RESTRICTEDWORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONWT/IFSC/M/6
25 February 2003
(03-1138)
Integrated Framework Steering Committee
Sixth and Seventh Sessions
REPORT ON THE 6TH AND 7TH MEETING OF THE
INTEGRATED FRAMEWORK STEERING COMMITTEE (IFSC)
Friday17 January and Wednesday 29 January 2003, WTO, Geneva
1. The Integrated Framework Steering Committee (IFSC) held its 6th meeting on 17 January, and
its 7th meeting on 29 January 2003 at the WTO, Geneva.  The adopted agendas are reproduced in
Annex 1.
A. REPORTS  BY THE IFWG CHAIRMAN ON THE 33RD MEETING OF THE IFWG
HELD ON 17-18 OCTOBER 2002  AND THE  34TH MEETING,  HELD ON 16 JANUARY
2003.
2. In reporting on the main outcome of the two meetings of the Integrated Framework Working
Group (IFWG),  its Chairman  made the following poi nts:  the most urgent challenge of the IF ahead
was the elaboration of a credible, systematic and predictable process of follow up  to the DTIS.
General satisfaction had been expressed by the LDCs involved in the IF process.  The leadership of
the World Bank in the preparation of the DTIS was recognized.  Further extension of the IF wouldonly be considered after the forthcoming IF Evaluation.  There was a need to establish clear criteria
of eligibility for funds from Window II of the IF  Trust Fund.  The concrete linkages between the IF
and the PRSP need to be shown and brought to the fore.  The IFSC took note of the Reports made.
B. IF TRUST FUND
3. The representative of UNDP presented the financial report on the Integrated Framework Trust
Fund (IFTF) which includes its current financial situation.  The report showed that the financial
situation in Window I  was sufficient to cover expenditure of  new Diagnostic Trade Studies, butthat the situation as regards Window II pointed to the need for new resources to finance more
follow-up activities.  Bilateral consultations between the UNDP and Switzerland would be held in
order to clarify a technical issue concerning the allocation of the Swiss contribution.  The meeting
took note of the Financial Report and of the statements made.
C. IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS AND RESULTS: REPORT BY THE COUNTRY
REPRESENTATIVES AND FACILITATORS ON BURUNDI, CAMBODIA,
DJIBOUTI, ERITREA, ETHIOPIA, GUINEA, LESOTHO, MALI, MALAWI,
MADAGASCAR, MAURITANIA, NEPAL, SENEGAL, YEMEN
4. In reviewing the stages of implementation in  the fourteen countries to which the IF is
currently extended,  the representative of the World Bank reported on progress made in all countries
where it had carried out IF-related activities while UNDP reported on Djibouti.   A table of the
current status of progress in each of the fourteen countries is in Annex 2.
5. Representatives of several least-developed countries and development partners made
interventions.  In particular the following:WT/IFSC/M/6
Page 2
Madagascar:  need for institutional support from the Agencies to hold the national validation
workshop at the beginning of the year.
Mauritania: follow- up mechanism to the National Workshop was being put in place by the
government and would hold meetings once every trimester. The Facilitator should be involved
from the beginning.
Ethiopia:  a first workshop took place in November 2002,  while a second one was scheduled
for March 2003 to validate the DTIS.Guinea:  further clarification by the Agencies concerning the use of U$S 300.000 allocated
out of the IF Trust Fund for the preparation of the DTIS needed.  The representatives of the
World Bank would provide the clarification sought.
Bangladesh: concern that the relatively small amounts of money contributed to the IF Trust
Fund would not be sufficient to deal with all th e activities in all the countries involved in the
IF process.
The Netherlands: important to maintain a coherent approach for allocations out of Window II
of the IF Trust Fund and to avoid ad-hoc situations.  Netherlands will be the Facilitator in
Yemen.  Government considering a second contribution to the IF Trust Fund.
European Commission:  the Terms of Reference for each DTIS should  fit  the profile of the
LDC concerned.     Caution should be had to ensure that the LDCs keep ownership of the
DTIS,  not the Facilitator.  Concern that little was known about the IF in the LDCs;  more
should be done to involve and inform the local stakeholders.
Zambia: need to increase funding and to continue to explain and publicize the IF process in
each  LDC capital among local authorities.
Canada:  important to continue synergy-building between the IF and JITAP.
Denmark: clarification of the Terms of Reference of Window II of the IF Trust Fund needed.
United States:   interested in becoming Facilitator in Mozambique.
World Bank: as illustration of the Agency's to tal commitment to the IF, more staff had been
assigned to work on the follow-up process and a request for additional funds to contribute to
Window II had been made.  Coordination between the agencies of the various steps in the IF
process  required burden sharing of bureaucratic  requirements involved.  Concrete results on
the ground were the predominant indicators of success.
6. The IFSC took note of the statements made,  welcomed  the satisfaction expressed in general
with the current progress, and reconfirmed its comm itments to the IF Process.  Based on experience
with the IF so far, the IFSC reiterated the importance of  involving national consultants throughout
all stages of the process;  the need for a systematic and predictable approach for the follow up
stages;  and the importance of continued dialogue between the national Ministers responsible for
Trade and their counterparts responsible for matters of Finance and/or Development.WT/IFSC/M/6
Page 3
D. SECOND EVALUATION OF THE INTEGRATED FRAMEWORK
7. The Terms Of Reference (TORs) for the IF Evaluation agreed upon by the IFWG at its 34th
meeting were considered  by the IFSC at its 6th and 7th session and approved at its 7th session.
Consensus was reached based on the TORs, agreed upon earlier by the IFWG and proposals made
by the Least-Developed Countries. The IFSC  au thorised the Chair of the IFWG  to finalise
arrangements for the tendering process with UNDP,  in line with the IFWG's decision on this matter.
The tight schedule of the Evaluation process was recalled.  The approved TOR are in Annex 3.
E. EXTENSION OF THE IF
8. The Chair of the IFWG recalled that the Heads of Agencies, at their second meeting, had
noted that the launch of additional IF DTIS's would be preceded by a thorough evaluation of the IF.
Accordingly, the IFWG had agreed  that a decision on additional DTIS's  would be deferred and
taken within the context of the evaluation of the IF .   The IFSC took note of the statement made and
agreed to come back to this issue at its next meeting.
F. INTERIM REPORT BY THE DIRECTOR-GENERAL OF THE WTO TO THE
GENERAL COUNCIL
9. The IFSC  took note of the Interim Report (document WT/GC/W/485/Rev.1).
G. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE IF AND JITAP
10. The IFSC was briefed by ITC on the proceedings and outcome of the JITAP CTF Steering
Group Meeting of 19 December 2002 . The Chairman proposed that the IFSC would have a
substantial discussion on this item at a subsequent date.  It was so agreed.
H. IMPLEMENTATION OF THE DECISION ON SUPPORT FOR THE IF NATIONAL
ARRANGEMENTS
11. The IFSC agreed  to come back to this issue at its next meeting.
I. IF WEBSITE
12. The IFSC took note of the report of th e World Bank and welcomed the domain name
(www.integratedframework.com).
J. THIRD HEADS OF AGENCY MEETING
13. The IMF reiterated its offer to host the thir d Heads-of-Agency Meeting and suggested the
date of 10 July 2003. The IFSC welcomed the offer by the IMF and took note  of the statement made.
K. IMPLEMENTATION OF THE FOLLOW-UP ACTIVITIES TO THE IF ROUND
TABLE MEETINGS IN BANGLADESH, THE GAMBIA, HAITI, TANZANIA AND
UGANDA
14. The representative of the ITC gave an overview of progress made in the follow-up activities
in each of the five LDCs.   The IFSC  welcomed the progress made and took note of the statements
made.WT/IFSC/M/6
Page 4
L. OTHER BUSINESS
15. The representative of Mozambique requested that the IF be extended to her country.  A
formal request would be submitted to the WTO Secretariat shortly.
16. The IFSC agreed  to hold its next meeting on 14 March 2003.
In the absence of any other business, the meeting was adjourned.WT/IFSC/M/6
Page 5
ANNEX 1
INTEGRATED FRAMEWORK STEERING COMMITTEE
Provisional Agenda for the 6th Session of the IF Steering Committee
Friday, 17 January 2003
1. The Integrated Framework Steering Committee will hold its Sixth Session on 17 January
2003, beginning at 10 a.m. , in the Centre William Rappard.
2. The items proposed for the agenda are as follows.
(a) Adoption of the agenda
(b) 33rd  and 34th meetings of the Integrated Framework Working Group (IFWG): report
by the Chairman of the IFWG;
(c) IF Trust Fund
(i) Financial report by UNDP
(ii) Clarification of the TORs of Window II: report by the Chairman of the IFWG
(d) Implementation process and results: report by Lead Facilitators and country
representatives on: Burundi, Cambodia, Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Guinea, Lesotho,
Mali, Malawi, Madagascar, Mauritania, Nepal, Senegal, Yemen:
(i) DTIS, national trade integration seminars and Action Matrices;
(ii) Established Linkage to PRSP and/or Consultative Group; and
(iii) Donors Round Table
(e) Implementation of the decision on support for the IF national arrangements: report by
UNDP
(f) Implementation of the follow-up activities to the IF Round Table Meetings in
Bangladesh, the Gambia, Haiti, Tanzania and Uganda: report by ITC.
(g) Extension of the IF:
- Technically reviewed requests from Benin, Chad, Sao Tome and Principe,
and Togo: report by the World Bank
- Technical review of the requests from Angola, Laos, Maldives and Zambia:
report by the World Bank
- New requests from Burkina Faso and the Gambia
(h) Evaluation of the Integrated Framework: report by the Chairman of the IFWGWT/IFSC/M/6
Page 6
(i) Interim report by the DG of the WTO to the General Council: paragraph 43 of the
Doha Ministerial Declaration report by the Chairman of the IFWG
(WT/GC/W/485/Rev.1)
(j) Relationship between the IF and JITAP: statement by ITC
(k) IF website: report by the World Bank
(l) Third Heads of Agency meeting: report by the IMF
(m) Report of the 2nd IFWG-DAC meeting, November 2002.
(n) Joint IF seminar "Trade Mainstreaming and Enhancing the IF Approach" 31 October
– 1 November 2002:  report by the Chairman of the IFWG
(o) Other business
- Date next meetingWT/IFSC/M/6
Page 7
INTEGRATED FRAMEWORK STEERING COMMITTEE
Provisional Agenda for the 7th Session of the IF Steering Committee
Wednesday, 29 January 2003
1. The Integrated Framework Steering Committee will hold its Seventh Session on 29 January
2003, beginning at 11 a.m. , in the Centre William Rappard.
2. The items proposed for the agenda are as follows.
(a) Adoption of the agenda;
(b) Terms of Reference for the Evaluation of the Integrated Framework;
(c) Any other business.WT/IFSC/M/6
Page 8ANNEX 2: INTEGRATED FRAMEWORK – STATUS OF LDCS
INTEGRATED FRAMEWORK – STATUS OF LDCs
As of January 10, 2003
COUNTRIES IF STATUS PRE-MISSION MISSION Delivery to LDC WORKSHOPDONOR
AGENCY/FACILITATOR
Angola Review complete
Benin Review complete
Burundi Work initiated 30/11/2002 28/02/2003 30/04/2003 30/05/2003 France
Cambodia IF study completed 01/08/2001 01/11 /2001 02/02/2002
Chad Review complete
Djibouti Preparing activities14/12/2002 02/2003 08/2003Consultations by LDC
Representatives.
Eritrea Work initiated 15/10/2002 TBC1TBC
Ethiopia Work initiated 26/08/2002 15/ 11/2002 30/02/2003 Eur opean Commission
Guinea Work initiated15/09/2002 15/12/2002 15/03/2003Consultations by LDC
Representatives.
Lao PDR Review complete World Bank (?)
Lesotho IF study completed 24/11/ 2001 22/03/2002 15/09/ 2002 United Kingdom
Madagascar IF study completed 01/07/2003 01/10/2003 TBC World Bank
Malawi If study completed 28/03/ 2002 27/04/2002 30/12/2002 Norway (TBC)
                                                     
1 TBC: To be confirmedWT/IFSC/M/6
Page 9Maldives Request received
Mali Work initiated 01/2003 01/04/2003 15/07/2003 United States
Mauritania IF study completed07/2001 10/200111/2001
11/2002European Commission
Nepal Work initiated 26/08/2002 30/09/2002 15/02/2003 United Kingdom
Sao Tome/Principe New govt to reconfirm interest
Senegal IF study completed 28/11/2001 04/02/2002 30/08/2002 16/12/2002 The European Commission
Togo Review complete
Yemen IF study completed 13/02/2002 15/05/2002 30/08/2002 TBC Netherlands
Zambia Review complete
Bangladesh Roundtable follow-up N/A2N/A N/A N/A
Gambia Roundtable follow-up N/A N/A N/A N/A
Haiti Roundtable follow-up N/A N/A N/A N/A
Tanzania Roundtable follow-up N/A N/A N/A N/A
Uganda Roundtable follow-up N/A N/A N/A N/A
                                                     
2 N/A: Non ApplicableWT/IFSC/M/6
Page 10
ANNEX  3
WORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONWT/IFSC/3/Rev.1
4 February 2003
(03-0706)
Integrated Framework Steering Committee
TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR THE IF EVALUATION
Revision
1. BACKGROUND: MANDATE FOR THE IF EVALUATION
1. The functioning of the IF for the LDCs is due for an evaluation.  The mandate for the
evaluation is embedded in several decisions already taken by agencies, trade ministers, and several
requests by recipient countries and donors for a review.
(a) In the last paragraph of the Communiqué by the Heads of Agency, New York, July
2000, Agency Heads agreed to re-visit the issue of “enlargement” after two years
within the framework of determining whether improvements to the IF were working;
(b) As part of the adoption of the IF Pilot Scheme, 12 February 2001, WTO Members
agreed (following extensive consultations with core agencies) that as the Pilot
Scheme was being implemented, progress would be monitored and reviewed,
including on a country-by-country basis; 3
(c) In paragraph 43 of the Doha Ministerial Declaration, Ministers urged the six core
agencies, in coordination with development partners, to explore the enhancement of
the IF with a view to addressing the LDCs’ supply-side constraints, the extension ofthe model to all LDCs, the appraisal of the Pilot Scheme in three LDCs, and to review
the IF;
(d) In paragraph 7 of the Heads of Agency Communiqué, 26 February 2002, Agency
Heads agreed to the extension of the IF to be preceded by a thorough review; and,
(e) At the 31
st meeting of the IAWG, the Group agreed that an external evaluation of the
IF was desirable and necessary, and that this evaluation should be undertaken in
2003, but before the Fifth WTO Ministerial Conference.  The Group agreed that it
would develop the TORs.  To this end, agencies, donors and LDCs’ representatives
were requested to forward inputs to th e Chairman who would propose draft TORs to
the Group at its 33rd meeting.
                                                     
3 WT/LDC/SWG/IF/13WT/IFSC/M/6
Page 11
WT/IFSC/3/Rev.1
Page 2
OBJECTIVES OF THE EVALUATION
2. The evaluation should focus on  six clear objectives:
(a) the impact of the Integrated Framework in linking trade, development and poverty
reduction and in mainstreaming trade into PRSPs and/or development plans and its
effectiveness as a model for trade capacity building.  The lessons learned in this
regard;
(b) the Impact of the Integrated Framework as a means of generating coordinated donor
support and sufficient funding to a government-owned trade capacity building
programme;
(c) reviewing the roles and responsibilities of agencies, donors and the LDCs, with a
view to further clarifying the extent to which they have implemented these roles and
responsibilities under the re-vamped Integrated Framework;
(d) addressing the urgent challenge of a systematic and predictable implementation and
follow-up process in the post-DTIS stages;
(e) effectiveness of the IF as a mechanism to deliver trade-related technical assistance,
and exploring its potential as an instrument for addressing the supply–side constraints
of the LDCs; and,
(f) recommendations on all aspects of these TORs4.
TERMS OF REFERENCE
3. The two objectives of the redesigned IF are: (i) the use of the IF as a mechanism to
mainstream trade into development plans and/or poverty reduction strategies; and, (ii) the use of the
Integrated Framework as a mechanism to deliver trade-related technical assistance.  These two
consensus objectives and donor/agency coordination as prioritized by the partner country remain
fundamental.5 Initial application of the revamped IF began, on a pilot basis, in Cambodia, Mauritania
and Madagascar. Beyond the three pilots, the IF has now been extended in a non-pilot stage to 11
other LDCs.6 Eight (8) other LDCs have applied to benefit from the extension of the IF to their
countries.7
4. While the principles of the revamped IF remain sound, implementation and follow-up to the
DTIS are critical.  This issue is now at core of the IF.  Implementation and follow-up explicitly
involve two elements namely, (i) implementation of the priority TA recommendations for human,
institutional and infrastructure capacity building; and (ii) implementation of the priority policyrecommendations to enable a LDC integrate into the trading system and global economy.  On these
two elements, the process requires clarity.  The specific linkages to the development setting of PRSPs,
development plans, Consultative Group meetings and Round Tables, remain very much unclear.
These are the current and most immediate experiences from the on-going functioning of the IF.  They
are the basis for the evaluation.
                                                     
4 WT/LDC/SWG/IF/2
5 WT/LDC/SWG/IF/2
6 Burundi, Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Guinea, Le sotho, Malawi, Mali, Nepal, Senegal and Yemen.
7 Angola, Benin, Chad, Laos PDR, Maldives, Sao Tome and Principe, Togo and Zambia.WT/IFSC/M/6
Page 12
WT/IFSC/3/Rev.1
Page 3
A. SCOPE OF THE EVALUATION
5. The evaluation team will work with stakeholders at all levels, including the six core agencies
(IMF, ITC, UNCTAD, UNDP, World Bank, and the WTO), donors, LDCs' governments, the private
sector and civil society.  The evaluation will focus, inter alia , on
- status of implementation of recommendations in the first IF Review;
- the status of the old IF 5 Round Table Countries (Bangladesh, The Gambia,
Haiti, Tanzania, and Uganda);
- the process of country selection in the re-vamped IF;
- the procedures for applying the Integrated Framework to selected countries;
- procedures and process for preparing the diagnostic trade integration studies;
quality of the DTIS; selection of consultants; the involvement of core
agencies, LDCs’ beneficiaries, donors;
- defined roles of agencies, donors and Least-Developed Countries;
- stable and predictable mechanisms for the follow-up of the recommendations
in the DTIS;
- linkages of the Integrated Framework to existing development architecture:
e.g. PRSPs, Country Consultative Groups, and Donor Round Tables;
- its potential in addressing supply-side capacity building; and,
- performance criteria/benchmarks for on-going evaluation.
B. IMPLEMENTATION
6. Evaluation of implementation will focus on:
(a) the development of an action plan that results from the DTIS and national workshops;
(b) roles of  Facilitating Donor, LDC recipients, and agencies in implementing the results
of the DTIS;
(c) linkages of the process and results of the DTIS into development plans such as
PRSPs8 and CGs/RTs;
(d) re-focusing of core agency programmes for trade-related technical assistance for the
specific implementation of the results of the DTISs, in programmes for regional and
country operations of the six core agencies and bilateral donors;
                                                     
8 PRSPs are, inter alia, the basis for Bank/Fund policy lending.WT/IFSC/M/6
Page 13
WT/IFSC/3/Rev.1
Page 4
(e) partner country ownership and commitment, such as through the establishment of an
institutional structure for implementation, including for activities and follow-up:national implementation arrangements;
(f) involvement and association of the main regional development banks in the
implementation and follow-up to the results of the DTIS; and, the involvement of
other specialized relevant agencies in im plementation and follow-up to the results of
the DTIS;
C. G
OVERNANCE
(a) The adequacy of the IF management structure, currently incorporating overall
governance (IFSC); day-to-day management (IFWG); fund management (UNDP);
trade mainstreaming (World Bank); and the IF Secretariat (WTO);
D. FUNDING
(a) If funding, modalities, and replenishment cycles;
E. METHODOLOGY
7. The Evaluators will at all times work in close coordination with the Donor Group, the
Agencies, and the Partner Governments concerned.  Their approach will be inclusive and
participatory.  At country level, the Evaluators will need to work with a range of senior government
officials in Trade, Finance and other Ministries/Departments, the PRSP Committees, donors, civil
society, including academia.  In the event that it is not possible to visit all the 19 LDCs to which theIntegrated Framework is currently extended, the Evaluation Team will visit a selection of countries to
be visited.  The countries to be visited will be justified and agreed in consultations between the
Evaluation Team, and the IFSC.
F. IF 
AND JITAP AND OTHER TRADE CAPACITY BUILDING INITIATIVES
(a) Relationship of the IF and JITAP and other trade capacity building initiatives for
human and institutional capacity building;
G. STRENGTHENING THE ROLE OF PARTICIPATING AGENCIES
(a) The role of participating agencies should be examined, particularly with a view to
greater involvement of all Agencies that are in the core Group. Explore the
association with other UN Agencies, as appropriate.
TIMING AND PROCESS FOR ADOPTING REVIEW RESULTS
8. The review will take place over a period of five months.  However, the Evaluation Team is
required to provide interim reports to meetings of the IFSC, as its work progresses.  These front-
loaded reports will enable the Integrated Fram ework Working Group (IFWG) to undertake immediate
corrections and adjustments as necessary.  The initial interim report is expected by  April of 2003.
Reports will be addressed to the Integrated Framework Steering Committee (IFSC) through its
Chairman.  (The IFSC is a tripartite body of the 6 agencies, bilateral donors, and 6 representatives ofthe LDCs, participating on the basis of equality).WT/IFSC/M/6
Page 14
WT/IFSC/3/Rev.1
Page 5
9. The following calendar will apply:
Action
Date
Selection of Evaluation Team by Selection
Board End February 2003
Preparation of a draft review by Evaluation TeamMarch – July  2003
Country visits by Evaluation Team/organization
stakeholders consultations selected LDCsEnd April  2003
Interim Report to the IFSC  April 2003
Comments by agencies, donors and LDCs to the
Evaluation Team15 May 2003
Feedback – The Evaluation Team will ensure a
feedback from LDCs to the draft report, through
the medium of the LDCs' Reps. in the IFWGMay/June
Revised final evaluation report by Evaluation
Team to IFWG15  June 2003
IFWG finalises and adopts the report for
presentation to IFSC30  June 2003
Consideration of evaluation results by IFWG
Heads of Agency3rd Meeting of the IF Heads of Agency meeting,
(July) 2003
Circulation of Report to WTO 5th Ministerial
Meeting and Governing Boards/Councils of Core
AgenciesSeptember – December 2003
FRONT-LOADED REPORT/INTERIM RECOMMENDATIONS
10. Within the scope of these TORs, by end April 2003, the Evaluation Team will present an
Interim Report identifying the most immediate challenges to the Integrated Framework, with
recommendations on how to address them.  Recommendations on a systematic and predictable
follow-up process to the post-DTIS stage, will be one such urgent and priority challenge.
11. In consultation with the LDCs' Representatives in the IFWG, the evaluators will be
responsible for ensuring a feedback from the Least-Developed Countries on the draft report before
final submission.  This procedure will contribute to ownership by the LDCs' partners and to building
consensus on the outcome of the review and hence support to any follow-up actions that the
evaluation may recommend.WT/IFSC/M/6
Page 15
WT/IFSC/3/Rev.1
Page 6
FUNDING
12. Funding for the evaluation will be provided fro m the Integrated Framework Trust Fund.  The
budget for the review will be prepared by the IF S ecretariat, in consultation with the leader of the
Evaluation Team that will be selected.  At the conclusion of the evaluation, a detailed financial report
will be circulated to the IFWG.
EVALUATORS
13. The Evaluation Team for the IF Review will be composed of a team of 4 trade and
development experts, including an expert with LDC experience. The team will function
independently. It will be composed of a lead evaluator, who will have final responsibility for thereport to be submitted to the IFSC. The evaluation team will operate on the basis of these agreed
Terms of Reference.
Evaluator Name
Lead Evaluator
Evaluator – private sector
Evaluator – donor community
Evaluator – LDC community
14. The process of selecting the Evaluators, including the lead evaluator will be based on a
selected tendering process to be managed by a selection board.  The Selection Board will be
composed of three members namely, the Chairman of the IFWG, who will chair the board; a
representative of the donor community and a representa tive of the LDCs to be selected by the LDCs.
The selection process will be completed by the end of February 2003. The selection of the evaluators
by the Selection Board will be based on criteria to be pre-agreed with the IFWG including an LDCMember to be selected by the LDCs and circulated in advance of the tendering process.
__________