The International Architecture of Aid for Trade · 2021. 4. 25. · WTO 10 10 0 UNCTAD 12 10 2...

transcript

The International Architecture of Aid for Trade

Informal Experts’ Workshop

BMZ, Berlin 29-30 January 2007

Remigi Winzap

Joint SECO-OECD/DEV Project

Global Global MappingMapping ofof AidAid for for TradeTrade ActivitiesActivities

(c) (c) Main results

Introduction: Introduction: AidAid for for TradeTrade

(a) (a) Methodology

(b) Limitations(b) Limitations

Ways Forward: Ways Forward: Monitoring and EvaluationMonitoring and Evaluation33

1. Introduction: Aid for Trade

WTO Aid for Trade Task Force definition of Aid for Trade (AfT) includes:

(1) Trade policy and regulations

(2) Trade development

(3) Trade-related infrastructure

(4) Building productive capacity

(5) Trade-related adjustment

(6) Other trade-related needs

Trade-related Technical

Assistance

1. Introduction: Aid for Trade

WTO Aid for Trade Task Force (2006):

“Projects and programmes should be considered as Aid for Trade if these activities have been identified as trade-related development priorities in the recipient country’s national development strategies.”

(a) (a) Methodology

2. Global Mapping of Aid for Trade Activities

Mapping bilateral, regional and international AfT programmes

- Institutions involved

- Volumes committed

- Sectors prioritised

- Regional/country groups

(a) Methodology

Bilateral donors

- DAC reporting and non-DAC reporting

Multilateral agencies

Trust Funds

- ITC, JITAP, Integrated Framework (IF) and WTO

2. Global Mapping of Aid for TradeActivities

(a) Methodology

Analysis based on funding data

Major specialised international organisations(e.g. WTO, UNCTAD)

-> implementing role

(a) Methodology

Three broad AfT categories:

1. Trade policy and regulations

2. Building productive capacity (including trade development for non-DAC reporting countries and agencies)

3. Trade-related Infrastructure

(a) Methodology

Data sources:

- OECD/DAC CRS Aid Activity Database

- Joint WTO/OECD Trade Capacity Building Database

Commitments (not disbursements)

2001-2004 annual averages

Deflators

(a) (a) Methodology

(b) LimitationsGlobal mapping of AfT activities reported by donors

-> not possible to identify “gaps”

- between needs and supply of A4T

- in terms of sectors covered

Includes activities that are not explicitly trade-related

(a) (a) Methodology

156UNDP

01010WTO

21012UNCTAD

8715UNIDO

10616FAO

16218ITC

Trade Development

Trade Policy and

RegulationsTotal AfT

Major Implementing Agencies (USD million)*

* Note: Annual averages over 2001-2004 at constant 2004 pricesSource: WTO/OECD database

(c) Main results: GlobalTotal global support to AfT averaged 22 % of total official development assistance (ODA) over 2001-2004

Support to “trade policy and regulations” very small (3 % of total AfT)

Around 20 donors in “trade-related infrastructure” and building productive capacity

Four donors dominate in all regions and A4T categories: Japan, IDA, the United States (US) and the European Commission (EC)

(c) Main results: Trust Funds (TF)

TF account for 0.2 % of the total AfT volume (or 0.4 per cent if trade-related infrastructure is excluded)

Switzerland top donor of all TF in AfT activities

US largest contributor to the WTO trust fund

235SE144CH936NO

673DE271DK148DE1 023SE2 208US

885NO280CA189DK1 225DK2 605SE

1 138NL430CH219UK 1 152DE2 811NL

1 241SE983UK 228NO1 462NL3 787NO

1 775US1 738NO342CA4 266CH5 064CH

11 770Total5 419Total1 683Total15 023Total33 894Total

WTOIFJITAPITCAll TF

Contributions to Trust Funds (USD thousand)*

* Note: Annual averages over 2001-2004 at constant 2004 prices

Source: WTO/OECD database

(c) Main results: Regions

Asia largest recipient followed by Africa

Two major donors in Asia: Japan and the US

Limited A4T support to America and Europe

Global Support for AfT by Category and Region

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Total A4T

Africa Asia America Europe Global Programmes

Source: WTO/OECD database; OECD/DAC CRS database

(c) Main results: Regions

Germany and Spain important actors in Europe

Regional development banks only present in their region of competence

(c) Main results: Income groups25 % of total AfT to least-developed countries (LDCs)

US and Japan lowest shares of support to LDCsamong all major donors

Japan main donor of AfT to other low income countries (OLICs)

Over 70 % of the US support to AfT to middle income countries (MICs)

Global Support for AfT by Income Group and Category

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Total A4T

LDCs OLICs MICs Unallocated

Source: WTO/OECD database; OECD/DAC CRS database

(a) (a) Methodology

3. Ways Forward: Monitoring and Evaluation

WTO multilateral process of monitoring and evaluating AfT in 2007

OECD will contribute

Monitoring and evaluation at three levels

Three levels:

1. Global review based on WTO/OECD database and OECD/DAC database

2. Self-assessments by donors

3. Results-based evaluations at individual country level, e.g. Tanzania and Zambia

Country level:

- Mainstreaming trade into national development strategies is more relevant than ever before

- Appropriate framework or mechanism needed

- The report provides a first attempt to identify “gaps”, duplications and co-ordination challenges in the delivery of AfT

- > Two case studies: Tanzania and Zambia

Lessons Learned from Tanzania and Zambia

1. Matching demand for and supply of AfT closely linked to government budget process

2. T + Z have developed own intricate frameworks of institutional arrangements and forums

3. Aid modalities vary significantly across countries and sectors

4. WTO/OECD database and the DTIS of the Integrated Framework show serious information gaps

-> Need to strengthen local ownership and capacity in identifying and reporting AfTactivities at country level

Thank you for your attention

The International Architecture of Aid for Trade · 2021. 4. 25. · WTO 10 10 0 UNCTAD 12 10 2...

Documents