Aid for Trade Global Review 
Author : Pascal Lamy
Date : December 3rd, 2007
Comments : 11
Sorry that it has taken me a bit of a while to get back to you on the issue of Aid for Trade. I have just been able to sit down after a busy week discussing with WTO members and Heads of International Organisations on this topic.
It was never going to be easy to bring together the huge crowd that we saw in Geneva last week for our first Aid for Trade Global Review.
Bob Zoellick, from the World Bank; Dominique Strauss-Kahn, from the IMF; Kemal Dervis, from UNDP; Donald Kaberuka, from the African Development Bank; Luis Alberto Moreno, from the Inter-American Development Bank; and Rajat Nag, from the Asian Development Bank were all there. Luckily none of them missed their plane connections!
We also had with us Supachai Panitchpakdi of UNCTAD; Juan Somavia, of the ILO; Edouard Dayan, from the Universal Postal Union; Patricia Francis, from the ITC and Abdoulie Janneh, from the UNECA. Never has the WTO seen so many heads of international organizations gather at our headquarters for a conference like this! I guess it is a clear signal of the importance they – we – all attach to Aid for Trade.
Heads of multilateral agencies.
From left to right: Luis Alberto Moreno, IADB - Edouard Dayan, UPU - Dominique Strauss-Kahn, IMF - Rajat Nag, ADB - Patricia Francis, ITC - Abdoulie Janneh, ECA - Pascal Lamy, WTO - Angel Gurría, OECD - Valentine Rugwabiza, WTO - Kemal Dervis, UNDP - Robert Zoellick, World Bank - Juan Somavia, ILO - Donald Kaberuka, AfDB
We also had ministers from many of our Member countries as well as representatives from civil society and from business.
This conference has given us the tools we need to put our plans on track. I was asked by journalists and members of civil society what was it that made this conference special. Obviously too many conferences come and go. So what is it that made this one special?
I would say there are three new elements: first, there is consensus to move on to the phase of implementation, to chose sectoral priorities and to mainstream them into development strategies at the national and regional level. Second, we need to develop good monitoring and evaluation tools; and thirdly, we need to ensure adequate funding.
Donors have made commitments that would lead to $8 billion in new financing for Aid-for-Trade by 2010 and bring the total support to $30 billion. Recipient countries need infrastructure, enhanced institutional capacity, better standards testing facilities and more knowledge among their officials on how to take advantage of WTO rules. Even with the enhanced financial commitments, however, there will always be resource constraints. So donors absolutely must deliver on their commitments and recipient countries will need to prioritize. Roads, telecoms networks, ports, testing laboratories, training programmes – all are essential but it will not be possible for every country to have everything it wants.
Clearly a lot of work ahead of us in 2008.
At the Conference we also heard a lot of voices in support of the Doha Round. At the end of the day the Doha Round is the WTO’s core business! Bob and Angel made vibrant interventions as did Garteh Thomas from the UK and the Finish Trade Minister Paavo Väyrynen. Aid for Trade is separate from the Doha negotiations but it is clear that the trade opportunities stemming from Doha will need Aid for Trade to be translated into realities.
The next three months will be crucial for the Doha Round which we all hope can be concluded before the end of 2008. I will keep you posted; Stay tuned.
CHE THUY NHU
Date : July 9th, 2008 11:18:35
Approval some projects
(06/07/2008-01:10:00 PM)
( Government portal ) - date 4/7, Pri-minister Nguyen Tan Dung approved the project ” Technical support for renovation trading registration in Vietnam ” With total ODA 8.980.000 USD by the UNIDO support period 2006 -2010 .
The ministry of Planning and Investment complete the project proposal, approval, sign with UNIDO and implement it bases the rules in side Vietnam and ensure to achieved the objectives .
In the same day, Pri-minister agree the Agreement of technical cooperation and technology between Socialist of Vietnam and Democratic republic Braxin . Pri-minister assigned the Ministry of Science and Technology on behalf of Vietnam government signed this agreement with Braxin.MOFA complete the necessary documents .
In the same day 4/7, Deputy Pri-minister Pham Gia Khiem agree that Vietnam taking part in 29 projects Regional and Inter -Regional by the IAEA support the Ministry of Science and Technology, Ministry of Health and Military Ministry, Ministry of Rural and Agricultural development in cycle 2007-2008.
Pri-minister agree the Ministry of Planning and Investment on behalf of Vietnam government submit to Japan Government support 8 kinds of equipment and soft ware value 226.400 U S D to project ” Apply the knowledge ’s Information in Vietnam ” -It given by ODA of Japan government .
Ministry of Science and Technology receive this ODA follow the rules .
Ngọc Diệp
(Resource :Document 1048, 1053, 4372, 4393/VPCP
CHE THUY NHU
Date : June 30th, 2008 10:55:49
- World Bank approved 320 millions USD support Vietnam
(Cập nhật lúc 7:46′ 28/6/2008) -INFORTIVI
Director’s beard of WB have just aproved 2 sum of Credits from International development Association with total 320 millions USD for Vietnam to implement the Poverty Alleviaon and Infrastructure development
By the information of WB in Hanoi , the credit for poverty Alleviation the 7 times ( PRSC ) with 150 millions and credit for transport in North with 170 millions USD .
PRSC 7 give the fund for Vietnam Government to implement the Socio- economic development plan ( SEDP ) 2006 -2010 .PRSC 7 approved is the signal of progress of Vietnam in trade , global intergration and resources management and state governance - 4 pillars SEDP 2006 -2010
The objective of transport project in North Vietnam is improve the sustain and effective of environment and safe to infrastructure , transport’s services to solve the infrastructure and coridore of maritime transport in North Vietnam
The project to reduces the river’s transport , reduces the environment’s pollutions and improve the states near rivers : This project in 3 kinds of transport : investment to difference kinds of transport in river , support the Ministry of transport manage the transport in river and provinces .
WB ensures support 5 billions USD to Vietnam in 3 next years .
TTX
Pascal Lamy
Date : May 22nd, 2008 02:43:00
Response to Phillip Huggan
Agree that productivity enhancement in the agricultural sector is key to development, both for domestic and for international markets. And if (which I believe) higher prices than the last decades are there to stay, fostering agricultural production in developing countries and making sure trade contributes to meet the changes in demand is crucial. As FAO knows well, raising productivity in farming is multifaceted (fertilises, machines, ware housing, the cold chain) and these must be addressed as a whole. A candidate for A4T…
Phillip Huggan
Date : March 19th, 2008 04:06:31
The most convincing explanation I’ve seen if you are to assign a single reason why in the past SE Asia enjoyed higher economic growth rates than Sub-Saharan Africa, is that farm yields fialed regularly in Africa far more than they did in Asia. Every time Agriculture harvests drop, health suffers.
I’d give priority to roads (or rails or water transport) and drinking water. Sustainable irrigation technologies (like IDE’s drip irrigation) of course. One thing that isn’t on the list is grain storage facilities like grain elevators. I don’t have the link now, but someone recently invented an underground storage chamber that keeps insects out of grain and can be constructed with lumber from common African trees.
With grain storage facilities, a farm region can ride out the shock of lower harvests. And save the good harvests as equity from which to borrow or trade for productivity increasing farm equipment or other diversified sources of income.
There are now polymer solar panels small enough to be mailed.
The Sustainable Development Blogger
Date : March 10th, 2008 12:16:15
Let me ask two questions that are crucial to assess if A4T will have a significant impact:
1) There is an agreement on how to be sure that A4T will be financed by additional resources?
2) There is an agreement on how to ensure ownership by developing countries and to be sure that A4T will be coherent with the development strategy of each developing countries. Notably the accent should be put more in increasing skills and productive capabilities to export not to import.
3) A4T will be included with precise engagements in the single undertaking and the final Doha Round Agreement? Without this element A4T will have an impact close to zero (as was the case for the Uruguay Agreement on risks linked to increasing prices caused by the reform).
Pascal Lamy
Date : January 22nd, 2008 03:34:37
Querido Jean Michel:
He leído con interés tu respuesta a la reciente nota que he publicado sobre el Examen Global de la Ayuda para el Comercio. Coincido contigo en que queda mucho camino por recorrer y mucho trabajo por hacer, tanto por parte de los donantes como de los receptores, para integrar con éxito los programas del comercio y el desarrollo.
Con respecto a la segunda cuestión que planteas, la de los Acuerdos de Asociación Económica entre la UE y los países ACP, ten en cuenta que los países del grupo de África, el Caribe y el Pacífico representan aproximadamente el 40 por ciento de los Miembros de la OMC y comprenden la totalidad de países africanos en la OMC. Por consiguiente, estoy seguro de que convendrás en que cualquier novedad en el régimen de su política comercial interesa a la OMC y a todos sus Miembros.
Ello no obstante, las negociaciones relativas a los Acuerdos de Asociación Económica entre la UE y las seis regiones del grupo de países ACP son esencialmente un asunto bilateral entre dos miembros, considerando como entidades de negociación individuales tanto a la UE como a las regiones ACP. Como ocurre con otras negociaciones comerciales bilaterales que entablan muchos de nuestros Miembros, estas negociaciones sólo pasan a ser de la incumbencia de la OMC cuando son notificadas a la Organización con miras a su examen.
Desde diciembre de 2006 disponemos de un nuevo mecanismo de transparencia para evaluar la compatibilidad de los acuerdos comerciales bilaterales con las normas de la OMC. Si te interesa, puedes consultar los exámenes que ya han tenido lugar pulsando en la siguiente dirección:
http://www.wto.org/spanish/tratop_s/region_s/region_s.htm
En tanto no se negocien los tratos bilaterales, en mi calidad de Director de la OMC hago todo lo posible para evitar pronunciarme …
En cuanto al posible papel de los socios en el desarrollo, particularmente durante el período provisional, a mi modo de ver es prioritario prestar un apoyo continuo a estos países para ayudarles a crear la capacidad de identificar y articular mejor sus intereses ofensivos en el mercado de las UE. Pero también convendría poner las miras más allá de los tratos comerciales y empezar a preparar el terreno para que los países en desarrollo puedan recoger todos los frutos de estos acuerdos. Ello significa que hay que determinar cuáles son los embotellamientos que ahogan la capacidad productiva, abordar las cuestiones relativas a la pérdida de ingresos y analizar las infraestructuras comerciales, o sea, en lo esencial examinar el programa de la Ayuda para el Comercio.
Aquí es donde, en mi opinión, deberían centrar su intervención los organismos de desarrollo durante este período.
Espero que mis indicaciones te sean de utilidad.
Pascal Lamy
Date : January 21st, 2008 06:20:42
Cher Jean-Michel,
J’ai lu avec intérêt ta réponse à ma récente contribution sur l’Examen global de l’Aide pour le commerce. Je suis d’accord avec toi, nous avons encore beaucoup à faire pour gagner le pari de l’intégration des programmes de travail sur le commerce et le développement, du côté des donateurs comme de celui des bénéficiaires.
S’agissant du deuxième point que tu soulèves – les Accords de partenariat économique (APE) entre l’UE et les pays ACP – il faut noter que les pays du groupe Afrique, Caraïbes, Pacifique représentent environ 40 pour cent des Membres de l’OMC et comprennent l’ensemble des Membres africains de l’Organisation. Dans ces conditions, tu conviendras que toute évolution de leur régime de politique commerciale présente un intérêt pour l’OMC et pour tous ses Membres.
Il n’en reste pas moins que les négociations sur les APE entre l’Union européenne et les six régions du groupe ACP sont essentiellement une question bilatérale, qui intéresse deux Membres, l’UE et les ACP constituant deux entités de négociation individuelles. Comme les autres négociations commerciales bilatérales menées par beaucoup de nos Membres, elles ne relèvent de l’OMC qu’une fois qu’elles sont notifiées en vue de leur examen.
Depuis décembre 2006, nous disposons d’un nouveau mécanisme pour la transparence qui permet d’évaluer la compatibilité des accords commerciaux bilatéraux avec les règles de l’OMC. Si cela t’intéresse, tu peux consulter les examens qui ont déjà eu lieu, à l’adresse suivante:
http://www.wto.org/french/tratop_f/region_f/region_f.htm
Jusqu’à ce que les accords bilatéraux soient négociés, en tant que Directeur général de l’OMC, je m’efforce de ne pas me prononcer …
Quant au rôle potentiel des partenaires de développement, en particulier pendant la période intérimaire, j’ai le sentiment qu’un soutien suivi à ces pays pour les aider à acquérir la capacité de mieux identifier et formuler leurs intérêts offensifs sur le marché de l’UE est une priorité. Mais il serait bon aussi de regarder au-delà de la négociation des accords commerciaux et de commencer à préparer le terrain pour garantir que les pays en développement tireront pleinement parti de ces accords. Cela signifie mettre en évidence les goulets d’étranglement dans la capacité de production, s’atteler aux problèmes des pertes de recettes, se pencher sur la question des infrastructures commerciales. En somme, se reporter au programme de l’Aide pour le commerce.
Voilà à mon sens ce sur quoi devrait se concentrer l’intervention des agences de développement pendant cette période.
J’espère avoir répondu à ta question.
Pascal Lamy
Date : January 14th, 2008 12:42:35
Dear Jean Michel,
I read with interest your response to my recent posting on the aid for trade global review. I agree with you that we have a long way to go and much to work to do to successfully integrate the trade and development agendas on both the donor side and the recipient side.
Regarding the second issue you raise, that of the Economic Partnership Agreements (EPA) between the EU and the ACP countries, note that the countries of the African, Caribbean and Pacific group represent approximately 40% of the WTO membership and also include the entire African WTO constituency. Therefore, as I am sure you will agree, any developments in their trade policy regime is of interest to the WTO and its entire membership.
Notwithstanding the above, the EPA negotiations between the European Union and the 6 regions of the ACP group are in essence a bilateral affair between two members, taking both the EU and ACP regions as two individual negotiating entities. As is the case with other bilateral trade negotiations that many of our members pursue, they only become a matter for the WTO when they are notified to the WTO for their review.
Since December 2006 we have a new transparency mechanism to asses the compatibility of bilateral trade agreements with WTO rules. If you are interested, you can have a look at examinations which have already taken place, by clicking on:
http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/region_e/region_e.htm
Until the bilateral deals are negotiated, as the head of the WTO I do my best to avoid pronouncing myself …
As far as the potential role of development partners, in particular during the interim period, my sense is that continued support to these countries to help them build capacity to better identify and articulate their offensive interests in the EU market is a priority. But it would also be good to look beyond the negotiation of trade deals and start preparing the ground for ensuring the developing countries reap the full benefits of these agreements; This means identifying current bottle necks in productive capacity, addressing revenue loss issues, looking into trading infrastructures; in essence, looking at the Aid for Trade Agenda.
This in my view is where the development agencies should focus their intervention during this period.
Hope this helps
Pascal Lamy
Jean-Michel Severino
Date : December 21st, 2007 07:41:22
Cher Pascal,
J’ai lu ton dernier post avec beaucoup d’intérêt. Nous croyons beaucoup, ici à l’AFD, à l’importance du renforcement des capacités commerciales des pays qui s’intègrent progressivement (souvent au prix d’ajustements douloureux) au commerce mondial. A mon sens, nous avons encore beaucoup à faire pour gagner le pari de l’intégration de la problématique du commerce à celle du développement.
Je voulais t’interroger sur un dossier connexe, qui me préoccupe en cette fin d’année 2007: celui des Accords de Partenariat Economique (APE). Il est maintenant clair que tous nos partenaires des pays ACP n’auront pas signé des APE avec l’UE d’ici la fin d’année. Quelle est ton analyse sur l’évolution de ce dossier ? La signature d’accords intérimaires pour passer l’échéance de la fin décembre 2007 ne risque-t-elle pas de retarder l’intégration régionale ?
Quel rôle vois-tu pour nos agences de développement dans l’accompagnement de cette transition ?
JMS
———-
Dear Pascal,
I was very interested in your last post. We very much believe, here at AFD, in the crucial importance of reinforcing commercial capacities of the states who are gradually (often at the price of painful adjustments) inserting themselves in world trade. I feel that we still have a long way to go and much work to do to successfully integrate the trade and development agendas.
I wanted to pick your brain on a related issue, which is of particular concern to me at this time of 2007: that of the Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs). It is now clear that all of our ACP partners will not have signed EPAs with the EU by the end of the year. What is your analysis of the progress on this issue? Does the signing of interim agreements not carry a risk of delaying progress in regional integration?
What role would you see our development agencies play in support of these transitions?
JMS
Che Thuy Nhu
Date : December 12th, 2007 06:21:21
Every year Vietnam have the meeting of Consultative Group ( CG ) .This year the international donors promised : with Vietnam on the development’s way . In the CG meeting 2007 the international donors commited support Vietnam 5,4 billions USD - ODA to achieve the Goverment’s objectives :” Poverty reduction and Sustainable development ”
In this Japan 1,1 billions USD, Korea 286 millions USD, France 228 millions USD, ADB 1,4 billions USD and WB 1,1 billions USD
Resource: http://www.mof.gov.vn
iatp
Date : December 7th, 2007 05:57:24
Two years have gone by since Aid for Trade was launched at the WTO. Pascal Lamy has just completed the first Global Aid for Trade Review. The picture does not look good. There is still no clearly accepted definition of what counts as an Aid for Trade initiative, no guidelines for accessing funds, and no effective monitoring and evaluation mechanisms.
But the big question on everyone’s lips is what about the money? When Aid for Trade was launched, WTO members asked Pascal Lamy to find appropriate mechanisms to securing additional financial resources for Aid for Trade. No funding is secured. It is now confirmed that there will be no additional money over and above existing aid, formerly known as Overseas Development Assistance (ODA), pledges. Instead, the Director-General must seek to get a bigger share of aid for trade initiatives. The OECD-WTO data estimates that trade initiatives currently soak up 40 percent of existing aid money. If no additional money is found, there is a serious risk that other sectors, like health and education, may find they receive a much smaller share of the pie in the future. Overall development aid declined in 2006.
Worse, other global issues are desperately in need of a massive boost of funds, most importantly, steps to mitigate the devastating effects of climate change. The UNDP recently issued their annual Human Development Report which accuses rich nations of failing to do their bit to curb greenhouse gas emissions and to help developing countries cope with climate change. To date, only $26 million has been delivered under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. The UNDP says developed countries need to provide US$86 billion a year by 2015. US$44 billion would go for climate-related infrastructure. US$40 billion would help the poor cope with climate-related risks. The other US$2 billion would go to strengthening responses to natural disasters.
Going ahead with the Aid for Trade agenda in the current climate would be disastrous. For now, donors and recipients should invest their energy in improving the effectiveness of existing aid schemes. WTO members should get back to the task of creating a better multilateral trading system. If WTO members are able to build a better framework for the multilateral trading system then Aid for Trade could be a useful and important addition.