  
  
INF/IFD/R/ 21 
31 March 2021  
(21-2695) Page: 1/5 
  Original: English  
 
  
WTO STRUCTURED DISCUSSIONS ON  
INVESTMENT  FACILITATION FOR DEVELOPMENT  
NEGOTIATING MEETING HELD ON 8 AND 9 MARCH 2021 
Summary of discussions by the Coordinator1 
An open -ended negotiating meeting of the Structured Discussions on Investment Facilitation for 
Development, coordinated by Ambassador Mathias Francke (Chile), was held on  8 and 9 March 2021.  
As indicated in the annotated agenda circulated to all WTO Members ahead of the meeting2, the 
purpose of this meetin g was: (a) to continue the negotiations on an Agreement on Investment 
Facilitation for Development; (b) to discuss the three newly added provisions of the Revised Draft 
Text prepared by the Coordinator , circulated to all Members o n 2 March 2021; (c) to discuss the 
'firewall' provisions based on the outcome report of the 'Discussion group on scope -firewall'; and 
(d) to hold focused discussions on the concept of 'authorization' . 
1  CONTINUATION OF THE NEGOTIATIONS BASED ON THE INFORMAL CONSOLIDATED 
TEXT  
1.1.  Participating Members managed to complete the second review, in negotiating mo de, of the 
remaining provisions based on the latest version of the informal consolidated text,3 alongside any 
other available text proposals by Member s not yet incorporated into it. Negotiations resumed where 
they had been adjourned at the 9 February 2021 meeting. Unless otherwise specified, references to 
sections, elements and paragraphs hereafter refer to the informal consolidated text.  
1.1 Business obstacle alert mechanism (element 18 in section IV)  
1.2.  The discussion was based on a specific proposal by a Member  who explained that its propos ed 
business obstacle alert mechanism constituted a 'central point ' where investors could register 
concrete challeng es that they faced  – for instance, with obtaining an authorization . In its country, 
such a mechanism had been put in place in 2020 . Currently, the proponent' s authorities were in the 
process of further automating the system with a view to providing an onli ne centralized platform. 
The proponent explained that the mechanism was inspired by  the 'Trade Obstacle Alert Mechanism' , 
implemented under an initiative of the International Trade Centre , which allowed companies to post 
online information , queries and reports about the challenges they face d in their daily export and 
import operations . While several delegations conceded that such a mechanism could be usefully 
applied to improve the investment environment and facilitate both the attraction an d retention of 
foreign direct investment, they saw it as a voluntary mechanism, rather than as part of a future 
multilateral investment facilitation agreement.  
1.3.  Several Members asked for further clarification o f the practical aspects regarding the 
implementation  of such a mechanism . They pointed out the functional similarities and potential 
overlaps between the two proposed mechanisms, the business obstacle alert mechanism , and the 
proposed investment facilitato r – both of which they c onsidered as challenging to implement . It was  
suggested that , instead,  the proposal could be included as part of a future work program , or for the 
exchange of good practices in the future WTO Committee on Investment Facilitation.  
 
1 This summary, prepared and circulated under the Coordinator's responsibility, provides a non -
exhaustive, illustrative review of the issues addressed by Members at the meeting.  
2 Document INF/IFD/W/31  dated 2 March 2021.  
3 Document INF/IFD/RD/50/Rev. 9 dated 2 March 2021.  INF/IFD/R/ 21 
 
- 2 - 
 
  1.2  Domestic supplier databases (element 20 in section IV)  
1.4.  The discussion was based on a revised proposal on domestic supplier databases  presented  by 
a Member .4 The proponent  explained that its revised proposal was framed  as an encouragement  and 
that it accommodated  Members' previously identified concerns on the need to limit Members' 
responsibility derived from the use of such databases by clearly stating  that Members shall not be 
liable for the information shared in such  databases , particularly where they were maintained by the 
private sector  (e.g., by a business association) . 
1.5.  Many  participating Members saw value in including the revised  provision on domestic supplier 
databases in the future Agreement and considered such databases as  a useful instrument to help 
match ing foreign  investors  with domestic suppliers – including  MSMEs . The Coordinator stated that 
he would propose some 'revised draft text' on this element, while accommo dating  some of the 
concerns expressed by a couple of participating Members.      
1.3  Responsible business conduct (element 26 in section VI)  
1.6.  The discussion was based on a new proposal by a Member5 – in addition to those  already 
included in the informal consol idated text . The proponent explained that the first paragraph of its 
proposal – built on existing proposals made by other Members  – reaffirm ed the importance Members 
placed on internationally recognized responsible business conduct standards, guidelines, and 
principles . The proposal explicitly provided flexibility by making it clear that Members were only 
recognizing those international standards that they ha d endorsed  or that they supported. The second 
paragraph  of the proposal called for Members to encourage investors to maintain meaningful 
engagement and dialogue with Indigenous p eoples  and local communities . Many participants 
welcomed the new  proposal , which streamlined  some of the proposals already co ntained in the 
informal consolidated text .  
1.7.  Many participating Members saw the inclusion of a provision on responsible business  conduct 
in the future Agreement as contributing to sustainable investment and development. The title 
'responsible business conduct' was preferred to the term 'corporate social responsibility' , which was 
used more for private philanthropic activities of companies . Also, the title of Section VI ('Cross -
cutting Issues') was viewed as misleading and nee ded to be replaced . Some concerns were raised 
regarding the identification of those  international standards  and guidelines that no t all participating 
Members had endorsed or were supportive  of. Finally, s everal  delegation s considered that it was 
important  also to include in the provision  an explicit reference to  'due diligence' , which  was an 
important concept for responsible business conduct .  
1.4  Measures against corruption (element 27  in section VI ) 
1.8.  Participating Members  reviewed the text proposals included u nder element 27 of the informal 
consolidated text . One of the proponents explained that it had revised its text proposal6 to address 
concerns expressed by Members  at a previous meeting , remov ing some of the elements that 
Members had found too prescriptive . Another proponent explained that its proposed footnote ,7 which 
was added to another Member's text proposal , was to ensure that  the anti-corruption provision s 
applied at all times . 
1.9.  Many delegations expressed their support  to includ e provision s to prevent and fight corruption 
in the future IFD  Agreement . A number of Member s strongly supported referring to international  
anti-corruption  instruments and standards in order to ensure that the disciplines defined under the 
future IFD Agreement would be  in line with such international standards and would remain so in 
case the standards should evolve over time . In analogy to  the provision on responsible business 
conduct, several  delegations preferred to list in the text of the future Agreement only those 
instruments and standards adhered to , or supported  by, the broad WTO membership. Many 
participating Members stressed the importance of keeping a balance between the approach on anti-
corruption and th e one on responsible business conduct in order to reflect the equal importance that 
Members attached to both issues . Finally, the point was made that the WTO dispute settlement 
 
4 Document INF/IFD/RD/62 dated 26 November 2020.  
5 Contained in document INF/IFD/RD/70 dated 8 March 2021.  
6 Document INF/IFD/RD/71 dated 8 March 2021.  
7 As stipulated  under  section 7 of its proposal contained in document INF/IFD /RD/66 . INF/IFD/R/ 21 
 
- 3 - 
 
  procedures shall not apply to matters arising from the application and enforcement o f anti-corruption 
laws of Members.  
1.5  General, Security and Financial Exceptions ( element s 29, 30 and 30 bis in section VII)  
1.10.  Regarding the general and security exceptions, several  delegations stressed the need for 
consistency with existing WTO agreements  - advocating for the 1994 GATT and GATS language to 
apply mutatis mutandis  to investment facilitation for development. A few participating Members 
reserv ed their positions with respect to the inclusion of the GATT exception s. A delegation stated 
the need to have a more specific exception provision for taxation.  
1.11.  Turning to the financial exceptions, contained in element 30  bis, most participating Members 
saw value in including an exception for prudential measures in the financial sector. The discussion 
was base d on the two proposals submitted by Members. Several participating Members saw merit 
in including a provision based on the prudential carve -out contained in paragraph 2(a) of the GATS 
Annex on Financial Services . A delegation questioned paragraph 2.7  of the informal consolidated 
text (based on the second sentence of paragraph 2(a) of the GATS Annex on Financial Services) , 
arguing that it had self-cancelling effects that  could disable the financial exceptions . Finally, several  
Members raised questions on  paragraph 2.8  of the informal consolidated text ,8  arguing  that such a 
broad  exception  could possibly nullify some of the transparency provisions  of the future Agreement .  
2  DISCUSSION OF REVISED DRAFT TEXT PREPARED BY THE COORDINATOR  
2.1.  Participating Members rev iewed the latest version of the Revised Draft Text9 put forward by 
the Coordinator covering three provisions based on Members' discussions held at the intersessional 
meeting on 9 February 2021 . Overall, participating Members welcomed the latest version of the 
Revised Draft Text  and estimated that the proposed language appropriately addressed the issues 
raised during previous discussions .  
2.2.  Regarding Article 3 on single information portal ,10 participating Members welcomed its focus 
on the transparency aspects  – including the new title  of the provision, which includes the term 
"information" . Several  delegations , which  did not have such a single portal in their domestic systems , 
were nonetheless ready to positively consider th e proposed text  given its flexibility language.  
2.3.  With respect to Article 10 bis on authorization fees applying to financial services (Section III) , 
participating Members welcomed the revised draft text ; some  of them suggest ed regrouping  the 
articles related to financial services into a  dedicated  annex or section.   
2.4.  Finally, concerning Article 15 on focal point(s) (Section IV), many participating Members 
supported the flexibility to establish "one or more" focal points as well as  their responsibility to 
respond to enquiries from investors or persons seeking to invest (paragraph 15.1(a)). Concerning 
the possibility to assign additional functions to the focal point(s), such as problem -solving (paragraph  
15.3), while several participating Members welcomed the  flexibility introduced in th e drafting, some 
reserved their positions  on that paragraph.  
3  DISCUSSION ON 'FIREWALL' PROVISIONS  
3.1.  The discussion on the 'firewall' provisions relating to the insulation of the future IFD A greeme nt 
from international investment agreements (IIAs) was based on the text contribution by the facilitator 
of the 'Discussion group on scope -firewall ' circulated to all Members on  4 March 2021. T he facilitator 
of the group  presented the three firewall provis ions included in the text contribution , respectiv ely, 
under Scope, Most  Favoured Nation, and Dispute Settlement . He explained that the text without 
brackets was supported by all Members  participating in the Discussion Group , whereas views still 
diverged on  the provisions  appearing in between brackets .  
 
8 The p aragraph in question states that: "Noting in the framework applies to non -discriminatory 
measures of general application in pursuit of monetary and related credit policies or exchange rate policies".  
9 Revised Draft Text by the Coordinator, restricted document without symbol, dated 2 March 2021 . 
10 See paragraphs 3.7 to 3.10 . in Section II  of the Revised Draft Text dated 2 March 2021.  INF/IFD/R/ 21 
 
- 4 - 
 
  3.2.  As to the inclusion of a non-exportation clause  under 'Scope' in the IFD Agreement , most 
participating Members saw value in including it in order to avoid that the future IFD  Agreement be 
invoked in investor -state disputes under Members' respective IIAs. Regarding  a possible non-
importation clause  under 'Scope' to prevent the use of IIA provisions for the interpretation of the 
IFD agreement , some Members considered it necessar y, while other s considered that such a 
provision was not needed.  
3.3.  With respect to  introducing a firewall provision for purposes of clarifying the concept of 
"treatment" under the Most-Favoured -Nation (MFN)  treatment, a few  delegation s reserved their 
positio n regarding the inclusion of an MFN provision in th e future  IFD agreement.  Two delegation s 
indicated their intention to submit proposal s on the  wording of the  MFN provision in order to  better 
define the "treatment" that should be accorded .  
3.4.  On "dispute settlement", all participating Members who intervened saw value in including a 
clause providing exclusive jurisdiction to the WTO dispute settlement system on disputes arising 
under the I FD agreement. A number of participating Members considered  that th e second paragraph 
under 'Dispute Settlement ' in the facilitator's text contribution, which aimed at limiting the Panel's 
sources of interpretation when resolving disputes under the WTO DSU, was already covered by  the 
first paragraph under  'Scope'.  
4  CONCEPTUAL DISCUSSION ON THE CONCEPT OF 'AUTHORIZATION'  
4.1.  Participating Members discussed the concept of 'authorization' on the basis of the guiding 
questions circulated by the Coordinator in advanc e of the meeting . Regarding the application of the 
concept of 'authorization' to the different stages of the investment life -cycle, many delegations 
advocated applying this concept to the whole investment life -cycle, whereas some participants 
preferred to limit its application only to the initial stages of an investment – i.e., to the esta blishment 
phase , including the renewal of an investment.  
4.2.  Further to the discussion, participating Members provided examples on the type s of procedures, 
decisions, and administrative actions that an authorization would cover at the different stages of the 
investment cycle. One delegation raised the question of whether an auction mechanism would be 
covered by th e future agreement.  
4.3.  Concerning the need to specify that the provisions on 'authorization' under th e future 
agreement apply with respect to an 'invest or of another Member', several delegations stated that , 
while the same authorization would , presumably,  apply to both domestic and foreign investors, the 
aim of the future agreement was to provide obligations with regard  to foreign investors. Overall, 
participating Members saw value in including a definition of "authorization ".  
5  OTHER BUSINESS  
5.1.  Regarding outreach activities, the Coordinator informed participating Members that he had met 
with several WTO group coordinators. In addition , the Coordinat or recalled that, on 24 February  and 
3 March 2021 , he had participated in High -level Regional Round table discussions for the Caribbean 
and Africa,  respectively  organized by  ITC, the German Development Institute,  and the World 
Economic Forum together with local and regional partner organizations . The objective of these 
outreach efforts was to  better unde rstand Members' interests and concerns with regard to , and 
increase participation in , the negotiations . 
5.2.  Participating Members supported t he proposal by the Coordinator to organize a debriefing 
session for relevant international organizations working in the  field of investment facilitation in the 
margin of the next negotiating meeting in April 2021.  Several participating Members expressed their 
appreciation to the Coordinator for his efforts and welcomed the proposed debriefing session . A 
delegation reported  that it was  planning to organize an outreach activit y for Members of the  Arab 
Group . 
5.3.  The Coord inator further informed participa ting Members  of the creation of a new 'small group' 
on the facilitation of  the entry and temporary stay  of business pe rsons  for investment purposes , 
which would be facilitated by Guatemala.  The small group w ould be open to all interested Members 
and w ould regularly report back to the plenary.  INF/IFD/R/ 21 
 
- 5 - 
 
  6  NEXT MEETING  
6.1.  The Coordinator informed  participating Members that , an intersessional meeting would be held 
on 22 March 2021. Its main purpose would be to discuss the provisions newly added to, as well as 
further revised in , the Revised Draft text , and also to discuss the "firewall" provisions , for which t he 
Coordinator  would prepare a brief text. As foreseen in the schedule of meeti ngs, the next regular 
negotiating meeting would be held in the second part of April 2021.  
__________  