areas, be it customs 
clearance or transport (e.g., air traffic restrictions ), will strongly affect suppliers heavily using such 
                                                      
82 For further developing country experiences with reform, see Ianni (2008), Segni and Ianni (2004), 
and World Bank and UPU (2001).  Countries mentioned in these studies are:  Azerbaijan, Brazil, Costa Rica, 
Guatemala, Indonesia, Morocco, Tanzania, Trinidad and Tobago.   
83 The terms "barriers to trade" or "trade restrictions " are used here to refer generally to measures that 
may negatively affect trade, and not to  depict solely limitations on mark et access or national treatment as per 
Articles XVI and XVII  of the GATS.    S/C/W/319 
 Page 25 
 
 
  services.  Undue delays at customs have a negative impact on express delivery firms, which rely on 
guaranteed delivery times.  In some countries, express firms are affected by weight or value restrictions on their shipments, e.g., limiting e xpress items to those weighting less than a certain 
quantity, and barring them from expedited processing at customs.   
79. Nevertheless, the current market situation in  many economies suggests that, regardless of 
such impediments, there is much scope for ne w or improved commitments on postal and courier 
services.   
 
_______________ S/C/W/319 
Page 26  
 
  REFERENCES 
 
 
Adrenale Corporation (2010).  "Market Research on International Letters, and Lightweight Parcels 
and Express Mail Service Items",  Report submitted to  the International Bureau of the Universal 
Postal Union.   
Ansón, José, Rudy Cuadra, Altamir Linhares, Guille rmo Ronderos and Joëlle Toledano (2006), "First 
Steps Towards New Postal Economics Models fo r Developing Countries: Learning from the Latin 
American Experience", in M.A. Crew and P.R. Kleindorfer (eds.), Liberalization of the Postal and 
Delivery Sector ,  Cheltenham (UK), Edward Elgar, pp. 217-36. 
Ansón, José and Joëlle Toledano (2008), "Emerging As ia:  'Is there a Tiger in the Post?", in Ansón, 
Toledano, Bosch and Caron (eds.), Postal Economics in Developing Countries: Posts, Infrastructure 
of the 21st Century?,  Bern, Universal Postal Union. 
Ansón, José, Joëlle Toledano, Laia  Bosch, and Justin Caron (2008), Postal Economics in Developing 
Countries: Posts, Infrastructure of the 21st Century?  Bern, Universal Postal Union. 
Campbell, James I. (2002), "The Evolution of Term inal Dues and Remail Provisions in European and 
International Postal Law", in Damien Géradin (ed.), The Liberalization of Postal Services in the 
European Union , The Hague, Kluwer Law International. 
Crew, Michael A. and Paul R. Kleindorfer (eds.) (2006), Liberalization of the Postal and Delivery 
Sector ,  Cheltenham (UK), Edward Elgar. 
Crew, Michael A. and Paul R. Kleindorfer (eds.) (2008), Competition and Regulation in the Postal 
and Delivery Sector , Cheltenham (UK), Edward Elgar. 
Crew, Michael A., Paul R. Kleindorfer, and James I. Campbell Jr. (2008), "Postal Reform: 
Introduction", in Crew, Kleindorfer and Campbell (eds.), Handbook of Worldwide Postal Reform , 
Cheltenham (UK), Edward Elgar, pp. 1-12. 
Ecorys (2008), "Main Developments in the Postal Sector (2006-2008)", Final Report, prepared for the 
European Commission, DG Internal Ma rket and Services, September 2008. 
European Commission (2008a), "Commission Staff Working Document, Accompanying Document to 
the Report from the Commission to the European Pa rliament and the Council on the Application of 
the Postal Directive", (
SEC(2008)3076), Brussels, 22 December 2008. 
European Commission (2008b), "Report from the Commission to the Council and the European 
Parliament on the Application of the Postal Dir ective (COM(2008)884), Brussels, 22 December 2008.   
Finger, Matthias, Ismail Alyanak and Pierre Rosse l (2005), "The Universal Postal Service in the 
Communications Era;  Adapting to Changing Market s and Customer Behavior", Chair, Management 
of Network Industries, College of Management of  Technology, Ecole polytechnique fédérale de 
Lausanne. 
Geddes, Richard (2003), "The Structure and Effect of International Postal Reform", AEI Online, 
http://www.aei.org/paper/17066  
Guislain, Pierre (ed.) (2004), "The Postal Sector  in Developing and Transition Countries", The World 
Bank Group, GICTD, Washington DC.  S/C/W/319 
 Page 27 
 
 
  Ianni, Juan B. (2008)  "Postal Reform in Devel oping Countries: Challenges and Choices", in Michael 
A. Crew, Paul R. Kleindorfer and James I. Campbell Jr. (eds.), Handbook of Worldwide Postal 
Reform , Cheltenham UK, Edward Elgar.   
ITA Consulting and WIK-Consult (2009), "The Evolu tion of the European Postal Market since 1997", 
Final Report, Study for the European Commission,  DG Internal Market and Services, August 2009. 
Kenny, Charles (2005), "Reforming the Posts: Abandoning the Monopoly-Supported Postal Universal 
Service Obligation in Developing Countries", Wo rld Bank Policy Research Paper No. 3627, June. 
Luff, David (2002), "International Regulation of Po stal Services: UPU vs. WTO Rules", in Damien 
Géradin (ed.), The Liberalization of Postal Services in the European Union , The Hague, Kluwer Law 
International.  
Maruyama, Shoji and Shinichi Sano (2008), "The Di verse Characteristics of Postal Reform in Asia: 
Privatization, Corporatization, and Liberaliza tion", in Crew, Kleindorfer and Campbell (eds.), 
Handbook of Worldwide Postal Reform , Cheltenham (UK), Edward Elgar, pp. 355-372. 
Mukherjee, Arpita (2009), "Express Industry in India: Constraints and the Way Forward", 
presentation, Indian Council for Research  on International Economic Relations, 
http://www.icrier.org/pdf/ArpitaMukherjee.pdf  
OECD (1999), "Promoting Competition in the Postal Sector; Policy Roundtable", Paris. OECD (2001), "Promoting Competition in the Postal Sector; Policy Brief", Paris. Oxford Economic Forecasting (2005), "The Imp act of the Express Delivery Industry on the Global 
Economy", March, Oxford (UK). 
Oxford Economics (2009), "The Impact of the Express Delivery Industry on the Global Economy", 
September, Oxford (UK). 
Perrazzelli, Alessandra and Paolo Vergano (200 0), "Terminal dues under the UPU Convention and 
the GATS: Overview of the Rules and their Compat ibility", Fordham International Law Journal 2: 3. 
T.M.C. Asser Instituut (2004), "The Study of th e Relationship between the Constitution, Rules, and 
Practice of the Universal Postal Union, the WTO Rules (in particular the GATS), and the European 
Community Law", Final Report, prepar ed for the European Commission: 
http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/post/studies_en.htm
 
UN, European Commission, IMF, OECD, UNCTAD, WTO (2002), Manual on Statistics of 
International Trade in Services , Geneva.   
UN, European Commission, IMF, OECD, UNCTAD, WTO (2010), Manual on Statistics of 
International Trade in Services , draft, unedited version: http://unstats.un.org/unsd/statcom/doc10/BG-
MSITS2010.pdf  
United States General Accountability Office (2010), "U .S. Postal Service: Strategies and Options to 
Facilitate Progress toward Financial Viabilit y", GAO-10-455, 12 April, Washington DC. 
United States International Trade Commission (2004), "Express Delivery Services: Competitive 
Conditions Facing U.S.-Based Firms in Foreig n Markets", Investigation No. 332-456, USITC 
Publication 3678, Washington DC. S/C/W/319 
Page 28  
 
  Universal Postal Union (2002), "The Postal Market in the Age of Globalization", Bern. 
Universal Postal Union (2004), "Benchmarking posta l regulator effectiveness", Presentation to the 
IPC shareholders meeting by Thomas Leavey, Direct or General, UPU International Bureau; Berne, 30 
January 2004.   
Universal Postal Union (2006a), "Development of Postal Services in 2005: A Few Key Figures", 
Bern. 
Universal Postal Union (2006b), “Status and Structures of Postal Administrations”, Bern. Universal Postal Union (2007), "The Evolution of th e Postal Sector;  Implications for Stakeholders 
(2006-2012)", Bern. 
Universal Postal Union (2009a), "Impact of the Ec onomic Crisis on Postal Activities", POC Plenary 
Session, High Level Conference, Bern, 2 April 2009. 
Universal Postal Union (2009b), "Status and Struct ures of Postal Entities in UPU Member Countries", 
Bern. 
Walsh, Tim (2001), "Delivering Economic Developmen t: Postal Infrastructures and Sectoral Reform 
in Developing Countries", London, Consignia. 
WIK-Consult (2009), "The Role of Regulators in a More Competitive Postal Market", Final Report, 
Study for the European Commission, DG for In ternal Market and Services, September 2009. 
World Bank (1998), "Redirecting Mail: Postal  Sector Reform", Washington DC. 
World Bank and Universal Postal Union (2001), "The Po stal Industry in an Internet Age: Case Studies 
in Postal Reform", Washington DC/Bern.   
WTO (2002), "Background Paper by the Universal Postal  Union", Informal Note  from the Secretariat, 
4 March 2002, JOB(02)/17. 
WTO (2007), "Second Review of the Air Transport Anne x: Developments in the Air Transport Sector 
(Part Three)", Note by the Secretariat, 28 September 2007, S/C/W/270/Add.2.   
WTO (2010), "Report to the TPRB from the Direct or-General on Trade-Related Developments", 
WT/TPR/OV/W/3, 14 June 2010. 
Zhang, Ruosi (2008), "Liberalization of Postal a nd Courier Services: Ready for Delivery?", in Juan 
Marchetti and Martin Roy (eds.), Opening Markets for Trade in Services; Countries and Sectors in 
Bilateral and WTO Negotiations , Cambridge (UK), WTO and Cambridge University Press.  
 
_______________ 
  
  S/C/W/319 
 Page 29 
 
 
  ANNEX 
 
Further Information on EU Postal Reform  
 
 
In addition to liberalization, the EU Postal Di rectives also cover various other aspects, with 
the objective of developing common rules for the gr owth of the EU internal postal market and 
improving service quality.  For example, it requires all Member States to provide a universal postal service for all users comprising a minimum of one delivery and collection five days a week, and provides that all users be permanently provided w ith a postal service of specified quality throughout 
the territory.  It requires that tariffs for uni versal services be cost-based, transparent and non-
discriminatory.  Cross-subsidies from the reserve d area to the competitive area are limited to the 
fulfilment of universal service obligations.  Universal  service providers have to apply transparent and 
separated cost accounting principles, and provide  separate accounts for reserved and non-reserved 
universal services and non-universal services.  Me mber States also have to establish regulatory 
authorities independent from postal operators.  
The Directives also provide that Member Stat es may establish a compensation fund to ensure 
that universal service is provided, should the unive rsal service obligation constitute an unfair burden 
for the provider.  While several Members have made provisions for setting up compensation fund 
arrangements, only one Member State ha d actually established one by end 2008. 
Access to postal networks is another area c overed by the Directives, although they do not 
impose specific access rules in that regard. Member  States have different policies on whether the 
dominant operator needs to provide  third-party access to its deliv ery network, and under what 
conditions, but there is a trend towards access to th e delivery network by competitors.  Lack of access 
to the postal infrastructure can constitute an impor tant barrier to the development of effective 
competition in the postal market.
1  As of end 2008, ten Member States (including Germany, Spain, 
United Kingdom and France) had granted their regulat ory authority the right to require downstream 
access to the public postal network under appropriate  circumstances.  Downstream access can consist 
of access to inward and outward sorting centres or  delivery facilities.  Access terms and conditions 
(e.g., access points, prices) can, for example, be regulate d ex-ante by authorities, or left to the parties 
to negotiate with the regulation authorities to inte rvene if no agreement can be attained.  A related 
issue concerns access to the postal infrastructure, such as letter box es, post office boxes, and address 
database, but less has been achieved by Member States on that aspect.2   
 
 
_______________ 
 
                                                      
1 Ecorys (2008), p. 19. 
2 EC (2008a), pp. 19-21. S/C/W/319 
Page 30  
 
  Table A-1: Characteristics of Postal Services, 2008
 
  
Member Percentage of the 
population having 
basic mail 
delivered at home Percentage of 
the population 
having to collect 
basic mail from 
a postal 
establishment Percentage of 
the population 
without postal 
services Average 
number of 
letter-post 
items posted 
per 
inhabitant 
Angola 15 53 32 0.03 
Argentina 93 4 3 14 
Armenia 98 2 0 2.3 
Australia 99.5 0.5 0 254* 
Austria 99 1 0 - 
Bahrain  100 0 0 72* 
Bangladesh 100 0 0 0.8* 
Barbados 100 0 0 152* 
Benin 7 83 10 0.7 
Bolivia 45 35 20 0.4 
Botswana 0 100 0 - 
Brazil 79 21 0 45* 
Bulgaria  90 10 0 18 
Burkina Faso 2* 100 0 0.2 
Burundi 2 22 76 0.1 
Cambodia 60 - - 0.1 
Cameroon - - - - 
Cape Verde 20 80 0 1.7 
Chad 2 20 78 - 
Chile 87 13 0 20 
China  - - - 19 
Colombia 74 24 2 0.4 
Congo  3.4 0 96.6 0.2* 
Costa Rica 97 1 2 5.8 
Croatia 75 25 0 72 
Cuba 97 3 0 12 
Cyprus 97 3 0 82 
Czech Rep. 99.9 - 0.05 266 
Democratic Rep. of Congo 5 15 80 0 
Denmark 100 0 0 -  
Djibouti 3* 97* 0* 0.5 
Dominican Republic 85 10 5 - 
Ecuador 65 20 15 0.2 
Egypt 99 1 0 3 
El Salvador 95 5 0 1.3 
Estonia 97 3 0 184 
Fiji 20 75 5 - 
Finland 99 0.07 0 536 
France 100 0 0 - 
FYROM 100 0 0 18 
Georgia 100 0 0 0.4 
Germany 100 0 0 - 
Ghana 7 93 0 1.2 
Greece 100 0 0 61 
Guatemala 91 8.5 0.5 3.4 
Guinea 0.8 65 34.2 -  S/C/W/319 
 Page 31 
 
 
  Member Percentage of the 
population having 
basic mail 
delivered at home Percentage of 
the population 
having to collect 
basic mail from 
a postal 
establishment Percentage of 
the population 
without postal 
services Average 
number of 
letter-post 
items posted 
per 
inhabitant 
Guinea-Bissau 15 80 5 0.01 
Hong Kong, China 99 1 0 - 
Hungary 100 0 0 170* 
India 100 0 0 - 
Indonesia 75 25 0 1.9 
Ireland 100 0 0 195 
Israel 100 0 0 97 
Italy 99 1 0 106 
Jamaica 50 50 0 - 
Japan - - 0 166 
Jordan 55 42 3 - 
Kenya - 100 0 2.4 
Korea, Rep. of  99.9 0.1 0 - 
Kuwait 39 60 1 - 
Kyrgyz Rep.  - - - 4.3 
Latvia 100 0 0 65 
Lithuania 99.9 0.1 0 55 
Luxembourg 100 0 0 485 
Macao, China - - - - 
Madagascar 80 5 15 - 
Malawi 1 99 0 - 
Malaysia 94 1 5 44 
Maldives 88 12 0 3.6 
Mali - 7* 6.1 0.2* 
Malta 100 0 0 164 
Mauritius 97 3 0 48* 
Mexico 90 5 5 8.5 
Moldova 98 2 0 9.3* 
Mongolia 19.9 23.1 61.4 6.7* 
Morocco - - - 8.8* 
Mozambique - - - 0.1 
Myanmar - - - 1.7 
Namibia 0 100 0 - 
Nepal - - 0 2.6 
Netherlands 100 0 0 - 
Niger 2 30.7 67.3 0.2 
Nigeria 36.6 61.7 1.6 - 
Norway 100 - - 546 
Pakistan 95 5 0 2 
Panama  20 75 5 3* 
Papua New Guinea 0 27* 73* 0.5* 
Paraguay 72* 10* 18* 0.3 
Peru 85 5 10 0.6 
Philippines 85 13 2 1.8* 
Poland 99.8 0.2 0 62 
Portugal 100 - 0 165 
Qatar 0 100 0 - 
Romania 99.9 0.1 0 29 
Rwanda   0 100 0 0.2 S/C/W/319 
Page 32  
 
  Member Percentage of the 
population having 
basic mail 
delivered at home Percentage of 
the population 
having to collect 
basic mail from 
a postal 
establishment Percentage of 
the population 
without postal 
services Average 
number of 
letter-post 
items posted 
per 
inhabitant 
Saint Christopher  and Nevis 89.5 6 4.5 47 
Senegal 100 0 0 - 
Sierra Leone 95 5 0 0.02 
Singapore 100 0 0 - 
Slovak Rep. 99 1 0 100* 
Slovenia 100 0 0 537 
Solomon Islands 30 60 10 - 
South Africa 64.9 15.3 19.8 - 
Spain 99 1 0 - 
Swaziland 0 100 - - 
Sweden 99.6 0.5 - - 
Switzerland 100 0 0* 701 
Tanzania   0 100 0 - 
Thailand 94 6 0 29 
Togo - 90 10 0.2* 
Tonga - 100 0 0.5 
Trinidad and Tobago 87 9 4 - 
Tunisia 90 10 0 13 
Turkey 97 3 0 16 
Uganda 5 85 10 0.2* 
Ukraine - - 0 36 
United Arab Emirates - - - 69* 
United Kingdom 100 0 0 315 
United States   89.6 10.4 0 621 
Uruguay - - - 7.9 
Venezuela   99.9 0.1 0 4.3 
Zambia 30 60 10 0.4* 
Zimbabwe 57 43 0 1.9 
Note:  * Data for 2007    
Source : UPU 
 
 
__________