Overview - Volume 2

Executive Summary:

Volume 2: Bilateral Services

Volume 2, Bilateral Services reviews the trade capacity building by the twenty-four members of the OECD DAC (the Development Co-operation Directorate of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development) at the time this Guide started to be compiled, one  which joined in early 2013 (Czech Republic) for which fully comparable data are not yet available, and eleven other donors:  five of these, like the Czech Republic, are members of the EU (European Union) (the EC, European Commission, was already included as a DAC donor):   Estonia, Hungary, Poland, Slovak Republic, and Slovenia; and six others are  members of the G20:  Argentina, Brazil, Indonesia, Mexico, the Russian Federation, and Turkey.  Other members of the EU and the G20 were invited to participate, but did not respond or declined.   Several of the countries which did participate actively in the last volume were less willing to review and update their contributions this time:  as with all new international initiatives, there is a risk that, now that Aid for Trade is no longer a novelty, the interest in trade capacity building is diminishing.  It also seems that donors are returning to seeing their aid programmes as purely internal questions, in spite of their international commitments to Aid for Trade under the WTO (World Trade Organization) and under EC and G20 targets.

It is essential to note that in most cases Volume 2, Bilateral Services of the Resource Guide is based on a review of publicly available information on donors’ programmes and activities.  The chapters were elaborated by UNIDO (United Nations Industrial Development Organization) and then validated and/or modified by each country; in some cases, countries provided substantial additional information, for which we are grateful.  But for some, the reviews may omit some activities.   There had been some standardization of approach and definition of categories for the multilateral agencies, but much less for the bilateral donors, especially for those which are only now starting both trade capacity building and international reporting on their aid activities.   It is particularly difficult to find comparable definitions of the roles of agencies not directly responsible for aid, but with activities which are closely related to trade.

This Execeutive Summary looks first at the DAC donors included in the last edition, to identify any changes in their priorities or in other characteristics of their programmes.  It then introduces the additional donors, as far as we have information on them, asking the same questions about the role of trade capacity building in their aid and their priorities within trade capacity building.  In particular, it looks at the information available on partnerships between developed and developing country donors.   It includes some information on some of the donors which did not respond.   It concludes with a summary description of some of their activities by standard category.

 

DAC donors

There are no reported formal changes in donors’ priority for trade capacity building within aid, but some may be omitted because some of the countriesdid not provide updates of their activities.    In contrast to the multilateral and regional agencies,  where only one agency reported more than one change in the activities covered, seven countries report two or three changes; Spain had three changes, and one country, Portugal, had four changes. Table B1 summarises the information available on activities covered.)  Most of the changes were reductions in the number of activities reported (Australia, Belgium, Denmark, the EC, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, and Norway) suggesting that the trend toward greater concentration of aid programmes is continuing, but Canada, Finland, Sweden and the UK, along with Portugal and Spain, reported more activities.   It remains true that the major donors cover most or all activities, and the smaller or newer, a small number, but Italy has now reduced its coverage to five activities.   Portugal has now moved up to eight, about the level of middle sized donors such as the Scandinavian countries. 

 

Table B1

Overview of Bilateral Donors' Aid for Trade Programmes and Initiatives

 
 

Global
Advocacy

TradePolicy
Development

Legal and
Regulatory
Framework

Supply
Capacity

Compliance
Support

 

Trade
Promotion

Market
& Trade
Information

 

Trade
Facilitation

Physical Trade
Infrastructure

Trade-related
Financial Services

Participation
in Triangular
Cooperation

Other Trade-
related Activities*

 

DAC members

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Australia

 

x

x

x

x

 

x

x

x

x

 

 

Austria

x

x

 

x

x

x

 

x

x

x

 

 

Belgium

 

 

x

x

x

x

x

x

 

x

 

x

Canada

 

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

 

 

x

Denmark

x

x

 

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

 

EC

 

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

under consideration

x

Finland

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

 

 

France

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

 

x

x

not directly

 

Germany

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

 

Greece

 

 

 

x

x

 

 

 

 

x

 

 

Ireland

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

 

 

Italy

 

 

x

x

 

x

 

 

x

x

 

 

Japan

x

x

x

x

x

x

 

 

x

x

x

 

Korea (Rep. of)

 

x

 

x

x

 

 

x

x

x

 

 

Luxembourg

 

x

 

x

 

 

 

 

 

x

 

 

Netherlands

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

 

 

New Zealand

 

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

 

Norway

x

x

x

x

x

 

x

x

 

 

 

x

Portugal

 

x

x

x

x

x

 

x

x

x

 

x

Spain

x

x

 

x

 

 

x

x

x

x

x

 

Sweden

x

x

x

x

x

 

x

x

x

x

x

x

Switzerland

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

 

United Kingdom

x

x

x

x

x

 

x

x

x

x

x

x

United States

 

x

x

x

x

 

x

x

x

x

x

 

 

Other EU member countries

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Czech Rep

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

x

 

 

no

 

Estonia

x

 

x

 

 

 

x

 

 

 

no

 

Hungary

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

no

 

Slovak Rep.

 

 

 

 

 

x

 

 

 

 

no

 

Slovenia

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

x

no

 

Poland

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

no

 

 

Other members of G20

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Argentina

 

 

x

x

x

 

x

x

 

 

x

 

Brazil

 

x

x

x

x

 

 

x

x

 

x

 

Indonesia

 

x

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

x

 

Mexico

 

x

 

 

 

 

 

 

x

 

x

 

Russian Fed.

 

x

 

 

x

 

 

x

 

 

x

 

Turkey

 

 

x

 

 

 

 

x

 

 

no

 

 

* Most countries did not use this category, so activities listed under this were distributed under the other categories.

 

 

Some donors are willing to assist virtually all developing countries (Table B2), even if they have regional or traditional centres of interest.  These include Australia, the EC, Germany, Ireland, Japan, the Netherlands, Sweden, Switzerland, and the US.  Others define regions or types of countries, including Austria, Belgium, France, Greece, Italy, and Norway.  All these include Sub-Saharan African LDCs along with other groupings.  Austria also has Eastern Europe as an area focus.  Spain is unusual in concentrating on middle income countries, partly because of its historical commitment to Latin America, and New Zealand specifies South East Asia and the Pacific.  Canada, Finland, Luxembourg, Portugal, and the UK have more limited lists, often in the form of target countries.

Table B2

Bilateral Donors:  Designated Beneficiaries

 

DAC Members

Australia

all regions

Austria

Sub-Saharan Africa,Himalayan region,SE Europe,S Caucasus

Belgium

African LDCs

Canada

Bolivia,Caribbean,Colombia,Haiti,Honduras,Peru,Afghanisatan,
Bangladesh,Indonesia,Pakistan,Vietnam,E.Europe,Ukraine,MidEast
Ethiopia,Ghana,Mali,Mozambique,Senegal,Sudan,SSudan, Tanzania

Denmark

 

EC

 

Finland

Ethiopia,Kenya,Mozambique,Nepal,Tanzania,Vietnam,Zambia, crisis states

France

Sub-Saharan Africa (60%),Mediterraean,fragile and crisis states

Germany

 

Greece

Sub-Saharan Africa, Black Sea, Middle East

Ireland

 

Italy

Sub-Saharan Africa,Mediterranean; Asia, Latin America

Japan

 

Korea

 

Luxembourg

Burkina Faso,Cape Verde,El Salvador,Laos,Mali,Nicaragua,Niger,Senegal,Vietnam

Netherlands

 

New Zealand

Pacific, SE Asia

Norway

Africa, LDCs

Portugal

Lusophone Africa: Angola,Cape Verde,Guinea Bissau,Mozambique,Sao Tome Principe, E. Timor

Spain

Latin America,Middle income

Sweden

 

Switzerland

 

United Kingdom

Afghanistan,Bangladesh,Burma,DRC,Ethiopia,Ghana,India,Kenya,
Kyrgyzstan,Liberia,Malawi,Mozambique,Nepal,Nigeria,Palestine,
Pakistan,Rwanda,SierraLeone,Somalia,S.Africa,Sudan,S.Sudan,
Tajikistan,Tanzania,Uganda,Vietnam,Yemen,Zambia,Zimbabwe

United States

 

Other EU Member Countries

Czech

Ethiopia is priority,Kosovo,Serbia,Turkey

Estonia

E Europe

Slovak

Afghanisatan,Serbia,Kenya; S Sudan,Bosnia Herzogovina, Macedonia, Montenegro

Slovenia

Balkan countries, LDCs

 

Other members of the G20

Argentina

Latin America

Brazil

South&Central America,Caribbean,Africa

Indonesia

Asia

Mexico

Central America, Caribbean

Russian Fed.

border countries, Asia Pacific,Sub-Saharan Africa, Latin America

 

Other donors

Although the non-DAC donors are not required to submit their aid programmes for review by the DAC, those included in this Guide are all members of the WTO, and therefore formally committed to the Aid for Trade initiative and expected to participate in its Reviews of Aid for Trade.   Donors which are members of the EU are bound additionally by its declared support for Aid for Trade.   The new donors which are members of the G20 have made an additional commitment to increase Aid for Trade.  For all, therefore, their trade capacity building is internationally accountable.  Table B1 summarises the trade support activities for those which responded to UNIDO’s questionnaire.

The amount of assistance, both Overseas Development Assistance as defined by the DAC and other official flows, going from non-DAC donors to other developing countries has increased substantially in recent years:  for Brazil and China, it probably trebled between 2006 and 2011.  As aid from some DAC donors has decreased, the other donors have increased their share of the total.  Most South-South trade capacity building is technical assistance, so not requiring high volumes of spending, but the total may be about $10 billion. It may have been less affected by the financial crisis than aid from developed country donors.  None of the new donors is among the major donors in total aid.   China may now be at least at the level of middle level European donors.  A few of those included here are at the level of smaller European countries.

Non-members of the DAC are under no obligation to use DAC definitions of ODA or of Aid for Trade, and some do not (see Grimm 2011c p. 7 for some differences; Brazil and China, for example, link export credits to other assistance in trade).   Most South-South donors (like most  traditional donors) believe that their assistance is “special” and unlike that provided by others.   For every donor, its own programme is unique.  From the point of view of recipients, for whose needs this Resource Guide is designed, what matters is what donors do, not what they call it, so ‘Trade Capacity Building’ remains a useful description for all donors.  (WTO/OECD publications sometimes, but not consistently, refer to ‘providers of South-South Cooperation’ as a separate category from ‘donors’:  this could be a useful distinction if it were instead defined to mean participants in triangular aid providing expertise rather than funds.)

It is necessary for observers to identify the characteristics which can be compared, not take a position on which is ‘better’.  Some argue that South-South aid is different because it is less self-interested (South-South solidarity); others that it is different because it is more self-interested (mutually beneficial); and some prefer terms other than aid.  As there are many examples of both altruistic and self-interested aid from both new and traditional donors, these are not new categories.  Countries which have recently received (or are still receiving) aid may believe that they have a special awareness of the problems of recipients or feel a special obligation to help:  this is cited by some non-DAC donors.  Such experience is also, however, seen as important by some DAC donors, notably Japan, Korea (Kim, 2011), some new members of the EU, and even Germany.  

It is likely that each new donor (like each traditional donor) will need to identify its own advantages more precisely than just ‘being new’, for example on the basis of the sectors in which they specialise or, where relevant, expertise on particular types of trade policy such as regional integration, as has been done by some DAC donors.  The evidence here suggests that some new donors are doing this, most notably perhaps Argentina and Brazil. Others still need to identify their special advantages. 

Information on what the new donors in the EU and Southern donors do, how they do it, and how much they do is difficult to find.  For some of these countries, aid agencies are new and do not yet have detailed mandates, so often there is no clear source of information on the types of project or country which are eligible for assistance.    These information gaps are particularly worrying at a time when many of these donors are adding new recipients to their traditional partners, which were often closely linked to the donor by region, language or religion.    The OECD/WTO reviews of Aid for Trade have little information on Aid for Trade by non-DAC donors and do not attempt to collate or analyse it.    There is a small, but growing, literature describing what Southern donors do, including the  “Aid for Trade Case Stories” prepared for the WTO’s 2011 Review of Aid for Trade, which can supplement the material submitted by countries to UNIDO.

Brazil, like China, has a history of trading and managing its trade policy successfully, but although it attributes its own success to good trade policy (Motta Veiga 2011), it does not focus its aid on trade policy or skill in negotiations.  Its priorities (Cabral, Weinstock, 2010, WTO 2013) have been agriculture:  especially cotton and biofuels, health and education.  It mainly offers technical assistance.  It submitted two Aid for Trade case stories to the WTO in 2011: on cotton with the West African cotton producers (consistent with both its own experience in cotton production and its trade policy alliance with them) and on SMEs with several South American countries (see also below under Supply Capacity). Mexico’s aid (Lätt 2011) is mainly technical cooperation and not specifically in trade-related areas.  It did, however, submit a case story on a transport corridor in Central America (see also below, under Physical Infrastructure); this can be linked to its trade policy interest in regional FTAs.

In most cases, developing country donors help countries in their own region and also some African countries (table B2).  Other directions of cross-regional aid are observed only in special cases (e.g. Brazil aid to all Lusophone countries and aid among Islamic countries).   Brazil has been expanding the number of projects and number of recipients. Its original recipients were  South American countries and Lusophone countries in Africa and Asia, but it now deals with 58 recipients, and only 23% of its aid goes to South America, with 50% to Africa and 15% to Asia (Motta Veiga 2011).  Mexico (Lätt 2011) has had programmes in Central America for a couple of decades, and has also acted in the Caribbean.  Argentina focuses on Latin America. The Russian Federation has a broad approach, but with some concentration on border countries and others in Asia and the Pacific.  The proportions for Eastern Europe and Sub-Saharan Africa are in fact the same (at 28%), and Latin America and the Caribbean receive 20% of Russian aid.  Indonesia gives aid to Asian countries. 

Of the new EU donors, Estonia explicitly chooses to focus on Eastern European countries because it feels it has no competence in Africa, although its multilateral funding goes to that region.  The Czech Republic target list includes Kosovo and Serbia, but also Ethiopia and Turkey.   The Slovak Republic has three priority countries, Afghanistan, Serbia, and Kenya, plus ten other project countries:  South Sudan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Macedonia, Montenegro, Moldova, Ukraine, Belarus, Georgia, Tunisia and Egypt.   Slovenia gives aid to LDCs mainly through multilateral and EU programmes, while its bilateral aid is mainly to Balkan countries.

 

 

Selected major donors not included in this volume

China has had assistance projects, notably for infrastructure, in other Asian countries and in Africa since the 1950s.  It shows particular interest (Grimm 2011a) in supply side assistance, with its aid closely associated with its foreign investment and trade, and therefore with its interest in access to natural resources (Humphrey, 2011a).  It often provides fully completed projects.   Its own successful recent moves into exporting suggest that such aid fits its advantages.  As noted below, it now has extensive cooperation agreements with multilateral agencies and it has participated in discussions with other donors on aid effectiveness (Hayashikawa 2012).  It has worked with other Asian donors in third countries.

India also has a long history of bilateral aid; this has been mainly to other South Asian countries, but is now shifting to Africa (Humphrey  2011b). 

Singapore  has provided technical assistance to a wide range of countries, originally (from the 1960s) mainly in its region, but now globally, and identifies 80% of its assistance as Aid for Trade.  It established an aid agency in 1992.  Some of its assistance is through multilateral and regional organisations.  Examples include capacity building in trade policy in the region and in the Middle East and assistance with infrastructure and trade facilitation in Latin America.

Several Arab countries became major donors in the 1970s following the first oil price increase, and some are now again increasing their aid.  Like the other donors, they are moving out of their own region as well as into more multilateral and regional giving  (Denney 2011).  Saudi Arabia includes export promotion assistance in its objectives. 

South Africa mainly acts within Africa, and prefers to give assistance through regional organisations (Grimm 2011b).  Some is technical assistance; some, financial credits.  It is now trying to start some triangular programmes. 

 

Triangular cooperation:  partnership  between developed and developing country bilateral donors

As well as what may be considered ‘traditional’ bilateral aid by new donors, i.e. direct assistance from one country to another, some donors from both developed and developing countries are interested in what has become known as ‘triangular’ aid:  in the simplest model, a developed country provides funds and a developing country offers expertise to produce a joint package for a third country.    The  ways in which ‘old’ donors could offer form partnerships with  ‘new’ donors include:

  • Financing, directly or through joint participation in a multilateral or regional programme;
  • Advice or training in setting up and administering an aid agency, including mechanisms for identifying needs, designing programmes, monitoring and evaluation;
  • Advice or training in dealing with recipients; and
  • Advice and training in reporting  information to permit monitoring and evaluation.

 

An alternative model is the China-DAC Study Group initiated in January 2009 as a ‘mechanism for mutual learning’ (Brant 2011).  This draws on the aid experience of two donors, combining Chinese experience with DAC experience, recognising that knowledge may lie with the developing country donor as well as the developed donor.  There is no clear distinction between these partnerships and normal collaboration among donors (at any level of development) or between bilateral donors and multilateral or regional agencies.  The activities  different countries choose to report under this heading vary, so the formal sections under this category in the reports in this Guide and as summarised in the next section are not comparable.

 

The ways in which bilateral donors support trade

The categories used are explained in the introduction to Volume I [check what to call it], and the results are summarised in Table B1.  This also indicates which donors explicitly mention triangular aid.  Among the newly included donors, Argentina and Brazil report on five and six activities respectively, comparable with the small to medium DAC donors, with the others reporting three or fewer.  Supply Capacity, Financial Services, Trade Policy, Physical Infrastructure and Compliance Support remain the most frequently mentioned activities by the DAC donors.  Trade Promotion and Global Advocacy are the least often covered.  New donors, in contrast, have higher coverage of trade facilitation, with financial services joining global advocacy among the least often mentioned.  Hungary and Poland are not included in this section as they did not give details on their activities.

Global Advocacy

Sweden and the UK recall their role as advocates for Aid for Trade.  Switzerland encourages discussions on trade.  Germany has programmes to improve trade related assistance and to do research on the implications of proposed trade agreements for developing countries.  This includes research and capacity development for policy for trade in services.   Denmark has programmes to promote the development of the private sector in Ghana and Kenya and to promote corporate social reasonability.  Spain supports policy discussion and advocacy by cooperatives and other groups of entrepreneurs.  Ireland supports research to help developing countries. Austria has activities to promote good business and trade practices in Eastern European countries.  Finland supports research on trade and development by the OECD, UNCTAD, and ICTSD.  France includes here increasing support for Fair Trade in France.  Japan organises policy dialogues on Africa.  The Netherlands mentions its promotion of corporate social responsibility by its own multinationals operating in developing countries.  Norway includes its support for including gender in policies.  The US improves the African private sector’s ability to participate in policy discussions.

Only one of the new donors has an activity in this category.  Estonia has supported development and trade through the WTO and EIF (Enhanced Integrated Framework).

Trade Policy Development

Australia provides administrative and research support to regions including ASEAN and the Pacific Agreement on Closer Economic Relations (PACER) and assistance on developing competence in trade policy more generally.  New Zealand supports Pacer, mentioning explicitly that this is to enable it negotiate with New Zealand.  It also supports the Pacific Forum.   Canada supports programmes to improve African countries’ ability to negotiate trade agreements and to help them take advantage of FTAs with Canada.   The EC has supported ACP countries in their negotiations of FTAs with the EU and with their multilateral negotiations.   The UK has also supported countries to negotiate and to implement trading arrangements with the EU as well as supporting LDCs to negotiate for what it defines as appropriate objectives in international negotiations.

Finland has supported multilateral agencies and joint programmes in their trade policy assistance and research on trade policy.  Most countries support the WTO programme to assist countries to participate in WTO negotiations.  Korea supports countries through the WTO and the EIF.  Ireland supports training at the WTO.  It supports World Bank and ITC (International Trade Centre), research on trade barriers. 

Denmark supports regional trade policy in East Africa.  Germany has supported regional trade institutions in East and Southern Africa.  Norway has supported regional trade institutions in southern Africa.  Spain supports MERCOSUR (Mercado Común del Sur).   Canada also focuses on regional trade policy, with programmes in South America, the Caribbean, and Africa.  It also advises Africa countries on trade and investment policies more generally and Middle Eastern countries on investment policy It has assisted in the development of research capacity on trade policy in African and Latin American countries.  The EC has a comprehensive programme to support Armenia in agreeing and implementing deep integration with the EU.  France has provided a technical assistant to help Senegal in its trade negotiations and other support to countries to increase their negotiating capacity as well as support for research on their trade. 

The Netherlands has assisted Indonesia in designing measures to encourage trade and investment.  Austria assists Eastern European countries in investment policy.  Sweden provides training for trade officials both in Sweden, using its own experience, and through a training institute in Tanzania.  With Switzerland, it supports TRALAC, a research and training institute for southern Africa, and provides and information for private sectors to participate in policy.  Switzerland supports training on world trade in Switzerland and regional training at centres in Peru, South Africa and Vietnam.  It provides assistance to countries in formulating negotiating positions, and mentions in particular support for the West African cotton exporters.  The US provides capacity building for public officials and private sector representatives to participate in negotiations and implement agreements. 

Indonesia, supported by Japan and UNDP (United Nations Development Programme), uses its experience to help Uzbekistan on free trade economic zones and small and middle-sized enterprises (SMEs).  It has also provided training to public officials both through academic courses and exchange of experience.  Mexico cooperates on public administration with Chile.  Brazil supports joint MERCOSUR  policy development. The Russian Federation is supporting Belarus to accede to the WTO, including improving institutional capacity and providing information. 

Legal and Regulatory Framework

Australia offers institution building, for example to the Philippines and Viet Nam.  The UK supports regional harmonisation of trade regulations in East and Southern Africa.    Belgium contributes to the UK’s programme for trade institution building in Eastern Africa.   Finland has promoted reforms related to private sector development in Zambia, Mozambique, southern Africa, East Africa, Laos, and Cambodia, and legislation for encouraging sustainable development in Laos and the Ukraine.  Canada has built capacity on complying with international labour legislation.  Japan has a programme with WIPO to support building institutions on intellectual property protection in Asia and Africa.  The US provides capacity building for ASEAN in information technology and information management.

The EC has a programme to help develop programmes to integrate the private sector into consultations, including on standards and taxation.  New Zealand assists the Pacific countries to develop institutional capacity in financial regulation, taxation, and statistics.  France offers assistance to African governments negotiating with the private sector.   It also is helping Senegal develop the institutional capacity to support sustainable agriculture.  Japan helps Cambodia improve investment promotion and has a training course in competition law and policy which has been mainly for Asian countries.  Sweden has assisted African countries in developing capacity in dealing with Technical Barriers to trade and Iraq on consumer protection.  It provides training on rules of origin for southern African countries.  Switzerland has supported development of legal frameworks to reduce the costs of doing business and on competition policy, intellectual property, consumer protection, public procurement and e-commerce.    Portugal has supported consumer protection agencies and other types of public administration.  Italy offers support to Egypt, South Africa, Tunisia, and Vietnam.

Germany, Norway, Sweden and Switzerland offer support for countries acceding to the WTO.  Ireland and the Netherlands offer support through the Advisory Centre on WTO Law (ACWL) and the World Bank’s Facility for Investment Advisory Services (FIAS), and the Netherlands supports WTO training for officials.  Norway also supports the ACWL. 

Estonia assists Armenia, Georgia and Moldova to implement SPS requirements of free trade agreements with the EU.  

Argentina provides training in taxation for officials in Paraguay, on health and medicine regulation to Caribbean countries, and in management to Uruguay.  Turkey has training for trade officials in LDCs. 

Supply Capacity

In only a few cases do donors seem to be making a clear link between their own national expertise and experience and the sectors for which they offer assistance:  Argentina, Brazil and Norway are notable examples of this, with Argentina and Brazil mentioning projects in agriculture and Norway citing energy.    Some donors explicitly mention value chains.

Norway provides advice on managing petroleum resources and on clean energy development in Africa.  In Bangladesh, it assists the textile and garment sector. Norway and the UK also promote women’s participation in production. 

Some countries mention only agriculture as a specific sector to support.  Australia supports value chains in agriculture in south East Asia, offers other agricultural support in several countries, and assists development in textiles and clothing in Fiji.  Canada supports the development of supply chains in agriculture in the Caribbean, South America and Mali, with support also to research on supply chains and how to promote them.  It assists agriculture in the Nile Basin and in Central America.  It has an investment fund to support other types of supply in Africa.    Spain supports agriculture in Argentina, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, Algeria, Ethiopia, Morocco Senegal and Tunisia, mentioning value chains between Tunisia and Spain.  It supports fishing in Ethiopia and Mozambique.  The Netherlands has also supported developing value chains from recipient countries to Europe, supporting soya, cacao, stone, and forest products, and mangos from Mali.   Japan supports agriculture.  Greece supports potato seed development in Georgia.

Other countries mention agriculture with other sectors, including several supporting SMEs in particular.  Austria supports agriculture in Nicaragua, energy in western Africa and the shoe industry in Ethiopia.    Italy has programmes in general private sector development in Argentina, Ghana, West Africa and Syria, with support for SMEs in Albania and agriculture in Lebanon.  Portugal has supported rural development in East Timor and Guinea Bissau through a cluster approach combining improving productivity, improving marketing and other types of support.  It also supports agriculture in Mozambique and Angola and mining in Angola and Mozambique.   Belgium has programmes to support agriculture and SMEs.   New Zealand has programmes in agribusiness, in fair trade agriculture, in business to business support, and in general support to improving the business environment.  Finland’s support goes to agriculture, forestry, green construction, energy, and services, including ICT, across countries in all regions.  Germany supports cotton in West African countries and agriculture generally in Ghana and Kenya.  In Thailand, its support is for SMEs more generally.  Ireland’s supply support is for Fair Trade producers, in Central America and East Africa.  France’s priorities are agriculture, tourism, and the financial sector.  In agriculture, this includes increasing production and productivity in agriculture.  Specific activities include potato exports, cotton in Mali and Burkina Faso, tea in Burundi, and coffee in Kenya.  There is also support for biodiversity.  France’s promotion of tourism includes encouraging countries to develop tourism to maximise multiplier effects on income and related activities, with attention to sustainable development.   France also encourages industry, for example mechanical, electrical, and electronic production in Tunisia.  Denmark supports the private sector in Ghana, Tanzania and Uganda, especially SMEs.  It has programmes on fruit in Viet Nam and car repairs in Uganda.   The US supports agriculture and services, including tourism, in Africa, including assistance in using US preferences and in regional integration.  It also supports SMEs in aquaculture, horticulture and leather value chains, focusing on bringing these up to export quality standards.  In Bolivia, Mali, Serbia, the Philippines and East and Central Africa, it has more comprehensive programmes to improve the ability of SMEs to participate in value chains.   Korea supports infrastructure, dams and irrigation projects, as an input into supply capacity in Cambodia, the Philippines, Indonesia and Mali.   It has specific supply projects for agriculture in Indonesia and Mali. 

Canada provides general support to the private sector in Africa and  the Caribbean, and to skills development in Asian countries.  The EC provides support to the Caribbean rum industry to adapt to new trading and environmental regulations.   Sweden’s support for South Africa is more general, with training and business development; in India it has supported clean production.  Switzerland supports SMEs and clean production.    The UK provides general support to encourage investment and to improve how markets work.  It tries to include European imports of food. 

Most of Luxembourg’s support is through micro-finance organisations, including in Vietnam, Cape Verde, and Central America.  It has also supported rural development in Vietnam and the ITC sector in Africa.  The Netherlands also includes here support to Netherlands investors in emerging markets.

Argentina (with JICA, Japan) provides training in food production to other Latin American countries.  It also provides technical assistance to Mexico on agriculture and forestry and to Ecuador on SMEs.  It uses Argentine expertise in fish farming to assist Paraguay.  It supports textiles and clothing and tourism in Paraguay and has programmes in agriculture, and in  llama, alpaca and cattle meat production, and in textiles in Bolivia.  It provides technical assistance on wine and olive production, fibres and cattle to Peru.   It also supports cattle production in Panama and meat in El Salvador.    It has programmes on energy and meat in Ecuador and fungi in Colombia.  Argentina has a comprehensive programme of support for agriculture in Haiti.    Brazil supports production of rice in Senegal and cotton in the Benin, Burkina Faso, Chad and Mali, provides training in agro ecology and cooperatives to Benin.  Outside agriculture, it supports tourism in Jamaica and  cinema in other MERCOSUR countries.  It provides advice to other Latin American countries on how to export to Brazil.

Compliance Support Infrastructure and Services

As well as support to recipients’ quality and standards institutions, some donors provide assistance to countries to participate in standard setting and in negotiations.  Agricultural standards are frequently included.  Australia provides aid to countries to meet Sanitary and Phyto-Sanitary rules, and Greece’s support for potatoes in Georgia includes research on quality.  The UK helps Mozambique meet fish standards for export to the EU. Norway has some programmes on fisheries and works with UNIDO on standards compliance for agricultural exports.  It also has programmes on meeting standards for fair trade and organic exports.  Belgium and New Zealand help countries to meet Fair Trade standards. Korea has helped Mongolia develop testing for animal products.

Canada has helped the Ukraine, Viet Nam and the Caribbean to develop testing to meet international standards.  Denmark has provided support to Viet Nam to develop testing for technical standards, and the EC has  programmes to help ACP countries meet technical standards and to help Bangladesh build  standards and testing capacity to meet international standards on textiles and clothing.  The UK supports labour and health standards in the garment industry in Bangladesh.   France has assisted quality management and testing in Madagascar, China, North Africa, the Balkan states and Ukraine.   Japan is promoting quality control, testing and certification in electrical equipment in Vietnam.   Norway is compiling information on private standards and on the problems faced by countries in meeting standards.  It has supported the development of quality standards and testing facilities in Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan, Philippines, Myanmar, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Viet Nam Malawi, Namibia, Sierra Leone, Swaziland, Zambia and in several regions:  the Mekong, SAARC, SADC and the East African Community.   Portugal supports engineering institutions, communication and postal agencies, ports and civil aviation agencies in African Lusophone countries. 

Switzerland supports strengthening of standards and metrology systems, with particular assistance for SMEs to meet international standards, including environmental and social standards and fair trade standards as well as product standards.  This includes activities in Nicaragua, Mozambique, Vietnam, Ghana, and Lebanon.  It has also encouraged countries to participate in standard setting.  Sweden has supported countries to participate in international standard setting.   The Netherlands provides support to countries to meet environmental requirements, including helping them to participate in WTO discussions. 

Germany includes developing expertise in intellectual property and the pharmaceutical sector in its support for East Africa.  The US has assisted Central American, ASEAN and African countries and Azerbaijan to develop and apply product standards.  It also provides training and information for officials.  It provides training on intellectual property rules.  Austria provides aid in accounting standards.    Finland and Ireland give support through the multilateral agencies and programmes.

Brazil (with cooperation from Germany) has assisted Mozambique on developing institutions and legislation on standardisation and metrology.  Argentina has a programme to improve dairy quality in Colombia.  The Russian Federation works with UNIDO on compliance. 

 

Trade Promotion Capacity Building

Austria, Belgium, Finland and Japan have supported trade promotion training done jointly with the private sector, and Japan also provides assistance in trade fairs.   Canada has built capacity in the business organisations of some of its target countries and Germany has supported business organisations in East Africa.    Denmark has a programme of import promotion, and has assisted in the development of export promotion in Kenya.  The Netherlands also has a programme to match exporters to importers.  France has assisted the development of trade promotion in Madagascar.  Ireland has supported the export promotion agency in Uganda.  Italy supports agencies in Mercosur and Tunisia.  New Zealand provides funding and market information to support the Pacific countries’ export agency.  Portugal has improved the ability of private organisations to support trade.  Switzerland has acted to strengthen public and private providers of trade support, including business associations as well as export promotion agencies.  The EC is supporting participation of NGOs in trade policy formation in Armenia.

The Slovak Republic is helping Serbia and Ukraine to develop advisory services for investors by building their capacity and knowledge. 

Market and Trade Information

In contrast to the multilateral and regional agencies, the bilateral donors are more likely to offer market information than trade information.

Spain has supported the development of services providing market information and advice to horticulture in Ethiopia.  Australia helps build competence in market information in agriculture.  Belgium helps African countries to improve their information on the Belgian market.  Canada builds capacity in African countries and also offers its own market information services.  Denmark and Norway promote business to business information, as well as providing research on opportunities.  Finland has supported activities in Eastern Europe and Central Asia.  Germany has supported the development of regional information in South Asia.   Japan builds market information in East Africa.  Ireland supports information through the ITC.  The US has developed market information services for Guyana, as well as its general support to countries to take advantage of its preferences.    The Netherlands through its import promotion agency has extensive programmes to provide information on legal and private requirements in export markets, on how to develop export businesses, and on using trade fairs, with training for both exporters and agencies which support these.  Sweden and Switzerland provide information for exporters to these countries.

There are a few initiatives on trade information, including trade statistics, but the bilateral agencies tend to leave this type of support to the multilateral and regional agencies.  The EC has a help desk to give countries information on its rules on trade, taxes, preferential arrangements, etc.  France helps African countries to improve their economic, social and environmental statistics, Norway is assisting the Malawi and Sudan statistical offices, and New Zealand provides assistance to Pacific countries.  The UK improves the transparency of trade data, with the objective of influencing public debate. 

Estonia provides training on agricultural statistics to Moldova. 

Argentina provides assistance in  statistics to Bolivia and Haiti.

Trade Facilitation

A few donors use their own areas of expertise in this, and a high proportion provide assistance on customs administration.  Belgium, Portugal and Spain use their port administrations to provide training in port management.   Belgium also supports support for regional integration in East Africa, and Portugal provides technical assistance to customs departments.   Ireland supports ports through UNCTAD (United Nations Conference on Trade and Development).

Australia  provides assistance on trade facilitation to Laos, in the context of a more general trade capacity building programme, and has a broad trade facilitation programme in the Caribbean.  It has programmes on improving customs administration in several Pacific countries and in China.   New Zealand also supports customs services in the Pacific, providing advice on customs administration and Sanitary and Phytosanitary standards and support to participate in WTO work.   Finland has supported customs modernisation in Africa.    Sweden has supported regional customs capacity building in East, Southern, and West Africa.  It also provides training for southern African countries on trade facilitation and assisted in developing a Trade Facilitation Implementation Guide.  Switzerland supports capacity building systems for customs officers.  Korea has provided modernisation assistance for customs in Tanzania.  Norway has worked with UNCTAD on modernising customs administration in East Africa and with the WCO (World Customs Organization) in Liberia, Rwanda, Tanzania, Mozambique, Vietnam, and East Timor.   Austria provided customs support to Croatia. 

The US has developed prototypes for customs administrations for risk management and to reduce costs to business.  It has developed information systems to assist in this.  It has encouraged reducing barriers to agricultural trade.    It is supporting trade facilitation in Afghanistan, including assisting it on trade agreements, increasing the efficiency of customs, streamlining border processes, and coordinating support for exports.  It has worked to reduce trading costs in Central Asia.   It supported ASEAN countries to implement Single Windows for traders.   The UK has regional programmes taking a comprehensive approach to reducing the technical, infrastructure, and administrative costs of trading in African regions.  The EC has helped Peru to reduce the complexity of trading.  Canada has programmes in Africa and the Middle East to reduce barriers to trade, as well as supporting IDB work in Latin America.  Denmark has supported Ghana to develop private services for traders.  The Netherlands supports World Bank work on trade facilitation and works with UK DFID on this in East Africa. Germany is supporting Central Asian countries to reduce administrative barriers to trade (including through its use of the Senegalese example mentioned above). 

The new donors focus mainly on customs assistance.  The Czech Republic supports customs reform in Kosovo, Serbia, and Turkey. 

Argentina provides training on customs to Bolivia.  Brazil provides information on logistics services for trade with Brazil and has helped to develop payments systems for MERCOSUR. The Russian Federation, with the IMF, helps African countries improve customs administration.  Turkey is promoting trade facilitation with Afghanistan, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz Republic, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan. 

Physical Trade Infrastructure

Germany emphasises its cross border approach, developing a container port in Namibia to serve transport corridors from Angola, Botswana, South Africa and Zambia, and simultaneously improving other elements along these corridors.  It is also improving roads in Bangladesh.  The UK encourages the development of regional infrastructure to reduce the costs of trading within Africa, and has a programme to improve transport in Mozambique to benefit the region as well as Mozambique itself.  Australia is involved either on its own or with other donors including New Zealand in infrastructure programmes in the Mekong and Pacific regions, and in Papua New Guinea and the Solomon Islands.  New Zealand is helping Tuvalu to improve its inter-island transport.  The EC supports regional and cross-border infrastructure in Africa.  Canada supports regional infrastructure projects in Africa, with several projects to improve roads in Africa and the Caribbean.  Denmark has supported roads in Ghana and Ireland roads in Ethiopia.  Finland supports rural infrastructure in Zambia, Cambodia, Kenya and Nicaragua, and also worked with the EBRD in Eastern Europe.  Its support includes roads, bridges, ports and electrification.  Portugal supports road and port development, and also energy infrastructure.  France’s main area of action is transport, including activities in ports in Morocco, air traffic control in Madagascar and roads in Sri Lanka and Nigeria.  Italy’s activities are also in roads and ports, in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Somalia.  Japan acts on regional infrastructure and energy.  In addition to the supply-related projects mentioned under Supply Capacity, Korea is involved in assisting a port project in Angola, energy in Madagascar and Nepal and a large number of road and bridge projects in Asia, Africa and Latin America.  Spain has supported aviation infrastructure in Namibia, port systems in Cape Verde and Mauritania, railways in Bangladesh and Turkey, and roads in Ghana and China. 

Sweden supports Information and Communication technology in Tanzania and environmentally friendly power in the Mekong region.  Switzerland has supported energy projects in Eastern Europe and Central Asia.  The US supports infrastructure management in Africa and also has a programme to improve electricity there.  It has a programme to support infrastructure improvement in the Philippines and one for roads in Rwanda.  Austria participates in joint programmes in Africa. The Netherlands responds to requests for support on this. 

Brazil has participated in developing regional infrastructure in South America and supports port infrastructure in Benin.  Mexico has assisted Honduras, Nicaragua and Belize with road building.

Trade-related Financial Services

Finland, Germany and Switzerland support trade finance.  Switzerland also supports improving financial access for SMEs.  Germany is also developing countries’ financial sectors including microfinance in Namibia and  Uganda and finance for small enterprises in Algeria.   Portugal’s central Bank provides technical assistance to other central banks.   Ireland supports the development of financial sectors in conflict-affected counties.  Australia has a project to provide joint finance with business to address market failures.   Denmark organises mixed credits, with a particular interest in supporting SMEs.  Italy has support for credit to marketing in Guatemala and Peru.    Japan provides equity finance and trade finance. 

The EC has a regionally based investment facility for Latin America, Central Asia, the ACP countries and countries in its own neighbourhood.  Korea is helping to develop a stock exchange in Viet Nam.  France helps banks to offer finance in sub-Saharan Africa and the Mediterranean.  Greece provides training in banking for Egypt, Georgia, Montenegro, and the Ukraine.  New Zealand supports finance for SMEs and supports microfinance  in the Pacific.  It also provides general training on financial services.  Spain supports a fund to increase finance for SMEs in Haiti.  The US provides training and information on good practice in finance, and also has an agency to offer credit guarantees.  Sweden  is helping to develop financial markets, including securities markets, in Africa.

The UK does research on constraints on finance. Luxembourg’s principal trade-related assistance is in microfinance, including increasing awareness of it and providing technical assistance to countries to develop institutions.     Austria, Belgium and the Netherlands also support micro-finance.

Slovenia supports an investment facility in the Western Balkans.    

None of the developing country donors offers aid in financial services. 

South-South and Triangular Cooperation

Table B1 summarises the countries which have identifiable triangular programmes in their chapters in this Guide.   Nine of the DAC donors mention this explicitly:   this includes many of the larger donors.  Germany is encouraging more use of this, and quotes a case study of Senegal providing its experience in trade facilitation to Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan.  Japan identifies three types:  two stage knowledge transfer, from Japan to a developing country and from that country to a third; parallel transfer, from Japan and a developing country to a third country; and support from Japan to a regional ‘pivot country’ in setting up regional cooperation.   New Zealand gives an example of working with Thailand to support the Mekong region.  Sweden has supported ‘twinning’ between Ghana and LiberiaSwitzerland has had triangular cooperation in intellectual property with Vietnam and Lao.  The US mentions cooperation with Chile to transfer its success in export promotion, customs administration, and agricultural credits to Paraguay and to transfer Chile’s customs expertise to Guatemala.  It has worked with South Africa in the southern Africa region and with Brazil to improve agricultural productivity in Mozambique.   The UK is working with Brazil (UK, 2013).  Denmark says it is active in it. The EC, however,  says only that it supports it.    The Netherlands says “not yet”, and the Czech Republic and Turkey say that they may consider introducing it. 

Among developing countries, Argentina, Brazil, Indonesia and Mexico have been active in triangular aid.  Indonesia works with Japan, Korea and ChinaBrazil has agreements on triangular aid with Germany, Italy, Japan, and Spain, and is considered one of the leading participants in such aid (Cabral, Weinstock, 2010).  The UK is now supporting its transfer of experience in agriculture to African countries (UK 2013).  Argentina works with Japan, and includes technical assistance and exchange of information. Mexico has partnerships with Japan, Spain, and Germany, working in Central America, the Caribbean and South America on environment and agriculture.  The Russian Federation mentions potential collaboration with Brazil, India, China and South Africa on a development bank.

 

Other Trade-related Activities

Belgium has a centre to promote Fair Trade, in addition to its activities to help countries with compliance mentioned above.  Other countries report assistance in implementing fair trade standards under Supply Capacity.  Canada has a programme to develop entrepreneurs in Africa.   Portugal mentions academic courses to train engineers and Spain the sharing of scientific and technology information.    The EC has a programme to assist exports from Palestine.

As was noted in the last edition, some  activities which are listed as trade capacity building are also closely related to the interests of the donor country, including those promoting information within the donor and corporate social responsibility in the donors’ foreign investors.  Some ‘Fair Trade’ initiatives could be included in donor-related aid.  Some bilateral donors are advising countries on their trade policies towards and negotiations with the donor, notably the EC and some member countries for African countries and Australia and  New Zealand in the Pacific.  Some which are investors themselves are  advising countries on policies to make treatment of foreign investors more friendly.  There still appears to be no consensus on shifting types of capacity building where there are high risks of conflict of interest into the multilateral and regional agencies.

 

References

Brant, Philippa (2011) ‘China and the international aid regime:  trilateral initiatives’,

Cabral, Lidia, Weinstock, Julia (2010)  Brazilian Technical Cooperation for Development, ODI report  

Denney, Lisa; Wild, Leni (2011) Arab Donors:  Implications for Future Development Cooperation, EDC2020  Policy Brief 13   http://www.edc2020.eu/4.0.html

Grimm, Sven (2011a)  Engaging with China in Africa—Trilateral Cooperation as an Option?  EDC2020 Policy Brief 9.    http://www.edc2020.eu/4.0.html

Grimm, Sven (2011b)  South Africa as a Development  Partner in Africa, EDC2020 Policy Brief 11     http://www.edc2020.eu/4.0.html

Grimm, Sven (2011c)  Transparency of Chinese Aid, Publish What you fund and Centre for Chinese Studies August. 

Hayashikawa, Masato ( 2012) ‘Chinese Aid for Trade and its impact on the global aid effectiveness agenda’ in Ricardo Melendez-Ortiz, Christophe Bellmann, Miguel Rodriquez Mendoza, ed, The Future and the WTO:  Confronting the Challenges, ICTSD.

 

Humphrey, John (2011a)  Chinese Development Cooperation and the EU, EDC2020 Policy Brief 17    http://www.edc2020.eu/4.0.html

Humphrey, John (2011b) Indian Development Cooperation:  Key Traits and Prospects,EDC2020 Policy Brief 16.   http://www.edc2020.eu/4.0.html

Kim, Soyeum (2011), ‘To be or not to be emerged, “DAC-Ability” is the Question:  lessons from Japan and Korea’, presented EADI General Conference 19-22 September.  

Lätt, Jeanne (2011) Mexico as an ‘Emerging Donor’ EDC2020 Policy Brief 18   http://www.edc2020.eu/4.0.html

Motta Veiga, Pedro da, ‘Brazilian aid’ presented EADI General Conference 19-22 September.

United Kingdom (2013) ‘Tackling hunger in Africa using Brazilian expertise’, DFID press release 15 May.

WTO (2013), Trade Policy Review: Report by the Secretariat:   Brazil.  WT/TPR/S/283.

WTO, OECD (2011), Case stories at
http://www.oecd.org/document/36/0,3746,en_21571361_46750445_48184932_1_1_1_1,00.html