Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation in Asia and the Pacific 2021 i
ii Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation in Asia and the Pacific 2021
Copyright © United Nations 2021
All rights reserved
The report is available at: https://www.unescap.org/kp/2022/untf-survey-2021-global
Disclaimers:
The designation employed and the presentation of the material in the Report do not imply the expression of
any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the United Nations concerning the legal status of
any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries.
The United Nations bears no responsibility for the availability or functionality of URLs.
Opinion, figures and estimates set forth in this publication are the responsibility of the authors and should
not necessarily be considered as reflecting the views or carrying the endorsement of the United Nations.
Any errors are the responsibility of the authors. Mention of firm names and commercial products does not
imply the endorsement of the United Nations.
The report has been issued without formal editing.
Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation in Asia and the Pacific 2021 i
Digital and Sustainable
Trade Facilitation: Global Report
2021
Based on the United Nations Global Survey on Digital
and Sustainable Trade Facilitation
ii Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation in Asia and the Pacific 2021
FOREWORD
The COVID-19 pandemic has had a devastating impact on people and economies across the globe. It has
also highlighted the importance of trade facilitation and the need to streamline trade procedures. Given the
essential role of international trade and supply chains play in accessing essential supplies, many countries
have renewed their efforts to simplify and digitalize trade, as suggested by the findings of this report.
This report presents the results of the fourth UN Global Survey on Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation.
It brings together information from countries worldwide on the implementation of a wide range of trade
facilitation measures, going beyond the set of measures included in the WTO Trade Facilitation Agreement
(TFA). The report aims at enabling countries and development partners to take a forward-looking approach
to trade facilitation, better understand and monitor progress, support evidence-based public policies, share
best practices, and identify emerging capacity-building and technical assistance needs.
The fourth Global Survey builds upon the earlier editions and an expanded collection of measures on trade
finance facilitation and trade facilitation in times of crisis. The latter category was incorporated to gather
information on the implementation of short-term measures in response to the COVID-19 pandemic as well
as long-term measures in preparation for future crises and pandemics. The crucial role of trade digitalization
has been emphasized not only for increasing regulatory compliance and reducing illicit financial flows, but
also as an effective means to mitigate trade disruptions during the COVID-19 pandemic. The fourth Global
Survey also pays special attention to sectors and groups with special needs, such as the agricultural sector,
small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and women traders, as international trade is one of the key
means of implementing the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).
As all economies now strive to recover from the COVID-19 crisis, still more needs to be done to make trade
easier for all. We hope that this report and the associated interactive database at untfsurvey.org will prove
helpful in making trade simpler, cheaper, more resilient and sustainable through the application of technology
and innovation to international trade procedures.
Mr. Stephen, Ms. Elisabeth Tuerk, Mr. Mario Castillo, Ms. Rupa Chanda, Mr. Mohamed
Karingi, Director, Director, Economic Director, Director, El Moctar
Regional Cooperation and International Trade, El Hacene,
Integration and Trade Division, Trade and Investment Leader, Shared
Trade Division, Integration and Innovation Economic
ECE
Division, Division, Prosperity Cluster,
ECA
ECLAC ESCAP ESCWA
Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation in Asia and the Pacific 2021 iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The fourth UN Global Survey was jointly conducted by five United Nations Regional Commissions (UNRCs) 
for Africa (ECA), Europe (ECE), Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP), Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC) 
and West Asia (ESCWA). The initiative was led and coordinated by ESCAP. Staff members from the UNRCs 
who directly contributed to the global report include: Nadia Hasham and Mie Vedel from ECA; Khan Salehin 
and Charles Frei from ECE; Jiangyuan Fu, Chorthip Utoktham, Soo Hyun Kim and Yann Duval from ESCAP; 
Sebastian Herreros from ECLAC; and Souraya Zein and Mohamed Chemingui from ESCWA. The report was 
prepared by Jiangyuan Fu and Chorthip Utoktham under the guidance of Soo Hyun Kim and the overall 
supervision of Yann Duval, all from the Trade, Investment and Innovation Division (TIID) of ESCAP. The 
research assistance provided by Ruixin Xie, Yifan Tan and Linyi Chen in data collection and finalizing the 
report is appreciated. Anisa Hussein informally edited the earlier version of the report and Tony Oliver informally 
edited the final draft of the report. Arom Sanguanyuang formatted the report and created the cover design.
Support from the following organizations and individuals is gratefully acknowledged:
Tadateru Hayashi and Esnerjames P. Fernandez from the Asian Development Bank (ADB); Cuong Ba Tran 
and Anki Agustrin from the Association of Southeast Asia Nations (ASEAN) Secretariat; Ghulam Samad, Qaisar 
Abbas and Iskandar Abdullaev from the Central Asia Regional Economic Cooperation (CAREC) Institute; 
Eurasian Economic Commission (EEC); International Trade Centre (ITC); Richard Brennan and Laisiana 
Tugaga from Oceania Customs Organization Secretariat (OCO); Organisation for Economic Cooperation and 
Development (OECD); Poul Hansen, Julian Fraga-Campos and Marianne Dumont from United Nations 
Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), as well as Sangwon Lim from ESCAP and Neijwa 
Mohammed Abdu from ECA, contributed to the survey efforts, in particular by facilitating data collection from 
relevant experts as well as data validation in several countries.
The United Nations Centre for Trade Facilitation and Electronic Business (UN/CEFACT) – an intergovernmental 
body serviced by the ECE – and the United Nations Network of Experts for Paperless Trade and Transport 
in Asia and the Pacific (UNNExT) – a knowledge community supported by ESCAP and ECE – greatly facilitated 
data collection. Inputs to the expert group meeting on trade facilitation in times of crisis and epidemic in the 
Asia-Pacific region (virtual, July 2020). In addition, the results from a pilot survey on trade facilitation in times 
of crisis and pandemic – conducted in 2020 for the Asia-Pacific countries, the results of which were published 
in a regional report in January 2021 – contributed to the development of the additional measures on trade 
facilitation in times of crisis. Comments and suggestions received from participants at the Launch of the UN 
Global Survey on Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation 2021 (virtual, July 2021), at which the 2021 survey 
results were presented, are gratefully acknowledged. The authors are also grateful to the following 
organizations and individuals for their inputs and suggestions for the development of the 2021 survey: 
Alexander R. Malaket, formerly from the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) Banking Commission 
and Andrew Wilson from the ICC for the trade finance facilitation component; Candice White from the World 
Economic Forum (WEF); and Alexandre Larouche-Maltais and Sijia Sun from UNCTAD for the women in 
trade facilitation component.
Preparation of the report benefited from the United Nations Development Account projects “Evidence-based 
trade facilitation measures for economies in transition” and “Transport and trade connectivity in the age of 
pandemics: Contactless, seamless and collaborative UN solutions”.
iv Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation in Asia and the Pacific 2021
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Reducing trade costs is essential for enabling economies to effectively participate in regional and global value
chains, and for them to continue using trade as an important engine of growth and sustainable development.
According to the ESCAP-World Bank Trade Cost Database, trade costs remain high in many regions of the
world. The international supply chain disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic and the recent surge in
shipping costs have put additional pressure on importers and exporters. Trade facilitation, which is aimed at
enhancing efficiency through streamlined and digitalized processes, can help to lower trade costs and increase
economic welfare, particularly in developing and emerging economies.
Based on the 2021 UN Global Survey on Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation, this report reviews the
progress of trade facilitation reforms across 144 countries. The analysis is based on 58 trade facilitation
measures that are classified into four groups (“General Trade Facilitation”, ”Digital Trade Facilitation”,
“Sustainable Trade Facilitation” and “Other Trade Facilitation”) and a further 11 sub-groups covering both
binding and non-binding WTO TFA measures, as well as measures beyond the scope of WTO TFA.
The global average implementation rate of 31 general and digital trade facilitation measures stands at 64.7%.
Despite the grave impact of COVID-19 on global trade, significant progress has been observed in more efficient
trade facilitation over the past two years. The overall implementation rate of measures increased by more
than 5 percentage points between 2019 and 2021. Implementation still varies greatly around the world, with
developed economies achieving the highest level at 81.8%, while the Pacific Islands have the lowest
implementation rate (40.1%). Implementation in Sub-Saharan Africa is 49.1%, second to the Pacific Islands.
South Asia recorded the most progress, with more than 10 percentage point increase since 2019. Sub-Saharan
Africa (6 percentage points), Developed Economies (5.2 percentage points) and Pacific Islands (4.9 percentage
points) also made substantial progress, despite the significant challenges and trade disruptions due to the
COVID-19 pandemic.
In general, WTO TFA-related measures are relatively well-implemented globally. In addition, the COVID-19
pandemic has contributed to the acceleration of digital transformation, with the implementation of ‘Paperless
Trade’ standing at 64%. However, the implementation level of ‘Cross-Border Paperless Trade’ is substantially
low at 38%, with bilateral and subregional paperless trade systems remaining either mostly partial or on
a pilot basis. Nonetheless, progress in the implementation of ‘Paperless Trade’ and ‘Cross-Border Paperless
Trade’ measures is remarkable, with increases of 6.3 and 5.4 percentage points over the past two years,
respectively – the highest improvement in these areas since the introduction of the survey in 2015.
International trade is an engine for economic growth and poverty reduction, and sustainable trade facilitation
is one indispensable dimension of trade facilitation. However, while ‘Agricultural Trade Facilitation’ measures
have been comparatively well-implemented, the implementation of trade facilitation measures aimed at SMEs
and women in business face big challenges, with average implementation rates of 41% and 31%, respectively.
Given their importance in achieving sustainable and inclusive development, particularly in times of crisis, trade
facilitation strategies should be designed in a more holistic and inclusive manner.
The COVID-19 pandemic has revealed many weaknesses of the trading system. The survey results show
that most countries have implemented short-term crisis measures. However, the overall implementation level
of measures in the ‘Trade Facilitation in Times of Crisis’ section stands at only 41%, essentially because
many countries still lack long-term trade facilitation plans to enhance preparedness for future crises. Continued
and sustained efforts should be made to further enhance cooperation, make trade information transparent,
and strengthen the capacity of countries to contribute to recovery and prepare to adequately safeguard against
future crises.
Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation in Asia and the Pacific 2021 v
Moving forward, trade facilitation implementation may be seen as a step-by-step process, based on the groups
of measures included in the survey – i.e., enhancing the institutional arrangement; establishing transparency;
implementing efficient trade formalities; and the development of paperless trade systems. This is followed by
enabling trade data and documents within these systems, including national Single Windows, to be safely
and securely used and reused by authorized stakeholders along the international supply chain (see the
following figure). Countries need to work together to develop and implement the legal and technical protocols
required for the seamless exchange of regulatory and commercial data as well as documentation within and
between countries. In this regard, regional and subregional initiatives – such as the Framework Agreement
on Facilitation of Cross-border Paperless Trade in Asia and the Pacific (CPTA), the expansion of the ASEAN
Single Window Agreement, and the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) Agreement – could support
countries in gradually moving to less paper and then to paperless and cross-border paperless trade by
providing a dedicated, inclusive and capacity-building intergovernmental platform. Indeed, the report finds
that digital trade facilitation measures serve as a great catalyst for trade cost reduction. Empirical evidence
shows that full digital trade facilitation implementation beyond the WTO TFA commitments could cut the average
trade cost by more than 13%, 6.7 percentage points more than that could be expected from meeting
requirements of the WTO TFA.
Moving up the trade facilitation ladder towards seamless international supply chains
Cross-border
paperless trade 100
Paperless trade
80
60
Formalities
40
Transparency
Institutional 20
arrangement and 
cooperation 
0
Performance area Frontier (full implementation)
Global Average Developed Economies
Latin America and the Caribbean Middle East and North Africa
Pacific Islands South and Europe, Caucasus and Central Asia
South Asia South-East and East Asia
Sub-Saharan Africa
Source: The UN Global Survey on Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation, 2021. Available at untfsurvey.org
Note: The figure shows global cumulative trade facilitation implementation scores for different regions in the five groups of trade facilitation
measures included in the survey. Scores are based on the equally weighted implementation of 31 trade facilitation measures, but the
number of measures varies in the five groups. Full implementation of all measures = 100.
vi Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation in Asia and the Pacific 2021
Contents
Page
FOREWORD ....................................................................................................................................... ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................................................................................................................... iii
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................................... iv
ABBREVIATIONS ............................................................................................................................... x
1. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................ 1
1.1 Background and objectives ............................................................................................... 1
1.2 Survey instrument and methodology ................................................................................ 3
1.3 Utilization of report and data ............................................................................................. 7
2.  TRADE FACILITATION IMPLEMENTATION: OVERVIEW ....................................................... 9
2.1 Implementation in countries with special needs ............................................................... 11
2.2 Most and least implemented trade facilitation measures .................................................. 12
2.3 Progress in implementation of trade facilitation measures since 2019 ............................. 14
3. IMPLEMENTATION OF TRADE FACILITATION MEASURES: A CLOSER LOOK .................. 17
3.1 General trade facilitation measures .................................................................................. 17
3.1.1 Transparency ........................................................................................................ 17
3.1.2 Formalities ............................................................................................................ 19
3.1.3 Institutional arrangements and cooperation ......................................................... 20
3.1.4 Transit ................................................................................................................... 21
3.2 Digital trade facilitation ...................................................................................................... 23
3.2.1 Paperless trade .................................................................................................... 23
3.2.2 Cross-border paperless trade ............................................................................... 25
3.3 Sustainable trade facilitation ............................................................................................. 28
3.3.1 Trade facilitation for SMEs ................................................................................... 28
3.3.2 Agricultural trade facilitation ................................................................................. 30
3.3.3 Women in trade facilitation ................................................................................... 32
3.4 Implementation of digital versus sustainable trade facilitation .......................................... 35
3.5 Other trade facilitation ....................................................................................................... 36
3.5.1 Trade finance facilitation ....................................................................................... 36
3.5.2 Trade facilitation in times of crisis ......................................................................... 37
4. CONCLUSION AND THE WAY FORWARD ............................................................................... 41
Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation in Asia and the Pacific 2021 vii
Contents (continued)
ANNEXES
Annex 1. Definitions of the various stages of implementation ......................................................... 48
Annex 2. Groupings of countries with special needs ....................................................................... 49
Annex 3. Trade facilitation implementation by countries in different groups (%) ............................. 50
Annex 4. Trade facilitation implementation: Full dataset versus limited dataset .............................. 54
Annex 5. Implementation stages of selected WTO TFA-related measures globally ........................ 57
List of Tables
Table 1. Intra- and extra-regional comprehensive trade costs (excluding tariff costs) ................... 2
Table 2. Grouping of trade facilitation measures and correspondence with TFA articles ............... 4
Table 3. Most and least implemented measures ............................................................................ 13
Table 4. Changes in trade costs resulting from the implementation of trade facilitation and
paperless trade ................................................................................................................. 43
Table 5. Breakdown of countries that participated in the 2019 and 2021 survey ........................... 54
Table 6. Comparison of regional average – full versus limited dataset .......................................... 56
List of Boxes
Box 1. A three-step approach to data collection and validation ................................................... 6
Box 2. Good practices in cross-border paperless trade ............................................................... 27
Box 3. Good practices on trade facilitation for SMEs................................................................... 29
Box 4. Good practices on agricultural trade facilitation ................................................................ 32
Box 5. Good practices in women in trade facilitation ................................................................... 34
Box 6. Good practices in trade finance facilitation ....................................................................... 37
Box 7. Good practices in trade facilitation in times of crisis ......................................................... 38
Box 8. Assessing the impact of trade facilitation .......................................................................... 43
viii Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation in Asia and the Pacific 2021
Contents (continued)
List of Figures
Figure 1. Average implementation rates of trade facilitation measures around the world ............... 10
Figure 2. Average trade facilitation implementation rates and GDP per capita ............................... 10
Figure 3. Average trade facilitation implementation rates by region and in countries with special
needs ................................................................................................................................ 11
Figure 4. Implementation rates of different sub-groups of trade facilitation measures .................... 12
Figure 5. Progress of implementation of trade facilitation measures by various regions, 2019 and
2021 .................................................................................................................................. 14
Figure 6. Progress of global implementation of trade facilitation measures, 2019 and 2021 .......... 15
Figure 7. Progress of implementation of specific group of trade facilitation measures in various
regions, 2019 and 2021 .................................................................................................... 16
Figure 8. Global implementation of transparency measures in various regions .............................. 18
Figure 9. State of implementation of transparency measures globally ............................................ 18
Figure 10. Global implementation of formalities measures in various regions ................................... 19
Figure 11. State of implementation of formalities measures globally ................................................. 20
Figure 12. Global implementation of institutional arrangement and cooperation measures in
various regions ................................................................................................................. 21
Figure 13. State of implementation of institutional arrangement and cooperation measures
globally .............................................................................................................................. 21
Figure 14. Global implementation of transit facilitation measures in various regions ........................ 22
Figure 15. State of implementation of transit facilitation measures globally ...................................... 22
Figure 16. Global implementation of paperless trade measures in various regions .......................... 23
Figure 17. State of implementation of paperless trade measures globally ........................................ 24
Figure 18. Global implementation of cross-border paperless trade measures in various regions ..... 25
Figure 19. State of implementation of Cross-Border Paperless Trade measures globally ................ 26
Figure 20. Global implementation of trade facilitation for SMEs measures in various regions .......... 28
Figure 21. State of implementation of trade facilitation for SMEs measures globally ........................ 30
Figure 22. Global implementation of agricultural trade facilitation measures in various regions ....... 31
Figure 23. State of implementation of agricultural trade facilitation measures globally ..................... 31
Figure 24. Global implementation of women in trade facilitation measuresin various regions .......... 33
Figure 25. State of implementation of women in trade facilitation globally ........................................ 33
Figure 26. Implementation of digital and sustainable trade dimensions of trade facilitation .............. 35
Figure 27. State of implementation of trade finance facilitation measures globally ........................... 36
Figure 28. State of implementation of trade tacilitation in times of crisis measures globally ............. 38
Figure 29. Trade facilitation implementation and trade costs ............................................................ 42
Figure 30. Trade facilitation implementation and logistics performance ............................................ 42
Figure 31. Impact of trade facilitation implementation on trade costs in various regions................... 44
Figure 32. Moving up the trade facilitation ladder towards seamless international supply chains ..... 46
Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation in Asia and the Pacific 2021 ix
Contents (continued)
Figure 33. Average implementation rates of trade facilitation measures in developed economies ... 50
Figure 34. Average implementation rates of trade facilitation measures in Latin America and the
Caribbean ......................................................................................................................... 50
Figure 35. Average implementation rates of trade facilitation measures in the Middle East and
North Africa ....................................................................................................................... 51
Figure 36. Average implementation rates of trade facilitation measures in the Pacific Islands ......... 51
Figure 37. Average implementation rates of trade facilitation measures in South and East Europe,
Caucasus and Central Asia .............................................................................................. 52
Figure 38. Average implementation rates of trade facilitation measures in South Asia ..................... 52
Figure 39. Average implementation rates of trade facilitation measures in South-East and
East Asia ........................................................................................................................... 53
Figure 40. Average implementation rates of trade facilitation measures in Sub-Saharan Africa ....... 53
Figure 41. Implementation stages of selected WTO TFA-related measures in general trade
facilitation and paperless trade globally ............................................................................ 57
Figure 42. Implementation stages of selected WTO TFA-related measures in transit facilitation
globally .............................................................................................................................. 58
x Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation in Asia and the Pacific 2021
Abbreviations
AACE The African Alliance for Electronic Commerce
ACDD ASEAN Customs Declaration Document
ADB Asian Development Bank
AEO Authorized Economic Operator
AfCFTA African Continental Free Trade Area
AMAK Aia Mwaea Ainen Kiribati
ASEAN Association of Southeast Asian Nations
ASW ASEAN Single Window
ASYCUDA Automated System for Customs Data
BoE Bill of Entry
CPTA Framework Agreement on Facilitation of Cross-border Paperless Trade in Asia and the
Pacific
CAREC Central Asia Regional Economic Cooperation
CBIC Central Board of Indirect Taxes
DGTS Directorate-General of Tax Payer Services
DGF Directorate-General of Foreign Trade
EAC East African Community
ECA United Nations Economic Commission for Africa
ECE United Nations Economic Commission for Europe
ECLAC United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean
ECOWAS Economic Community of West African States
BG Banker’s Guarantee
ESCAP United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific
ESCWA United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia
EU European Union
ERC Export Registration Certificate
GATT General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade
ICC International Chamber of Commerce
ICT Information and Communications Technology
IRC Import Registration Certificate
IMF International Monetary Fund
ITC International Trade Centre
LDC Least Developed Country
LLDC Landlocked Developing Country
MOU Memorandums of Understanding
NCTS National Computerized Transit System
NTMs Non-Tariff Measures
NSW National Single Window
NTFC National Trade Facilitation Committee
Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation in Asia and the Pacific 2021 xi
OCO Oceania Customs Organization
OECD Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development
RSW Regional Single Window
SADC South African Development Community
SARSO South Asia Regional Standards
SARTFP South Asia Regional Trade Facilitation Program
SEED System of Electronic Exchange of Data
SIDS Small Island Developing States
SPS Sanitary and Phytosanitary
SMEs small and medium-sized enterprises
TFA Trade Facilitation Agreement
TIID Trade, Investment and Innovation Division
TIDOs Trade Information Desk Offices
UCC Union Customs Code
UN/CEFACT United Nations Centre for Trade Facilitation and Electronic Business
UNCTAD United Nations Conference on Trade and Development
UNNExT United Nations Network of Experts for Paperless Trade and Transport for Asia and the
Pacific
UNRC United Nations Regional Commission
VPoA Vienna Programme of Action
WCO World Customs Organization
WTO World Trade Organization
WFP World Food Programme
xii Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation in Asia and the Pacific 2021
Introduction 1
1
Introduction
1.1 Background and objectives
Reducing trade costs is essential to enabling economies to
effectively participate in global value chains, and to continue
using trade as an important engine of growth and
sustainable development. According to the latest data from
the ESCAP-World Bank International Trade Cost Database,
the overall cost of trading goods among the three largest
European Union economies is equivalent to a 41.4%
average tariff on the value of goods traded (table 1). In
contrast, trade costs among the middle-income members
of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN),
which have actively pursued regional integration through
trade and investment over the past decades, still stand at
a 76.7% tariff equivalent. Amidst the current COVID-19
pandemic, shipping and air freight costs were pushed up
and significant challenges for supply chains globally were
posed. The crisis has had an impact on key components
of trade costs, particularly those related to travel and
transport. In addition, high levels of uncertainty magnify the
impact on trade costs. The increasing visibility of traditional
trade barriers as well as the surging trade and transport
costs pose risks for the recovery of the global economy.
While reversion of many of the changes in trade costs is
expected once the pandemic is brought under control, some
effects may persist.1
1 WTO, 2020, Trade Cost in The Time of Pandemic. Available at https://
www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/covid19_e/trade_costs_report_e.pdf
2 Digital and sustainable trade facilitation: Global Report 2021
Table 1. Intra- and extra-regional comprehensive trade costs (excluding tariff costs)
(Unit: %)
East South West North
Region ASEAN-4 LAC-4 NAF-3 SSA-3 EU-3
Asia-3 Asia-4 Asia-3 America
ASEAN-4 76.7 79.4 135.2 151.8 218.6 214.8 181.2 103.8 103.4
(3.9) (6.8) (5.1) (-1.8) (-12.0) (6.7) (11.4) (-3.2) (0.1)
East Asia-3 79.4 56.9 125.4 113.2 169.7 166.3 164.2 85.2 78.5
(6.8) (9.8) (1.0) (3.4) (2.4) (1.3) (4.0) (0.3) (3.1)
South 135.2 125.4 128.4 196.8 204.5 228.7 168.8 113.7 117.7
Asia-4 (5.1) (1.0) (13.4) (4.5) (8.4) (15.8) (3.9) (-0.5) (0.9)
LAC-4 151.8 113.2 196.8 102.8 243.1 309.2 235.7 112.8 92.6
(-1.8) (3.4) (4.5) (6.6) (-1.1) (13.0) (4.9) (-0.6) (-3.4)
NAF-3 218.6 169.7 204.5 243.1 168.4 259.8 135.2 140.6 189.3
(-12.0) (2.4) (8.4) (-1.1) (-16.9) (-2.7) (6.0) (8.6) (13.6)
SSA-3 214.8 166.3 228.7 309.2 259.8 216.3 223.5 148.1 176.5
(6.7) (1.3) (15.8) (13.0) (-2.7) (16.8) (11.6) (17.4) (6.3)
West Asia-3 181.2 164.2 168.8 235.7 135.2 223.5 95.6 152.5 157.1
(11.4) (4.0) (3.9) (4.9) (6.0) (11.6) (22.3) (6.3) (2.9)
EU-3 103.8 85.2 113.7 112.8 140.6 148.1 152.5 41.4 76.2
(-3.2) (0.3) (-0.5) (-0.6) (8.6) (17.4) (6.3) (-5.9) (-0.5)
North 103.4 78.5 117.7 92.6 189.3 176.5 157.1 76.2 29.6
America (0.1) (3.1) (0.9) (-3.4) (13.6) (6.3) (2.9) (-0.5) (-2.1)
Source: ESCAP-World Bank Trade Cost Database, updated July 2021. Available at https://www.unescap.org/resources/escap-world-
bank-trade-cost-database
Note: Trade costs may be interpreted as tariff equivalents. Percentage changes in trade costs between 2008-2013 and 2014-2019 are
in parentheses. ASEAN-4: Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines and Thailand; East Asia-3: China, Japan and the Republic of Korea;
South Asia-4: Bangladesh, India, Pakistan and Sri Lanka; Latin America-4: Brazil, Chile, Mexico and Uruguay; North Africa-3: Morocco,
Egypt and Sudan; Sub-Saharan Africa-3: Nigeria, Kenya and Ghana; West Asia-3: Jordan, Lebanon and Saudi Arabia; North America:
Canada and the United States of America; EU-3: Germany, France and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
The trade costs associated with non-tariff measures particularly for developing and emerging economies.
(NTMs) are estimated to be more than double those It also benefits small- and medium-sized enterprises
of tariffs.2 Thus, tackling non-tariff sources of trade (SMEs), for which the costs of trading can be
costs becomes the key to further trade cost disproportionately high. The importance of trade
reductions. This includes improving transport and facilitation is evidenced by the entry into force of the
logistics infrastructure and services as well as WTO Trade Facilitation Agreement and regional
simplifying cumbersome regulatory procedures and initiatives such as the Framework Agreement on
documentation. Trade facilitation covers the full Facilitation of Cross-border Paperless Trade in Asia
spectrum of border procedures, from transparency and the Pacific.3
and simplification of border procedures to the
electronic exchange of data about shipments. Trade Under the Joint UNRCs Approach to Trade Facilitation
facilitation, including paperless trade, helps to lower and following extensive discussions at the Global
overall trade costs and increases economic welfare, Trade Facilitation Forum 2013,4 it was decided that
2 ESCAP, 2019. The Asia-Pacific Trade and Investment Report 2019: Navigating Non-tariff Measures towards Sustainable Development
3 For details, see https://www.unescap.org/kp/cpta
4 The Global Trade Facilitation Forum was organized jointly by all the UNRCs in Bangkok in November 2013.
Introduction 3
the regional surveys should be conducted at the Facilitation Measures”, includes many of the WTO
global level jointly by all UNRCs. Since 2015, the TFA measures with sub-groups of ‘Transparency’,
UNRCs have systematically collected and analysed ‘Formalities’ ‘Institutional Arrangement and
information on the implementation of trade facilitation Cooperation’, and ‘Transit Facilitation’. The second
measures around the globe. The present report, group, “Digital Trade Facilitation Measures”
which is a continuation of this global effort, features includes two sub-groups, ‘Paperless Trade’, and
the results of the fourth global survey conducted ‘Cross-Border Paperless Trade’. The third group,
in 2021, which covers 144 economies from eight “Sustainable Trade Facilitation Measures”, includes
different regions worldwide. three sub-groups, ‘Trade Facilitation for SMEs’,
‘Agricultural Trade Facilitation’ and ‘Women in Trade
Following the introduction to the survey instrument Facilitation’. Given the increasing role that trade
and methodology, a global overview of the finance plays in facilitating global trade, and by virtue
implementation of trade facilitation measures across of the COVID-19 pandemic, in 2021 the UNRCs
the developed economies and seven developing introduced a new group, “Other Trade Facilitation”,
regions as well as groups of countries with special which includes two sub-groups, ‘Trade Finance
needs is provided in Section 2. This is followed by a Facilitation’5 and ‘Trade Facilitation in Times of Crisis’.
closer look at the implementation levels of various The ‘Trade Finance Facilitation’ sub-group is added
groups of trade facilitation measures in Section 3. with considerations given to the role that trade
Finally, Section 4 of this report highlights the key finance plays to facilitate trade flows. In addition,
findings and proposes a way forward for advancing COVID-19 has shaken global trade and posed
trade facilitation. enormous challenges to the global supply chain. To
“build back better”, sustainable and resilient recovery
1.2 Survey instrument and practices are required in order to avoid future
methodology systemic vulnerabilities. In this context, immediate
emergency responses and long-term action plans
for trade facilitation in response to pandemics and
The UN Global Survey on Digital and Sustainable crises have been incorporated into the 2021 survey
Trade Facilitation 2021 was prepared according to (table 2).
the final list of commitments included in the WTO
Trade Facilitation Agreement (TFA), supplemented by The overall scope of the survey goes beyond the
forward looking measures included in the Framework measures included in the WTO TFA. Most paperless
Agreement on Facilitation of Cross-Border Paperless trade measures, particularly cross-border paperless
Trade in Asia and the Pacific. It also includes trade, are not specifically featured in the WTO TFA.
sustainable trade facilitation measures as well as However, their implementation in many cases would
measures on trade facilitation in times of crisis and support better implementation of the TFA and in
trade finance facilitation. digital form. Most measures in the “Sustainable
Trade Facilitation” and “Other Trade Facilitation”
The survey covers 58 trade facilitation measures, groups are also not specifically included in the WTO
which are classified into four groups and eleven TFA, except for some of the ‘Agricultural Trade
sub-groups. The first group, “General Trade Facilitation’ measures.
5 Trade Finance Facilitation was an optional subgroup in the 2019 survey and three of the UNRCs (ESCAP, ESCWA and ECE) used it
for their survey. In 2021, this sub-group was updated in cooperation with the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) and surveyed
across all regions.
4 Digital and sustainable trade facilitation: Global Report 2021
Table 2. Grouping of trade facilitation measures and correspondence with TFA articles
Relevant
Groups Sub-groups Measures
TFA Articles
Transparency Publication of existing import-export regulations on the Internet 1.2
(Five measures) Stakeholders’ consultation on new draft regulations 2.2
(prior to their finalization)
Advance publication/notification of new trade-related regulations 2.1
before their implementation (e.g., 30 days prior)
Advance ruling on tariff classification and origin of imported goods 3
Independent appeal mechanism (for traders to appeal customs rulings 4
and the rulings of other relevant trade control agencies)
Formalities Risk management (as a basis for deciding whether a shipment will be 7.4
(Eight physically inspected or not)
measures) Pre-arrival processing 7.1
Post-clearance audits 7.5
Separation of release from final determination of customs duties, taxes, 7.3
fees and charges
Establishment and publication of average release times 7.6
Trade facilitation measures for authorized operators 7.7
Expedited shipments 7.8
Acceptance of copies of original supporting documents required for 10.2.1
import, export or transit formalities
Institutional Establishment of a National Trade Facilitation Committee (NTFC) 23
arrangement or similar body
and National legislative framework and/or institutional arrangements for 8
cooperation border agencies cooperation
(Five measures)
Government agencies delegating border controls to Customs authorities
Alignment of working days and hours with neighbouring countries at 8.2(a)
border crossings
Alignment of formalities and procedures with neighbouring countries at 8.2(b)
border crossings
Transit Transit facilitation agreement(s) with neighbouring country(ies)
facilitation Customs authorities limit the physical inspections of transit goods and 10.5
(Four measures) use risk assessment
Supporting pre-arrival processing for transit facilitation 11.9
Cooperation between agencies of countries involved in transit 11.16
Paperless trade Automated Customs System (e.g., ASYCUDA)
(Ten measures) Internet connection available to Customs and other trade control
agencies at border-crossings
Electronic Single Window System 10.4
Electronic submission of Customs declarations
Electronic application and issuance of import and export permits
Electronic submission of Sea Cargo manifests
Electronic submission of Air Cargo manifests
Electronic application and issuance of Preferential Certificate of Origin
Digital Trade Facilitation General Trade Facilitation
Introduction 5
Table 2. (continued)
Relevant
Groups Sub-groups Measures
TFA Articles
E-payment of Customs duties and fees 7.2
Electronic application for Customs refunds
Cross-border Laws and regulations for electronic transactions are in place
paperless trade (e.g., e-commerce law, e-transaction law)
(Six measures) Recognized certification authority issuing digital certificates to traders
to conduct electronic transactions
Electronic exchange of Customs declaration
Electronic exchange of Certificate of Origin
Electronic exchange of Sanitary and Phyto-Sanitary Certificate
Paperless collection of payment from a documentary letter of credit
Trade Trade-related information measures for SMEs
facilitation for SMEs in AEO scheme (i.e., a Government has developed specific
SMEs measures that enable SMEs to benefit from the AEO scheme more easily)
(Five measures)
SMEs access Single Window (i.e., a Government has taken action to
make a Single Window more easily accessible for SMEs (e.g., by
providing technical consultation and training services to SMEs on
registering and using the facility)
SMEs in NTFCs (i.e., a Government has taken action to ensure that
SMEs are well-represented and made key members of NTFCs)
Other special measures for SMEs
Agricultural Testing and laboratory facilities are available to meet SPS of main
trade trading partners
facilitation National standards and accreditation bodies established to facilitate
(Four measures) compliance with SPS
Electronic application and issuance of SPS certificates
Special treatment for perishable goods at border crossings 7.9
Women in trade Trade facilitation policy/strategy to increase women’s participation in trade
facilitation
Trade facilitation measures to benefit women involved in trade
(Three
measures) Women’s membership in the NTFC or similar bodies
Trade finance Single Window facilitates traders access to finance
facilitation Authorities engaged in blockchain-based supply chain project covering
(Three trade finance
measures)
Variety of trade finance services available
Trade Agency in place to manage trade facilitation in times of crises and
facilitation in emergencies
times of crisis Online publication of emergency trade facilitation measures
(Five measures)
Coordination between countries on emergency trade facilitation measures
Additional trade facilitation measures to facilitate trade in times of
emergencies
Plan in place to facilitate trade during future crises
Source: United Nations Global Survey on Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation, 2021. Available at untfsurvey.org
Digital Trade Facilitation
Other Trade Facilitation Sustainable Trade Facilitation (continued)
6 Digital and sustainable trade facilitation: Global Report 2021
The UNRCs adopted a three-step approach to or “don’t know” (see Annex 1 for the definition of the
develop the dataset (box 1). Data were collected, various stages of implementation). A score of 3, 2,
verified and validated between January and July 1, 0 and DK,6 respectively, was assigned to each
2021. Each of the trade facilitation measures included implementation stage in order to calculate
in the survey was rated as “fully implemented”, implementation scores for individual measures
“partially implemented”, “pilot state”, “not implemented” across countries, regions or groups.7
Box 1. A three-step approach to data collection and validation
Step 1. Data submission by experts: The survey instrument was sent by the UNRCs to trade facilitation
experts (in Governments, the private sector and academia) to gather preliminary information. The questionnaire
was also made publicly available online and disseminated with the support of the ADB, ASEAN, CAREC, ITC,
OCO, UN/CEFACT, UNCTAD and the United Nations Network of Experts for Paperless Trade and Transport for
Asia and the Pacific (UNNExT).
Step 2. Data verification by the UNRCs Secretariat: The UNRCs cross-checked the data collected in Step 1.
Desk research and data sharing among UNRCs and survey partners were carried out to further check the accuracy
of data. Face-to-face or telephone interviews with key informants were arranged to gather additional information
when needed. The outcome of Step 2 was a consistent set of responses per country.
Step 3. Data validation by national Governments: The UNRCs sent the completed questionnaire to each national
Government to ensure that the country had the opportunity to review the dataset and provide any additional
information. The feedback from national Governments was incorporated in order to finalize the dataset.
The survey covers 144 countries which are divided Middle East and North Africa (11 countries):
into the following eight groups: Bahrain, Egypt, Islamic Republic of Iran, Iraq, Jordan,
Lebanon, Morocco, State of Palestine, Saudi Arabia,
Developed economies (30 countries): Andorra, the Syrian Arab Republic and Tunisia.
Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada,
Croatia, Cyprus, Czechia, Estonia, Finland, France, Pacific Island (11 countries): Fiji, Kiribati, Micronesia,
Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Nauru, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Samoa, Solomon
Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, New Islands, Tonga, Tuvalu and Vanuatu.
Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Spain, Sweden,
Switzerland the United Kingdom. South and East Europe, Caucasus and Central
Asia (17 countries): Albania, Armenia, Azerbaijan,
Latin America and the Caribbean (21 countries): Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Georgia,
Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Belize, Brazil, Chile, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Republic of Moldova,
Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Dominican Republic, Montenegro, North Macedonia, Russian Federation,
Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Guyana, Mexico, Serbia, Tajikistan, Turkey, Ukraine and Uzbekistan.
Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Saint Vincent and the
Grenadines, Trinidad and Tobago, Uruguay, Saint South Asia (8 countries): Afghanistan, Bangladesh,
Kitts and Nevis. Bhutan, India, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan, Sri Lanka.
6 DK, “don’t know”, is treated as “no implementation” (0) for calculation of the implementation rate.
7 For more details on the calculation of the scores and the methodology, see https://www.untfsurvey.org/files/documents/2021-Survey-
Methodology.pdf
Introduction 7
South-East and East Asia (14 countries): Brunei 1.3 Utilization of report and data
Darussalam, Cambodia, China, Indonesia, Lao
People’s Democratic Republic, Malaysia, Mongolia,
Myanmar, the Philippines, the Republic of Korea, To make the survey as transparent and useful as
Singapore, Thailand, Timor-Leste and Viet Nam. possible, regional and global datasets have been
made available online on the dedicated survey
Sub-Saharan Africa (32 countries): Botswana, website at untfsurvey.org. Use of the data by
Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cabo Verde, Cameroon, researchers and policy analysts to advance
Comoros, Congo, Cote d’Ivoire, Equatorial Guinea, understanding of the impact of different trade
Ethiopia, Gabon, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Kenya, facilitation measures and derive evidence-based
Madagascar, Malawi, Mauritania, Mauritius, policy advice is strongly encouraged. Stakeholders
Mozambique, Namibia, Niger, Nigeria, Rwanda, interested in submitting information that may help to
Senegal, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Sudan, further improve or expand the dataset may contact
Sudan, Tanzania, Togo, Zambia and Zimbabwe. the UNRC focal points listed on the dedicated
website. Subject to the availability of resources, the
UNRCs and other willing partners will endeavour to
conduct the survey on a biennial basis.
8 Digital and sustainable trade facilitation: Global Report 2021
Trade facilitation implementation: Overview 9
2
Trade facilitation
implementation:
Overview
Figure 1 shows the average rates of implementation of trade
facilitation in the developed economies and seven
developing regions mentioned above. The implementation
rates are calculated based on 31 trade facilitation measures
relevant to all 144 economies included in the survey and
spanning five sub-groups from transparency to cross-border
paperless trade.8
The global average implementation rate stands at 64.7%
(figure 1).9 Developed economies have the highest
implementation rate (81.8%), while the Pacific Islands have
the lowest (40.1%). Among the developing regions, South-
East and East Asia, and Latin America and the Caribbean
achieve high implementation rates at 75.3% and 72.1%,
respectively. The implementation rate in Sub-Saharan Africa
which includes some of the poorest countries in the world
– is 49.1%, second to the Pacific Islands.
8 Among the 58 measures surveyed across UNRCs, three measures
including Electronic Submission of Sea Cargo Manifests, Alignment of
Working Days and Hours with Neighbouring Countries at Border Crossings
and Alignment of Formalities and Procedures with Neighbouring Countries
at Border Crossings are excluded when calculating the overall score as
they are not relevant to all countries surveyed. Four Transit Facilitation
measures are also excluded for the same reason. In addition, Sustainable
Trade Facilitation and Other Trade Facilitation are excluded, as these are
newly-added groups of measures not included in the original United
Nations Survey.
9 A few countries participated in the 2019 Global Survey but did not
respond to the 2021 Global Survey. Data of these countries were duplicated
from the 2019 Survey for illustrative purposes. These countries are: Antigua
and Barbuda, Belize, Brazil, El Salvador, Guyana, Saint Vincent and the
Grenadines, Trinidad and Tobago (Latin America and Caribbean), and
Tanzania (Sub-Saharan Africa) and Tunisia (Middle East and North Africa).
An alternative global average excluding those countries is 65.2%.
10 Digital and sustainable trade facilitation: Global Report 2021
Figure 1. Average implementation rates of trade facilitation measures around the world
100%
81.9%
80% 75.3%
72.1% 68.8%
64.7%
60% 58.7% 58.5%
49.1%
40% 40.1%
20%
0%
Developed Latin Middle East Pacific South and East South Asia South-East Sub-Saharan Global 
Economies America and North Islands Europe, and East Asia Africa Average
 and the Africa Caucasus
Caribbean and Central 
Asia
Transparency Formalities Institutional arrangement Paperless trade Cross-border paperless trade
and cooperation
Source: The UN Global Survey on Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation, 2021. Available at untfsurvey.org
Trade facilitation implementation rates for individual In terms of specific countries, Australia and New
economies are provided in Annex 3. Implementation Zealand (96.8%) tie for first place as the highest
varies greatly across regions and economies overall performers, followed by Singapore (95.7%),
within the same region. For example, implementation Belgium, the Netherlands and the Republic of Korea
rates in South-East and East Asia range from 24.7% (tied, each with an implementation rate of 94.6%).
(Timor-Leste) to 95.7% (Singapore). Similarly, in Latin Among developing regions, Singapore (95.7%), the
America, the implementation level varies from the Republic of Korea (94.6%) and China (91.4%) lead
lowest 44.1% (Antigua and Barbuda) to the highest in South-East and East Asia. Mexico (91.4%) leads
91.4% (Mexico). Latin America and the Caribbean, while Saudi Arabia
(84.9%) leads the Middle East and North Africa
Figure 2. Average trade facilitation implementation rates and GDP per capita
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
0 10 000 20 000 30 000 40 000 50 000 60 000 70 000 80 000 90 000 100 000 110 000 120 000 130 000
GDP per capita (current US$): 2020
Sources: The UN Global Survey on Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation, 2021. Available at untfsurvey.org; World Bank World
Development Indicators, accessed July 2021.
Trade facilitation implementation
Trade facilitation implementation: Overview 11
region. Azerbaijan (86%) and Russian Federation represent the poorest and most vulnerable segment
(84.9%) lead the South and East Europe, Caucasus of the international community, with poor infrastructure
and Central Asia region, while India (90.3%) leads and capacities, despite the special treatment and
the way in South Asia. flexibilities embedded in the WTO rules, including the
TFA. LLDCs lack direct access to the sea, resulting
In general, advanced economies perform better than in more complex trade logistics and higher trade
developing economies due to their well-developed costs. Many SIDS also face high communication and
infrastructure and stronger established trade logistics costs. In addition, COVID-19 mitigation
institutions. However, this is not always the case. measures and subsequent export restrictions have
About 60 countries with a GDP per capita lower than had a disproportionate impact on these countries.
US$ 10,000 have achieved implementation rates The efforts that LDCs, LLDCs and SIDS make
higher than 50% (figure 2). towards TF implementation should be supported
through addressing their needs and enhanced
2.1 Implementation in countries cooperation by the international community.
with special needs The red bars in figure 3 indicate the average level
of implementation for each group of countries, while
Figure 3 presents an overview of trade facilitation the diamonds show the implementation rates for
implementation in different regions, including three individual economies within each group. All three
groups of countries with special needs, i.e., groups of countries with special needs show similar
Landlocked Developing Countries (LLDCs), Least implementation rates, ranging between 48% and
Developed Countries (LDCs) and Small Island 56%. This is significantly below the global average
Developing States (SIDS) (see Annex 2 for grouping implementation rate (64.7%). This result confirms the
of countries with special needs). LLDCs, LDCs and need to provide LDCs, LLDCs and SIDS with special
SIDS are the world’s most vulnerable countries technical assistance and capacity-building support to
and face a number of connectivity barriers. LDCs help them bridge their existing implementation gaps.
Figure 3. Average trade facilitation implementation rates by region and in countries
with special needs
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Source: The UN Global Survey on Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation, 2021. Available at untfsurvey.org
Developed
Economies
Latin America
 and the Caribbean
Middle East and
North Africa
Pacific Islands
South and East
Europe, Caucasus
and Central Asia
South Asia
South-East and
East Asia
Sub-Saharan Africa
Landlocked
Developing Countries
Least Developed 
Economies
Small Island
Developing States
12 Digital and sustainable trade facilitation: Global Report 2021
2.2 Most and least implemented similar body stands at 84%, while the implementation
level of government agencies delegating controls to
trade facilitation measures customs authorities is only 48%.
All countries are engaged in implementing various The global average implementation level for
measures to enhance the transparency of trade ‘Paperless Trade’ stands at 64%. The implementation
procedures and reduce unnecessary formalities rates vary greatly, depending on the individual
associated with them. Implementation levels vary measures considered. The levels of implementation
significantly across countries for all sub-groups. The of automated customs system and internet
gaps are particularly wide for paperless trade and connection available to customs and other trade
cross-border paperless trade measures (table 3). control agencies reach 86%, while electronic
application for customs refunds is only at 38%.
In general, ‘Transparency’ measures (including
measures such as stakeholders’ consultations The implementation level for ‘Cross-Border Paperless
on new draft regulations) have the highest Trade’ (38%) is substantially lower than measures in
implementation rates (an average 78%) followed other sub-groups, which highlights the need for closer
by ‘Formalities’ and ‘Transit Facilitation’ (both intergovernmental cooperation on cross-border
standing at 75%). Post-clearance audits (82%), risk paperless trade.
management (81%) and separation of release from
final determination of customs duties, taxes, fees and The expansion of international trade can also help
charges (81%), are the most implemented measures to address critical development challenges.
in ‘Formalities’, while significant room for improvement “Sustainable Trade Facilitation” is the group that
exists for measures such as establishment and aligns trade facilitation with sustainable development
publication of average release times (57%) (figure 4). goals for inclusive economic growth and increases
opportunities for sectors and groups with special
The implementation rate for institutional arrangements needs. ‘Agricultural Trade Facilitation’ measures have
and cooperation is 69%. The level of implementation been relatively well-implemented. On the other hand,
of National Trade Facilitation Committee (NTFC) or the implementation of measures to increase
Figure 4. Implementation rates of different sub-groups of trade facilitation measures
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Source: The UN Global Survey on Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation, 2021. Available at untfsurvey.org
Transparency
Formalities
Institutional arrangement and 
cooperation
Paperless trade
Cross-border paperless trade
Transit facilitation
Trade facilitation for SMEs
Agricultural trade facilitation
Women in trade facilitation
Trade finance facilitation
Trade facilitation
 in times of crisis
Trade facilitation implementation: Overview 13
opportunities for SMEs and women remains low trade finance processes among trade policy and
(41% and 31%, respectively), showing a lack of facilitation specialists as well as pointing to significant
awareness and policies that address inclusiveness room for improvement in this area.
in trade facilitation.
‘Trade Facilitation in Times of Crisis’ is slightly better
The average implementation of ‘Trade finance’ is only implemented (41%). The COVID-19 pandemic
21%. The absence of data partly explains this low represents an unprecedented disruption to global
implementation rate for about half of the countries. trade. Many immediate policy responses such as
Many respondents from Customs, other trade agency in place to manage trade facilitation in times
agencies and private sector trade professionals could of crises and emergencies and online publication of
not complete the three questions covered under this emergency TF measures have been implemented to
sub-group. This suggests a lack of awareness of a certain extent to keep global supply chains going,
Table 3. Most and least implemented measuresmp
Most implemented (% of countries) Least implemented (% of countries)
Implemented fully, Implemented fully,
Sub-groups partially and on a partially and on a
Measures pilot basis (%)/full Measures pilot basis (%)/full
implementation implementation
(%) (%)
Transparency Stakeholders’ consultation 93.8 / 61.1 Advance ruling on tariff 85.4 / 54.2
on new draft regulations classification and origin of
(prior to their finalization) imported goods
Formalities Risk management 97.2 / 56.3 Establishment and 77.1 / 29.9
publication of average
release times
Institutional National Trade Facilitation 91.7 / 70.1 Government agencies 60.4 / 25.7
arrangement and Committee or similar body delegating border controls
cooperation  to Customs authorities
Paperless trade Automated Customs 95.8 / 68.8 Electronic Application for 50.0 / 20.8
System Customs Refunds
Cross-border Laws and regulations for 72.9 / 30.6 Paperless collection of 40.3 / 14.6
paperless trade electronic transactions payment from a
documentary letter of credit
Transit facilitation Limit the physical 72.2 / 56.3 Transit facilitation 63.9 / 37.5
inspections of transit goods agreement(s)
and use risk assessment
Trade facilitation Trade-related information 81.9 / 38.2 SMEs in AEO scheme 36.8 / 16.7
for SMEs measures for SMEs
Agricultural trade Special treatment for 84.7 / 41.7 Electronic application and 53.5 / 13.2
facilitation perishable goods issuance of SPS certificates
Women in trade Women membership in 50.7 / 13.2 Trade facilitation policy/ 38.2 / 9.0
facilitation the National Trade strategy incorporates
Facilitation Committee or special consideration of
similar bodies female traders
Trade finance Variety of trade finance 59.0 / 23.6 Single window facilitates 13.9 / 2.8
facilitation services available traders access to finance
Trade facilitation Agency in place to 59.0 / 13.9 Plan in place to facilitate 43.8 / 16.0
in times of crisis manage TF in times trade during future crises
of crises and emergencies
14 Digital and sustainable trade facilitation: Global Report 2021
especially for essential goods. However, many Despite the grave impact of COVID-19 on global
countries still lack long-term trade facilitation plans trade and the decline of trade flows in 2020,
to enhance preparedness for future crises. significant progress has been observed towards more
Improvement of sustained and long-term measures, efficient trade facilitation during the past two years.
such as plan in place to facilitate trade during future The implementation rate at the global level has
crises (34%), is also critical to improving resilience increased by more than 5 percentage points.11 The
and reducing the likely impact of future crises. most progress is observed in South Asia, where
implementation rates have increased by more than
2.3 Progress in implementation 10 percentage points.
 A substantial improvement is
also observed in Sub-Saharan Africa (6 percentage
of trade facilitation measures points), Developed Economies (5.2 percentage
since 2019 points) and Pacific Islands (4.9 percentage points).
The progress made by Sub-Saharan Africa and
Pacific Islands is particularly pronounced, as the two
A total of 144 countries participated in the Fourth UN groups are very vulnerable and less resilient to global
Global Survey, of which 128 countries had also trade disruptions due to existing gaps and lack of
participated in the Third UN Global Survey in 2019. infrastructure. Nevertheless, the pandemic has
Only countries covered in both surveys are analysed spurred countries to accelerate their efforts to ensure
to assess progress in the implementation of trade smoother trade flows and improve their current trade
facilitation measures over the previous two years to facilitation practices in the regulatory, institutional and
make the samples comparable.10 technical spheres. Comparatively, progress has not
Figure 5. Progress of implementation of trade facilitation measures by various regions,
2019 and 2021
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Developed Latin America Middle East Pacific South and South Asia South-East Sub-Saharan Global 
Economies and the and North Islands East Europe, and East Africa Average
Caribbean Africa Caucasus and Asia
Central Asia
2019 2021
Source: The UN Global Survey on Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation, 2021. Available at untfsurvey.org
10 See Annex 4 for details, including country list and comparison of average implementation rates by region using the full (144 countries)
and limited (128 countries) datasets.
11 The global average implementation rate of the 128 countries in 2021 and 2019 are 66.1% and 60.9%, respectively.
Trade facilitation implementation: Overview 15
been significant in the Middle East and North Africa, implementation rates for ‘Transparency’, ‘Formalities’,
where an increase of only 2.3 percentage points has ‘Institutional Arrangement and Cooperation’ have
occurred (figure 5). increased by 4.3, 4.5 and 4.7 percentage points,
respectively (figures 6 and 7).
Progress has been made at more or less the same
pace across different groups of measures. The most Figure 7 shows improvements in different regions
progress has been made in improving “Digital Trade across all five main sub-groups. It shows that South
Facilitation” with ‘Paperless Trade’ and ‘Cross-Border Asia has made significant progress across all sub-
Paperless Trade’, with increases of 6.3 and groups (India has undertaken ambitious reforms
5.4 percentage points, respectively. This is the first during the past two years). Pacific Islands have made
time since the introduction of the UN Global Survey particularly good progress in implementing
that measures in “Digital Trade Facilitation” have ‘Transparency’ and ‘Formalities’. Sub-Saharan Africa
shown the highest level of improvements. This could has made noticeable progress in ’Formalities’,
be due to the fundamental shift of preference towards ‘Institutional Arrangement and Cooperation’ and
digital systems and accelerated implementation ‘Paperless Trade’. Developed Economies have also
of paperless trade.12 Meanwhile, the average made pronounced progress in ‘Paperless Trade’.
Figure 6. Progress of global implementation of trade facilitation measures,
2019 and 2021
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Transparency Formalities Institutional Paperless trade Cross-border 
arrangement paperless trade
and cooperation
2019 2021
Source: The UN Global Survey on Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation, 2021. Available at untfsurvey.org
12 ESCAP, 2021, Trade Facilitation in Times of Crisis and Pandemic: Practices and Lessons from the Asia-Pacific, available at https://
www.unescap.org/sites/default/d8files/knowledge-products/Regional%20report-Trade%20facilitation%20in%20times%20
of%20crisis%20and%20pandemic_0.pdf
16 Digital and sustainable trade facilitation: Global Report 2021
Figure 7. Progress of implementation of specific group of trade facilitation measures
in various regions, 2019 and 2021
Transparency Formalities
Developed Economies Developed Economies
100% 100%
Global Average 80% Latin America and 
the Caribbean Global Average
80% Latin America and 
60% the Caribbean60%
40% 40%
Sub-Saharan Africa 20% Middle East and 
North Africa Sub-Saharan Africa
20% Middle East and 
0% North Africa0%
South-East and Pacific Islands South-East and 
East Asia Pacific IslandsEast Asia
South Asia South and East South and East South Asia
Europe, Caucasus Europe, Caucasus 
and Central Asia and Central Asia
2019 2021 2019 2021
Institutional arrangement and cooperation Paperless trade
Developed Economies Developed Economies
100% 100%
Global Average Latin America and 80% Global Average 80% Latin America and 
the Caribbean the Caribbean
60% 60%
40% 40%
Sub-Saharan Africa 20% Middle East and Sub-Saharan Africa 20% Middle East and 
North Africa North Africa
0% 0%
South-East and Pacific Islands South-East and Pacific Islands
East Asia East Asia
South Asia South and East South Asia South and East 
Europe, Caucasus Europe, Caucasus 
and Central Asia and Central Asia
2019 2021 2019 2021
Cross-border paperless trade Overall implementation
Developed Economies Developed Economies
100% 100%
Latin America and 
Global Average 80% Global Average 80% Latin America and 
the Caribbean the Caribbean
60% 60%
40% 40%
Middle East and 
Sub-Saharan Africa 20% Sub-Saharan Africa 20% Middle East and 
North Africa North Africa
0% 0%
South-East and Pacific Islands South-East and Pacific Islands
East Asia East Asia
South Asia South and East South Asia South and East 
Europe, Caucasus Europe, Caucasus 
and Central Asia and Central Asia
2019 2021 2019 2021
Source: The UN Global Survey on Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation, 2021. Available at untfsurvey.org
Implementation of trade facilitation measures: A closer look 17
3
Implementation of
trade facilitation
measures: A closer
look
3.1 General trade facilitation
measures
3.1.1 Transparency
Transparency is a critical obligation for WTO members and
the fundamental principle of the multilateral trading system.
It stipulates that a country’s policies and regulations affecting
trade should be communicated to its trading partners. The
main provision dealing with transparency can be found in
GATT Article X on the publication and administration of trade
regulations. Transparency is also recognized as an essential
element of trade facilitation. It has been re-emphasized in
Articles 1-5 of the WTO TFA. Five trade facilitation measures
included in the survey are categorized in ‘Transparency’.
The global average level of implementation of all five
transparency measures exceeds 70% (figure 8). However,
the implementation levels of these measures vary widely
across regions.
While the developed economies, South and East Europe,
Caucasus and Central Asia, South-East and East Asia and
Latin America and the Caribbean, have almost fully
implemented these measures, Sub-Saharan Africa and
the Pacific Islands lag far behind, especially on the
18 Digital and sustainable trade facilitation: Global Report 2021
Figure 8. Global implementation of transparency measures in various regions
Publication of existing 
import-export regulations 
on the internet
100%
80%
60%
Stakeholders’ consultation on 
40%
Independent appeal new draft regulations (prior to 
mechanism 20% their finalization)
0%
Advance ruling on tariff Advance publication/notification 
classification and origin of of new trade-related regulations 
imported goods before their implementation
Global Average Developed Economies Latin America and the Caribbean
Middle East and North Africa Pacific Islands South and East Europe, Caucasus and Central Asia
South Asia South-East and East Asia Sub-Saharan Africa
Source: The UN Global Survey on Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation, 2021. Available at untfsurvey.org
implementation of advance rulings on tariff finalization), independent appeal mechanism and
classification and origin of imported goods and publication of existing import-export regulations on
independent appeal mechanism (figure 8). the internet. The measure of advance publication/
notification of new trade-related regulations before
Figure 9 shows the percentage of countries that have their implementation has also been implemented by
fully implemented, partially implemented, or piloted nearly 90% of the countries. The issuance of advance
in the ‘Transparency’ measures, which are generally rulings on tariff classification and origin of imported
well-implemented. More than 90% of the countries goods is the least implemented Transparency
surveyed have introduced measures of stakeholders’ measure, and it has been implemented by
consultation on new draft regulations (prior to their approximately 85% of the countries surveyed.
Figure 9. State of implementation of transparency measures globally
Stakeholders’ consultation on new draft regulations
(prior to their finalization)
Independent appeal mechanism
Publication of existing import-export regulations on the internet
Advance publication/notification of new trade-related regulations 
before their implementation
Advance ruling on tariff classification and origin of imported goods
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Fully implemented Partially implemented Pilot stage of implementation
Not implemented Don’t know
Source: The UN Global Survey on Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation, 2021. Available at untfsurvey.org
Implementation of trade facilitation measures: A closer look 19
3.1.2 Formalities countries have introduced TRS with the assistance
of relevant regional and international organizations.
The ‘Formalities’ sub-group consists of eight general For example, WCO and ADB supported TRS
trade facilitation measures in relation to Articles 7 and development in some countries with special needs
10 of the WTO TFA and GATT Article VII, titled in the Asia-Pacific region. That said, when the
Release and Clearance of Goods. assistance project ended, such studies were
discontinued in certain countries. This reflects the fact
The level of implementation varies significantly that countries with special needs could be over-reliant
across regions when it comes to measures in this on regional and international organizations for
sub-group (figure 10). The implementation of the technical assistance. For sustainability, national or
measures for risk management, post clearance regional monitoring and evaluation mechanisms
audit, separation of release from final determination could be established. Being the least implemented
of customs duties, taxes, fees and charges, and measure under this sub-group, more than 70% of
acceptance of copies of original supporting the countries have implemented this measure, at
documents required for import, export or transit least on a pilot basis. That said, full implementation
formalities is well underway in most regions. has taken place in less than 30% of the economies
surveyed (figure 11).
The implementation of trade facilitation measures for
authorized operators, and the establishment and Most of the countries surveyed have implemented
publication of average release time, remains measures to reduce unnecessary formalities that
challenging in many regions, particularly the Pacific impede trade. Figure 11 illustrates that the measures
Islands. It is worth noting that the implementation of for risk management, the separation of release from
establishment and publication of average release final determination of customs duties, taxes, fees and
time is notably low for developed economies. This charges, post clearance audits, and pre-arrival
may be explained by the fact that they already have processing have been well-implemented. More than
well-established release and clearance mechanisms, 90% of the countries have, to some extent,
and follow-up studies on release time might have implemented these four measures.
been overlooked. On the other hand, many developing
Figure 10. Global implementation of formalities measures in various regions
Risk management
100%
Acceptance of copies of original supporting 80%
documents required for import, export or Pre-arrival processing
transit formalities 60%
40%
20%
Expedited shipments 0% Post-clearance audits
TF measures for authorized Separation of Release from final 
operators determination of customs duties,
taxes, fees and charges
Establishment and publication 
of average release times
Global Average Developed Economies Latin America and the Caribbean
Middle East and North Africa Pacific Islands South and East Europe, Caucasus and Central Asia
South Asia South-East and East Asia Sub-Saharan Africa
Source: The UN Global Survey on Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation, 2021. Available at untfsurvey.org
20 Digital and sustainable trade facilitation: Global Report 2021
Figure 11. State of implementation of formalities measures globally
Risk management
Separation of Release from final determination of
customs duties, taxes, fees and charges
Post-clearance audits
Pre-arrival processing
TF measures for authorized operators
Acceptance of copies of original supporting documents
required for import, export or transit formalities
Expedited shipments
Establishment and publication of average release times
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Fully implemented Partially implemented Pilot stage of implementation
Not implemented Don’t know
Source: The UN Global Survey on Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation, 2021. Available at untfsurvey.org
3.1.3 Institutional arrangements and not appear to be a common practice in Latin America
cooperation and the Caribbean, and the Pacific Islands.
Institutional arrangements are an organizational Most countries surveyed have started implementing
framework for efficiently managing governmental national legislative framework and/or institutional
activities and coordinating with other border agencies arrangements for border agencies cooperation, and
to fulfill their mandate. Three trade facilitation NTFC or similar body measures. Nearly 90% of the
measures featured in the survey are grouped under countries surveyed have at least partially implemented
‘Institutional Arrangement and Cooperation’. These these measures. It has been observed that an
measures are stipulated by Articles 8 and 23 of the increasing number of countries have fully established
WTO TFA that require the establishment of a national a NTFC during the past two years. The role of NTFCs
trade facilitation body and ensuring cooperation and or similar bodies in the global economic recovery
coordination among trade-related government following COVID-19 has been crucial and repeatedly
agencies. emphasized by the international community.
13
Enhancing the capacity of NTFCs or similar bodies
Figure 12 shows that the national legislative and increasing their visibility are actions countries
framework and institutional arrangement available to need to consider. This measure will also be read with
ensure border agencies cooperated with each other, a measure of agency in place to manage TF in times
and National Trade Facilitation Committee (NTFC) of crises and emergencies in the newly incorporated
measures have been extensively implemented ‘Trade Facilitation in Times of Crisis’ measures. Last,
globally. In contrast, the implementation of approximately 60% of the countries have initiated
government agencies delegating controls to customs government agencies’ measures to delegate controls
authorities varies across regions. This measure does to customs authorities (figure 13).
13 UNCTAD has introduced several NTFC empowerment trainings and technical assistance during the COVID-19 crisis. More information
at https://unctad.org/news/role-national-trade-facilitation-committees-global-economic-recovery-following-covid-19
Implementation of trade facilitation measures: A closer look 21
Figure 12. Global implementation of institutional arrangement and cooperation
measures in various regions
National Trade Facilitation Committee 
or similar body
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Government agencies delegating National legislative framework and/or 
border controls to Customs institutional arrangements for border 
authorities agencies cooperation
Global Average Developed Economies Latin America and the Caribbean
Middle East and North Africa Pacific Islands South and East Europe, Caucasus and Central Asia
South Asia South-East and East Asia Sub-Saharan Africa
Source: The UN Global Survey on Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation, 2021. Available at untfsurvey.org
Figure 13. State of implementation of institutional arrangement and cooperation
measures globally
National Trade Facilitation Committee or similar body
National legislative framework and/or institutional 
arrangements for border agencies cooperation
Government agencies delegating border controls to 
Customs authorities
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Fully implemented Partially implemented Pilot stage of implementation
Not implemented Don’t know
Source: The UN Global Survey on Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation, 2021. Available at untfsurvey.org
3.1.4 Transit the key to unlocking the potential of landlocked
countries to be better integrated into the supply chain.
A functional transit system is essential for trade It will also accelerate regional integration as well as
connectivity. It also meets substantive needs, both of boost regional and international trade.
landlocked and transit countries. Transit facilitation
could benefit from active engagement of Governments As shown in figure 14, the global average
on regional and global cooperation. Four measures implementation level for transit measures exceeds
covered in Transit Facilitation included in the survey 69% for all the measures. The average
relate specifically to WTO TFA Article 11 on Freedom implementation level in developed economies is
of Transit. These measures are intended to reduce, significantly higher than that in developing regions,
as much as possible, the formalities associated with particularly with regard to supporting pre-arrival
transit trade, thereby allowing the swift flow of goods processing for transit facilitation and transit facilitation
from one country to another. Efficient transit will be agreements. The Middle East and North Africa are
22 Digital and sustainable trade facilitation: Global Report 2021
Figure 14. Global implementation of transit facilitation measures in various regions
Transit facilitation 
agreement(s)
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
Cooperation between agencies of 0% Limit the physical inspections of transit 
countries involved in transit goods and use risk assessment
Supporting pre-arrival processing
for transit facilitation
Global Average Developed Economies Latin America and the Caribbean
Middle East and North Africa Pacific Islands South and East Europe, Caucasus and Central Asia
South Asia South-East and East Asia Sub-Saharan Africa
Source: The UN Global Survey on Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation, 2021. Available at untfsurvey.org
the regions with the lowest score, most notably countries for which transit is applicable, at least on
regarding measures for supporting pre-arrival a pilot basis, although the implementation has mainly
processing for transit facilitation, and cooperation been incomplete. Less than half of the countries
between agencies of countries involved in transit. involved in transit have fully implemented the
measures supporting pre-arrival processing for transit
Figure 15 shows that all the transit measures facilitation as well as transit facilitation agreement
considered have been implemented by most with neighbouring countries.
Figure 15. State of implementation of transit facilitation measures globally
Limit the physical inspections of transit goods 
and use risk assessment
Cooperation between agencies of countries 
involved in transit
Supporting pre-arrival processing for transit  
facilitation
Transit facilitation agreement(s)
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Fully implemented Partially implemented Pilot stage of implementation
Not implemented Don’t know Not applicable
Source: The UN Global Survey on Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation, 2021. Available at untfsurvey.org
Implementation of trade facilitation measures: A closer look 23
3.2 Digital trade facilitation accelerated the digital transformation and underscored
the importance of paperless trade. Achieving cross-
border paperless trade across the region is expected
Digital trade facilitation refers to the application of to be a long and difficult process, and it cannot be
information and communication technologies (ICT) achieved without close collaboration between
and digital solutions to automate and simplify trade countries.
procedures. Rapid technology developments on
digitally enabled services, supported by a range of 3.2.1 Paperless trade
new data-driven services, also facilitate the rise of
cross-border trade. There are two interconnected The ‘Paperless Trade’ measures relate to the
sub-groups. ‘Paperless Trade’ includes measures application of modern ICT to trade-related services
that transform traditionally paper-based at the national level. Measures in this sub-group
documentation systems into an electronic format to range from the availability of Internet connections at
speed up trade and ease the cost of doing business. border crossings and the automation of Customs
It has become an essential component of systems to fully-fledged electronic Single Window
governmental efforts to improve the efficiency of systems. Many of the measures are identified in
customs controls and trade administration processes. Articles 7 and 10 of the WTO TFA and in the text
‘Cross-Border Paperless Trade’ is the next step that of the Framework Agreement on Facilitation of
enables cross-border mutual recognition, and Cross-border Paperless Trade in Asia and the Pacific.
exchange of trade-related data and documents in
electronic form through institutional arrangement and The average regional levels of implementation for the
operational mechanisms. nine ‘Paperless Trade’ measures vary widely, as
shown in figure 16. The implementation of automated
The digital transformation of custom procedures customs systems and Internet connection available
could significantly reduce the time and costs required to customs and other trade control agencies is
for trading. Acceleration of trade digitalization could generally good in all regions. Developed economies
mitigate the consequences of COVID-19 and further have achieved 97% and 100%, respectively for these
harness the recovery process beyond the current two measures. Also notable is that Pacific Islands,
crisis. Notwithstanding that, the pandemic has
Figure 16. Global implementation of paperless trade measures in various regions
Automated Customs System
100%
Electronic Application for Customs 80% Internet connection available to Customs 
Refunds and other trade control agencies
60%
40%
E-Payment of Customs Duties and Fees 20% Electronic Single Window System
0%
Electronic application and issuance of Electronic submission of Customs 
Preferential Certificate of Origin declarations
Electronic Submission of Air Electronic application and issuance 
Cargo Manifests of import and export permit
Global Average Developed Economies Latin America and the Caribbean
Middle East and North Africa Pacific Islands South and East Europe, Caucasus and Central Asia
South Asia South-East and East Asia Sub-Saharan Africa
Source: The UN Global Survey on Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation, 2021. Available at untfsurvey.org
24 Digital and sustainable trade facilitation: Global Report 2021
which lag far behind in all other Paperless Trade duties and fees. These results indicate that most
measures have also reached a score of more than economies have been actively developing ICT
70% for the automated customs system. This could infrastructure and services, which are essential for
be attributed to the capacity-building programmes of achieving an efficient paperless trade system
PACER Plus to assist in implementing and upgrading
automated customs systems.14 Approximately 70% of the countries surveyed have,
to some extent, engaged in electronic submission of
Figure 17 highlights the gaps when it comes to air cargo manifests, electronic Single Window
the implementation of different measures within the systems and electronic application and issuance of
sub-group. The measures of automated customs import and export permits. However, implementation
systems, electronic submission of customs of these measures is mostly partial or on a pilot basis.
declarations, and internet connection available to The implementation of electronic application and
customs and other trade control agencies have been issuance of preferential certificate of origin as well as
implemented, at least on a pilot basis, by more electronic application for customs refunds are still
than 90% of the countries surveyed, and full a challenge. Only half of the countries surveyed can
implementation has been reached by more than half proceed with refunds electronically. It is still common
of the countries. Similarly, more than 80% of the among many countries for refunds to be made with
countries have at least piloted e-payment of customs paper documents (figure 17).
Figure 17. State of implementation of paperless trade measures globally
Automated Customs System
Electronic submission of Customs declarations
Internet connection available to Customs and 
other trade control agencies
E-Payment of Customs Duties and Fees
Electronic Submission of Air Cargo Manifests
Electronic Single Window System
Electronic application and issuance of import 
and export permit
Electronic application and issuance of Preferential 
Certificate of Origin
Electronic Application for Customs Refunds
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Fully implemented Partially implemented Pilot stage of implementation
Not implemented Don’t know
Source: The UN Global Survey on Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation, 2021. Available at untfsurvey.org
14 See https://www.ocosec.org/enhancing-regional-integration-through-customs-automation/
Implementation of trade facilitation measures: A closer look 25
3.2.2 Cross-border paperless trade Africa indicate significant challenges in implementing
these measures.
At the cross-border level, six measures are included
under the ‘Cross-Border Paperless Trade’ as shown Progress has been made in establishing laws and
in figure 18. Law and regulations for electronic regulations for electronic transactions. However, the
transactions’ and ‘recognized certification authority implementation levels of other measures in the group
are basic building blocks to be used towards enabling are very low. South-East and East Asia lead the other
the exchange and legal recognition of trade-related regions when it comes to implementing measures
data and documents, not only among stakeholders related to the cross-border electronic exchange of
within a country but also between stakeholders along trade-related documents, including exchange of
the entire international supply chain. certificates of origin, and sanitary and phytosanitary
certificates. This due to the continued efforts to
The other four measures relate to the exchange of develop the ASEAN Single Window, which enables
specific trade-related data and documents across the cross-border electronic exchange of Customs
borders needed for achieving a fully integrated declarations, certificates of origin and SPS certificates.
paperless transformation. Figure 18 shows the
average scores for implementing measures under Developed economies notably received lower
‘Cross-Border Paperless Trade’ across regions. At implementation rates than some developing
the global level, the implementation of these economies, particularly with regard to the measures
measures has been comparatively low. In particular, regarding electronic exchange of certificates of origin
countries in the Pacific Islands and Sub-Saharan and electronic exchange of SPS certificates.
Figure 18. Global implementation of cross-border paperless trade measures
in various regions
Laws and regulations for electronic 
transactions
100%
80%
60%
Paperless collection of payment from a Recognised certification authority
documentary letter of credit 40%
20%
0%
Electronic exchange of Sanitary & Electronic exchange of Customs 
Phyto-Sanitary Certificate Declaration
Electronic exchange of Certificate 
of Origin
Global Average Developed Economies Latin America and the Caribbean
Middle East and North Africa Pacific Islands South and East Europe, Caucasus and Central Asia
South Asia South-East and East Asia Sub-Saharan Africa
Source: The UN Global Survey on Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation, 2021. Available at untfsurvey.org
26 Digital and sustainable trade facilitation: Global Report 2021
European Union members consist of a large have such legal frameworks fully in place, affecting
proportion of the developed economies covered in the legal recognition of electronic data and
the survey. Eurostat revealed that most trade documents across borders. Less than 60% of the
happens within the European Union,15 where a countries have a recognized certification authority in
certificate of origin is only necessary for importing place. This partly explains why the full electronic
from/exporting to a third country. That said, the exchange of trade-related data and documents (such
patchwork of disconnected national portals could as Customs declaration, certificates of origin and
undermine the Single Market and Customs Union SPS certificates) is limited. Implementation is
and create confusion for traders. In late 2020, the essentially on a pilot or partial basis.
European Union Single Window initiative was
proposed to unify and simplify customs formalities During the past two years, paperless trade
and enable information exchange among European systems have helped to keep trade flowing during the
Union members. This implies that developed COVID-19 pandemic. The crisis has also accelerated
economies, including the European Union have the regional integration and the implementation of
started acting on the need to transition to harmonized some regional Single Window initiatives. The regional
digital solutions. Single Windows create a mechanism that could
handle trade-related regulatory requirements within
Figure 19 reveals that more than 70% of the a given region as well as provide additional levels of
countries surveyed have taken steps to establish functionality for shared trade and customs
legal and regulatory frameworks for electronic procedures within a region (box 2).
transactions. However, only 30% of the countries
Figure 19. State of implementation of cross-border paperless trade measures globally
Laws and regulations for electronic transactions
Electronic exchange of Customs Declaration
Recognised certification authority
Electronic exchange of Sanitary & Phyto-Sanitary 
Certificate
Electronic exchange of Certificate of Origin
Paperless collection of payment from a 
documentary letter of credit
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Fully implemented Partially implemented Pilot stage of implementation
Not implemented Don’t know
Source: The UN Global Survey on Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation, 2021. Available at untfsurvey.org
15 The value of intra-European Union trade in goods was 1.5 times as high as the value of extra-European Union trade in goods in
2020. See https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=International_trade_in_goods_for_the_EU-
an_overview&oldid=534985
Implementation of trade facilitation measures: A closer look 27
Box 2.  Good practices in cross-border paperless trade
[ASEAN] All ASEAN members have joined the ASW Live Operation, which allows the granting of preferential tariff
treatment based on the ATIGA e-Form D exchanged through the ASW. Recently, Cambodia, Myanmar, Singapore,
Malaysia and Thailand started the exchange of the ASEAN Customs Declaration Document (ACDD) through the
ASW, and the remaining ASEAN members are expected to join by the end of 2021. The system opens opportunities
for more trade-related documents (e-SPS, e-AH, e-FS) to be exchanged electronically.
Source: ASEAN Single Window, Available at https://asw.asean.org/
[Africa] The African Alliance for Electronic Commerce (AACE), with 18 member countries, seeks to promote the
SW concept in compliance with the recommendations of international institutions. One of the Alliance’s key projects
is establishing a Regional Single Window (RSW) that will interconnect all national platforms (NSW) to smoothen
trade and enable African countries to be more competitive in the global market. The RSW will be built on a simple
organizational model. National Single Windows will exchange data via the regional platform. Then, each NSW is
responsible for the exchanges with its local users. Thus, it will not be possible for a Customs administration or
economic operator to directly connect to the RSW, except when otherwise authorized by the NSW. Moreover, the
RSW can be developed and hosted ad hoc, or simply derive from one of its members that has the technical capacity
to offer services to the others.
Source: http://www.swguide.org/single_window/about_aace.php
[Kenya] Kenya has implemented a single maritime window system as part of its efforts to improve efficiency at
the port of Mombasa and address the perennial challenge of congestion that has seen importers incur losses due
to demurrage charges. The system allowing shipping agents to submit vessel pre-arrival and pre-departure
declarations electronically went live on 2 June 2021. Implementation of the system is in line with the International
Maritime Organization Convention on facilitation of maritime traffic (known as the FAL Convention), which makes
it mandatory for Governments to introduce electronic information exchange between ships and ports.
Source: https://maritime-executive.com/article/kenya-adopts-single-window-system-for-port-efficiency
[European Union] The recent development of the “New Computerized Transit System” (NCTS) includes the
European Union, the “European Free Trade Association” (Switzerland, Liechtenstein, Norway and Iceland), Turkey,
North Macedonia and Serbia. It is an electronic declaration and processing system that traders must use to submit
a transit declaration electronically. For transit shipments between participating States this system provides a single
procedure from the start of transportation to the final destination, with all the customs authorities linked electronically.
Other ECE countries that have shown an interest in participating in the NCTS system for transit include Albania,
Azerbaijan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Georgia and the Republic of Republic of Moldova and Ukraine.
IPPC launched an important initiative in 2017 to develop a “trusted third party” system to support the government-
to-government (G2G) exchange of sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) certificates electronically. This initiative aims
to reduce the resources required in every country to develop electronic tools for producing and receiving electronic
certificates as well as negotiating agreements with trading partners to allow for their exchange. This system allows
SPS certificates to be exchanged, downloaded or viewed directly on the web. The system “e-Phyto Hub” is now
operational in the European Union. All European Union member States are now able to communicate with the
IPPC ePhyto Hub in order to receive and process electronic data from phytosanitary certificates transmitted by
non-EC countries through the IPPC ePhyto Hub.
Source: ECE, 2021, Sustainable Mobility and Smart Connectivity, available at https://unece.org/sites/default/files/2021-04/
2015779_E_web.pdf
[Pacific Alliance] Since 2016, the four members of the Pacific Alliance (Chile, Colombia, Mexico and Peru) have
been exchanging preferential certificates of origin and SPS certificates through their respective electronic Single
Windows. They are now working on enabling the cross-border electronic exchange of customs declarations.
Source:  Country responses in the UN Global Survey on Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation, 2021.
[Central America] Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua and Panama electronically exchange
Customs declarations and preferential certificates of origin. They are now working on enabling the cross-border
electronic exchange of SPS certificates.
Source: Country responses in the UN Global Survey on Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation, 2021.
28 Digital and sustainable trade facilitation: Global Report 2021
3.3 Sustainable trade facilitation issues, bribery and corruption, time-consuming trade
procedures, and documentary requirements. 16
In today’s interconnected world, Governments face To make trade facilitation more sustainable and
new regulatory challenges in managing issues arising inclusive and mainstream trade facilitation to attain
from trade disruption as well as ensuring that the sustainable development goals in the digital era,
opportunities and benefits from international trade “Sustainable Trade Facilitation” is an essential pillar
can be realized and shared inclusively, especially in of the UN Global Survey, incorporated since 2017.
the digital trade environment. Digital trade provides Measures under three sub-groups ‘Trade Facilitation
an opportunity for sectors and groups with special for SMEs’, ‘Agriculture Trade Facilitation’ and ‘Women
needs to gain better access to international markets in Trade Facilitation’ are included in this group.
and global supply chains. On the other hand, it could
widen inequalities among people, firms and locations. 3.3.1 Trade facilitation for SMEs
Many SMEs are lagging in digital transformation in
that they do not have enough capabilities or financial A trade agenda that explicitly recognizes and acts on
resources to access and effectively use digital the facilitation of SMEs can be a strong force for
instruments. Gender inequalities also exist in many inclusive trade. Figure 20 shows the average scores
different areas, creating distinct barriers to women for implementing the ‘Trade Facilitation for SMEs’
and preventing integration into international trade. measures across regions. The implementation of
A recent ECA study in the Economic Community measures in this sub-group is generally low and
of West African States (ECOWAS) region showed varies widely across regions. Developed economies,
that female small-scale traders, often informal, face which have achieved higher implementation rates for
gender-related non-tariff barriers more often than other sub-groups, have received comparatively lower
their male counterparts. Such barriers include rates for measures under this sub-group (see box 3
physical and sexual harassment, personal safety for good practices).
Figure 20. Global implementation of trade facilitation for SMEs
measures in various regions
Trade-related information 
measures for SMEs
100%
80%
60%
40%
Other special measures for SMEs SMEs in AEO scheme
20%
0%
SMEs in National Trade SMEs access Single Window
Facilitation Committee
Global Average Developed Economies Latin America and the Caribbean
Middle East and North Africa Pacific Islands South and East Europe, Caucasus and Central Asia
South Asia South-East and East Asia Sub-Saharan Africa
Source: The UN Global Survey on Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation, 2021. Available at untfsurvey.org
16 ECA, 2020, Africa Trade Report 2020: Informal Cross-Border Trade in Africa in the Context of the AfCFTA. Available at https://afr-
corp-media-prod.s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/afrexim/African-Trade-Report-2020.pdf
Implementation of trade facilitation measures: A closer look 29
Box 3. Good practices on trade facilitation for SMEs
SMEs in AEO Scheme
[Australia and Hong Kong, China] SMEs in Australia have access to their AEO programme. The Government
of Australia distinguishes SMEs from other actors and provides a risk profile for SMEs that is different from the
one for larger businesses. Hong Kong, China grants additional benefits to AEO-certified companies that actively
promote AEO certification among SMEs providers and which have developed outreach strategies to promote the
inclusion of SMEs.
Source: Inter-American Development Bank, 2020, AEO in APEC Economies: Opportunities to Expand Mutual Recognition
Agreements and the Inclusion of SMEs.
Source: https://publications.iadb.org/publications/english/document/AEO_in_APEC_Economies_Opportunities_to_Expand_Mutual_
Recognition_Agreements_and_The_Inclusion_of_SMEs.pdf
SMEs in NTFC
[India] In India, many actions have been taken to benefit SMEs. Webinars are conducted regularly by the
Directorate-General of Tax Payer Services (DGTS) and the Directorate-General of Foreign Trade (DGF) create
awareness among SMEs. The dedicated outreach working group is part of the National Committee on Trade
Facilitation that is responsible for driving such agendas.
Source: Webinars available at https://www.dgft.gov.in/CP/?opt=webinar-under-niryaat-bandhu-scheme; Directorate General of
Taxpayer Services, GST MSME, available at https://www.cbic.gov.in/resources//htdocs-cbec/gst/MSME_Flyer.pdf
SME access to a Single Window
[Azerbaijan] Business incubators created by the Small and Medium Business Development Agency of the Republic
of Azerbaijan offer various services to business start-ups, and each incubator’s services differ. Primary business
incubator services mainly provide necessary office equipment, maintenance of accounting and filing, advice on
business development strategy, exploration of investment opportunities, and various training workshops and
seminars on successful business operations. The Center for Analysis Economic Reforms and Communication has
also made the Single Window more accessible to SMEs.  
Source: Country responses in the Global Survey on Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation 2021; see also https://azexport.az/
https://smb.gov.az/en https://dth.az/
Other measures for SMEs
[Paraguay] The EXPORTAFACIL (Easy Export) system simplifies exports for SMEs by using the postal system´s
logistics infrastructure. Beneficiary firms must be SMEs registered in the Export Single Window. Benefits include
reduced shipping rates, simplified export procedures and technical support, among others.
Source: Country response in the Global Survey on Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation 2021 and EXPORTAFACIL´s website
https://www.mic.gov.py/exporta_facil/marcolegal.html (in Spanish).
[COMESA] Trade Information Desk Offices (TIDOs) have been set up under the Great Lakes Trade Facilitation
Project (GLTFP) to continue facilitating cross border trade beyond the timelines of the main project to boost trade.
Busia and Malaba are among the border points where officials are stationed to assist traders, especially
small-scale traders to use physical and modern ICT tools to make trade easier. The TIDOs also collect vital
information on small scale cross-border trade which would otherwise be missed by Customs.
Source: https://www.comesa.int/study-on-the-sustainability-of-trade-information-desk-underway
[Republic of Moldova] The Republic of Moldova announced a new measure for Digitalization of the economy
and public services, supported by a large number of ministries and government authorities, and also a new initiative
to support in particular the digitalization of SMEs. It also launched a virtual platform for SMEs to facilitate
e-commerce, to mitigate the effect of the disruption in supply chains during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Ministry
of Economy and Infrastructure’s initiative to support digitalization of SMEs aims to expand their access to both
the domestic and the global market.
Source: UNECE, based on United Nations Global Survey on Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation, 2021.
30 Digital and sustainable trade facilitation: Global Report 2021
Figure 21 shows that although 80% of the countries a limited basis. Albeit the number of AEO Mutual
have, to varying extents, introduced trade-related Recognition Agreements signed during past years
information measures for SMEs, less than half of the has increased considerably, the position of SMEs
countries surveyed have included SMEs in their vis-à-vis AEO has been recognized as a special case
NTFCs. Measures that specifically target SMEs to and warrants attention. The entry barriers to SMEs’
overcome the challenges they face in trade such as AEO certification could be disadvantageous for the
Facilities for SMEs access to Single Window, SMEs participation of SMEs in AEO certification and
access to Authorized Economic Operator (AEO) diminish the effects of AEO benefits. There is a clear
scheme, and other special measures for SMEs (such need to enhance AEO training for SMEs and to assist
as the provision of deferred duty payment or their involvement in the AEO programmes, so that
developing a specific action plan dedicated to trade they can contribute better to supply chain security,
facilitation measures for SMEs) are carried out on integrity, and resilience.
Figure 21. State of implementation of trade facilitation for SMEs measures globally
Trade-related information measures for SMEs
SMEs in National Trade Facilitation Committee
Other special measures for SMEs
SMEs access Single Window
SMEs in AEO scheme
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Fully implemented Partially implemented Pilot stage of implementation
Not implemented Don’t know
Source: The UN Global Survey on Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation, 2021. Available at untfsurvey.org
3.3.2 Agricultural trade facilitation measure. However, for other measures, the Pacific
Islands are still lagging.
Much of the agricultural trade in certain regions is
informal trade and, as such, not captured formally. Figure 23 shows that many of the countries surveyed
Targeting the agricultural sector, which represents a have, to some extent, implemented the measures
considerable proportion of small-scale traders and under ‘Agriculture Trade Facilitation’ (see box 4 for
SMEs, can also increase the positive impact of trade good practices). Priority treatment of perishable
facilitation on sustainable development. Measures in goods is a core obligation provided by Article 7.9 of
this sub-group are generally better implemented than the TFA. More than 80% of the countries have
other measures in “Sustainable Trade Facilitation” implemented this measure on a pilot basis. Behind
except for the measure for electronic application and border procedures, such as meeting SPS standards
issuance of SPS certificates, which is also relevant and testing methods, are also critical for agricultural
to paperless trade (figure 22). The swift movement products. Therefore, national standards and
of trade goods may be more important for agricultural accreditation bodies to facilitate compliance with SPS
products, especially perishable ones, than other standards as well as testing and laboratory facilities
industrial products. Agriculture is the backbone available to meet SPS requirements of main trading
industry of Pacific Island economies, which have partners measures have been implemented at least
achieved a considerably good rate for the special on a pilot basis in more than 75% of the countries
treatment for perishable goods at border-crossings surveyed, although implementation is mainly
Implementation of trade facilitation measures: A closer look 31
Figure 22. Global implementation of agricultural trade facilitation measures
in various regions
Testing and laboratory facilities 
available to meet SPS of main 
trading partners
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
Special treatment for perishable goods 0% National standards and accreditation 
bodies to facilitate compliance with SPS
Electronic application and issuance 
of SPS certificates
Global Average Developed Economies Latin America and the Caribbean
Middle East and North Africa Pacific Islands South and East Europe, Caucasus and Central Asia
South Asia South-East and East Asia Sub-Saharan Africa
Source: The UN Global Survey on Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation, 2021. Available at untfsurvey.org
incomplete. The electronic application and issuance echoes findings of several cross-border paperless
of SPS certificates is particularly challenging. Full trade readiness assessment studies that the
implementation of this measure is only slightly over Customs are much more advanced than other
10%. This may be partly explained by the fact that trade-related government agencies in using
the current common practices on the import side electronic and automated systems for facilitating
remain for accepting only paper certificates. The low trade. SPS certificates are, in many countries, issued
implementation level, when it comes to the electronic by agencies such as Ministries of Food and
application and issuance of SPS certificates also Agriculture.17
Figure 23. State of implementation of agricultural trade facilitation measures globally
Special treatment for perishable goods
National standards and accreditation bodies to 
facilitate compliance with SPS
Testing and laboratory facilities available to meet SPS 
of main trading partners
Electronic application and issuance of SPS certificates
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Fully implemented Partially implemented Pilot stage of implementation
Not implemented Don’t know
Source: The UN Global Survey on Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation, 2021. Available at untfsurvey.org
17 Readiness Assessment for Cross-border Paperless Trade country reports are available at https://www.unescap.org/resources/readiness-
assessments-cross-border-paperless-trade
32 Digital and sustainable trade facilitation: Global Report 2021
Box 4. Good practices on agricultural trade facilitation
National standards and accreditation bodies to facilitate compliance with SPS
[India]: The Bureau of India Standards (BIS) has signed bilateral agreements with the national standards bodies
of Afghanistan, Bhutan, Brazil, France, Germany, Israel, Mauritius, Nigeria, South Africa, the United Arab Emirates
and the United States of America. BIS has also inked 21 Memorandums of Understanding (MoUs) in
“standardization and conformity assessment”. BIS has also actively engaged in regional forums, such as the South
Asia Regional Standards Organization (SARSO) and the Pacific Asia Standards Congress.
Source: ADB, SASEC, 2020, Potential Exports and Non-Tariff Barriers to Trade: India National Study. Available at  https://
www.adb.org/sites/default/files/publication/559296/india-exports-nontariff-barriers-trade-study.pdf see also: https://bis.gov.in/
index.php/standards/technical-information-services
Special treatment for perishable goods
[Bangladesh]:  The National Board of Revenue (NBR) is finalizing a Statutory Regulatory Order to facilitate
a faster release and disposal of perishable goods from ports. Customs will also be able to sell or transfer seized
and unreleased perishable goods that could not be disposed of through auction due to various reasons to the
State-owned agencies.
Source: NBR to frame rules for quick release of perishables, Maritime Gateway, 25 August 2020. Available at https://
www.maritimegateway.com/nbr-frame-rules-quick-release-perishables/
Other agricultural trade facilitation measures
[Peru] Peru has integrated 12 agriculture-related trade procedures into its Single Window. Measures include the
sanitary authorization of an establishment dedicated to the primary processing of agricultural food and animal
feed, the inspection and verification report for the importation of agricultural inputs, and the certificate of sale of
primary agricultural food and animal feed, among others.
Source: Available at https://elperuano.pe/noticia/126621-mincetur-brinda-mas-facilidades-para-empresas-del-sector-agropecuario
[Paraguay] Paraguay has launched a new platform and mobile application, “INTN Servicios”, to enhance
transparency and facilitate trade in agriculture products. It will also provide technical assistance to simplify,
modernize and harmonize the processes for the export, import and transit of agricultural products in Paraguay.
Source: Available at https://www.ip.gov.py/ip/intn-lanza-plataforma-y-aplicacion-movil-para-agilizar-procesos-comerciales/
3.3.3 Women in trade facilitation facilitation (see box 5 for good practices). Measures
include women membership in NTFC or similar body,
Empowering women to engage in trade will lead to TF policy incorporating special consideration of
stronger growth and a more prosperous society. women traders and TF measures benefiting women
However, reducing gender inequality in trade involved in trade (i.e., training programmes in place
facilitation is difficult because inequalities are to ensure equal access to trade and related job
not explicitly declared in trade procedures. The opportunities). Figure 24 shows the global average
COVID-19 pandemic has further magnified the level of implementation of three measures in
inequalities experienced by many vulnerable and ‘Women in Trade Facilitation’ is somewhat limited
disadvantaged communities, including women. (less than 40%). Developed economies are also
Therefore, the inclusion of the gender dimension in facing significant challenges in implementing
trade facilitation is essential, with a wide range of measures under this sub-group.
solutions to reduce inequalities for women in trade
Implementation of trade facilitation measures: A closer look 33
Figure 24. Global implementation of women in trade facilitation measures
in various regions
Trade facilitation policy/strategy 
incorporates special consideration of 
female traders
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Women’s membership in the National 
Trade Facilitation Committee or TF measures to benefit women 
similar bodies involved in trade
Global Average Developed Economies Latin America and the Caribbean
Middle East and North Africa Pacific Islands South and East Europe, Caucasus and Central Asia
South Asia South-East and East Asia Sub-Saharan Africa
Source: The UN Global Survey on Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation, 2021. Available at untfsurvey.org
Figure 25 shows that approximately 50% of countries. Implementation of all three measures
the countries have implemented women membership is mostly on a partial and pilot basis, while full
in NTFC or similar bodies and TF measures to implementation is very limited. There is a strong
benefit women involved in trade. The measure indication that current policies are insufficient
regarding how special consideration is given in to ensure women’s rights, and more efforts are
trade facilitation policies/strategies of female needed to emphasize gender inequality in trade
traders is only implemented in less than 40% of the facilitation.
Figure 25. State of implementation of women in trade facilitation globally
Women’s membership in the National Trade 
Facilitation Committee or similar bodies
TF measures to benefit women involved in trade
Trade facilitation policy/strategy incorporates 
special consideration of female traders
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Fully implemented Partially implemented Pilot stage of implementation
Not implemented Don’t know
Source: The UN Global Survey on Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation, 2021. Available at untfsurvey.org
34 Digital and sustainable trade facilitation: Global Report 2021
Box 5. Good practices in women in trade facilitation
Women membership in NTFC or similar bodies
[Kiribati] National Women’s Organization namely Aia Mwaea Ainen Kiribati (AMAK), coordinates the women’s
group under the direction of the National Council of Women. AMAK has representation in the National Trade
Advisory Committee.
Source: Country response in the Global Survey on Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation 2021
Trade facilitation strategy incorporates special consideration of female traders
[India] The National Trade Facilitation Action Plan 2020-2023 promotes gender inclusiveness in trade. The Action
Plan has conceptualized and developed a “Women in Global Business Program” that provides information,
resources and mentoring programme to Indian businesswomen. Implementation of the action points under the
NTFAP 2020-2023 has the following performance indicators: sharing of inclusiveness report; number of outreach
programs conducted; and number of female members participating in Customs Clearance Facilitation Committee
meetings
Source: India NTFC, Implementation of Trade Facilitation Agreement: National Trade Facilitation Action Plan 2020-2023, available
at  https://www.cbic.gov.in/resources//htdocs-cbec/implmntin-trade-facilitation/NTFAP2020-23jk.pdf
TF measures to benefit women involved in trade
[Australia] The Australian Government supports developing countries in addressing trade barriers and integrating
into the global trading system. The South Asia Regional Trade Facilitation Program (SARTFP) supported with
Australian investment, promotes gender-sensitive trade facilitation, infrastructure connectivity, improved livelihoods,
and enterprise development. It challenges the assumption that trade is gender neutral and demonstrates why gender
equality matters in regional trade facilitation and infrastructure connectivity. The program implements initiatives
that promote women’s participation in activities such as cross-border tourism, transport and infrastructure. It also
includes initiatives that support female traders at selected land ports through public information campaigns on
safety issues and education programs on trade legislation and their rights.
Source: Australian Government Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (2017) Australia Advancing Women’s Economic
Empowerment Through Aid, Trade and Economic Diplomacy, available at https://www.dfat.gov.au/sites/default/files/australia-
advancing-womens-economic-empowerment-aid-trade-economic-diplomacy.pdf
[Kenya-Uganda] At the Busia border crossing, the needs of women traders addressed by installing
sex-differentiated toilets, together with resting areas and dustbins, has helped to improve health and environmental
conditions; constructing border markets for women traders – the vast majority of whom trade in agricultural goods
– facilitates the selling and buying of goods at locations close to the border.
Source: Asmita Parshotam and Samuel Balongo, 2020, Women traders in East Africa: The case study of the Busia One Stop
Border Post, available at https://saiia.org.za/research/women-traders-in-east-africa-the-case-study-of-the-busia-one-stop-border-
post/
Implementation of trade facilitation measures: A closer look 35
18
3.4 Implementation of digital 55% and 53%, respectively.  In general, countries
achieving higher implementation rates for “Digital
versus sustainable trade Trade Facilitation” have also performed eminently in
facilitation “Sustainable Trade Facilitation”, suggesting a highly
positive correlation between the two groups. Overall,
developed countries have performed better in both
Digitalization and sustainability are the two
digital and sustainable dimensions than less
interrelated components of trade facilitation. Digital
advanced countries. Most developed countries are
transformation to (cross-border) paperless trade is
positioned in quadrant I, where the digital and
the key to sustainability, while sustainable trade
sustainable implementation rates are above average.
facilitation helps go reap the full development-related
Most of the least developed countries fall into
benefits from trade facilitation reforms. Given the
quadrant III, where the implementation rates of both
linkage of the “Digital Trade Facilitation” and
are below average. Some developing countries, such
“Sustainable Trade Facilitation”, it is necessary to
as China and India, are among the best performers
compare how countries have been implementing
in sustainable trade facilitation, while the Republic of
these two groups of trade facilitation measures.
Korea and Singapore are top performers for both
groups (figure 26).
Figure 26 shows that the global average
implementation rates for digital and sustainable are
Figure 26. Implementation of digital and sustainable trade dimensions of trade facilitation
100%
Ave sustainable TF = 53% New Zealand Singapore 
Australia 
90% Belgium Mexico Korea (Rep. of)II I Japan Netherlands
Ecuador Uruguay China 
Thailand India 
Spain Turkey 
80% Morocco Canada
Switzerland
Argentina Chile Ireland Peru Estonia
Costa Rica Indonesia Brazil Azerbaijan 
Panama Philippines United Kingdom Malaysia 
Norway
70% Italy Russian Federation Saudi Arabia
Saint Kitts and Nevis Finland
Lithuania Guatemala Georgia
Dominican Republic Tunisia Kyrgyzstan 
Sweden
60% Mauritania Jordan Kazakhstan Serbia Armenia Avg digital TF = 55%
El Salvador MontenegroViet Nam 
Cameroon
50% TogoLao PDR Zambia Sri Lanka 
Nepal Bangladesh Cote d'IvoireNigeria
Albania Malawi Bahrain
Namibia Burundi Trinidad and Tobago
40% Cuba Congo
Lebanon
Maldives Burkina FasoBelize
Tanzania
30% BhutanTonga Bosnia and Herzegovina Egypt
Mongolia 
Gabon Guinea Antigua & Barbuda
Guinea - Bissau
20% Saint Vincent and the Guyana
Timor Leste Tuvalu Comoros Grenadines
Palestine Afghanistan
Nauru 
10% Ethiopia
Somalia III IV
South Sudan Iraq Kiribati 
0%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Sustainable trade facilitation
Source: The UN Global Survey on Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation, 2021. Available at untfsurvey.org
Note: For the sake of comparability, the study calculates implementation rate of sustainable trade facilitation by using data from 2 sub-
groups, namely, ‘Trade Facilitation for SMEs’ and ‘Agricultural Trade Facilitation’. Rate of implementation is computed only if level of
implementation (0-3) is available for all questions associating to both aforementioned sub-groups. For digital trade facilitation
implementation, DK and NA are treated as zero and rate of implementation is calculated for all countries.
18 Data for Women in Trade Facilitation are not adequate enough to do an analysis. Therefore, it is excluded from calculating the
implementation rate of the Sustainable Trade Facilitation group in this section.
Digital trade facilitation
36 Digital and sustainable trade facilitation: Global Report 2021
3.5 Other trade facilitation successfully collected for some trade finance
measures in more than 40% of the countries
surveyed. The most implemented measure is variety
3.5.1 Trade finance facilitation of trade finance services available. Data suggest that
at least some trade finance services are available in
Trade finance has been a key catalyst in the about 80% of the countries for which data could be
expansion of international trade during the past obtained. Fewer than 10 countries for which data are
century. Access to trade finance is a key to available have fully implemented authorities engaged
developing and including importers and exporters in in blockchain-based supply chain project covering
regional and global supply chains. Given its trade finance and Single Window facilitates traders’
importance as an enabler of international trade access to finance. Customs in most countries are
transactions,19 trade finance was incorporated for the taking the lead in developing Single Window systems
first time into the 2019 survey on a pilot basis. It was to simplify trade procedures and expedite clearance.
further updated and included in the 2021 Survey in However, financing payments for international
collaboration with the ICC. trade transactions may fall outside the mandate of
Customs. The high “don’t know” rates also reveal that
Despite the importance of trade finance in boosting trade facilitation experts and officials who provided
trade and the global economy, the global trade or validated the survey are often unfamiliar with trade
finance gap before the COVID-19 pandemic was finance. The Single Window is an automated system
estimated to be US$ 1.5 trillion, mainly affecting linking relevant agencies with different roles through
SMEs in developing economies.20 In the wake of electronic means, whereas the connection of financial
the pandemic, access to trade finance has become institutions (banks) and authorities (Foreign Exchange
even more difficult and costly. The priorities are to Authorities etc.) may not be readily available in
reduce trade costs for traders through easily available many countries. Survey results suggest a need
trade finance channels and more efficient trade for greater coordination and cooperation between
facilitation and logistics. border agencies and those involved in developing
financial and payment services (see box 6 for good
Interpretation of results under this sub-group is practices).
subject to caution as information could not be
Figure 27. State of implementation of trade finance facilitation measures globally
Variety of trade finance services available
Authorities engaged in blockchain-based supply 
chain project covering trade finance
Single window facilitates traders access to finance
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Fully implemented Partially implemented Pilot stage of implementation
Not implemented Don’t know
Source: The UN Global Survey on Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation, 2021. Available at untfsurvey.org
19 Trade finance enables the flow of money from buyer to seller and mitigation of associated risks, which greatly facilitates the flow of
goods from seller to buyer. The flows of both money and goods are themselves enabled by the flow of data and documents between
buyer and seller.
20 ADB, 2019, Trade finance gaps, growth and job survey, ADB Brief 113.
Implementation of trade facilitation measures: A closer look 37
Box 6. Good practices in trade finance facilitation
[Bangladesh] The Bangladesh Single Window supports banks in assessing information easily to support financing
of exporters and importers. The Bangladesh Bank considers the Import Registration Certificate (IRC) and Export
Registration Certificate (ERC) in order to easily identify traders applying for trade finance.
Source: Country responses in the UN Global Survey on Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation, 2021.
[Singapore] The Singapore Customs Electronic Banker’s Guarantee (eBG) Programme was implemented
in November 2020 to provide a BG with a more efficient lodgement process. Under the eGB Programme,
a participating bank will seek the entity’s written consent of their clients, as the principal of the BG, in order to
issue and digitally send the BG in electronic form (eBG) directly to Singapore Customs as soon as it is issued by
the bank, instead of hardcopy BG.
Source: Available at https://www.customs.gov.sg/businesses/new-traders-and-registration-services/registration-services/security-
lodgement/electronic-bankers-guarantee-programme
3.5.2 Trade facilitation in times of crisis the 2021 survey, with a set of five measures covering
both immediate crisis response and long-term
The COVID-19 pandemic has revealed the fragility resilient measures.
of global supply chains. Supply chain disruptions
have had a devastating impact on global trade. Most of the countries for which data are available
Against this background, the global community has have implemented, to some extent, the measures of
widely recognized that keeping trade flowing is agencies in place to manage trade facilitation in times
essential to saving lives.21 Since the outbreak of of crisis and emergencies, coordination between
COVID-19, Governments, border agencies, logistics countries on emergency trade facilitation measures
companies and traders have been exploring how they and online publication of emergency trade facilitation
can leverage existing trade and transport facilitation measures. When it comes to long-term preparedness
measures to keep goods moving across borders. The for a future crisis, only 23 countries have confirmed
crisis has also stimulated the implementation of trade that they have a plan in place to facilitate trade during
facilitation measures, especially when it comes to such a case. Another 36 countries have already
digitalizing trade procedures (see box 7 for good started to explore (partially/on a pilot basis) how they
practices). can set themselves on the right trajectory to resilient
recovery and preparation for future crises. One of the
Based on good practices identified in 2020, a short big lessons learnt is how to improve resource
survey on “Trade Facilitation in Times of Crisis and allocation to better prepare for future crises beyond
Pandemic” was designed and pilot-tested in the Asia COVID-19.23 This should be a policy priority for
Pacific.22 Building upon it, a sub-group on ‘Trade countries that have not yet started making such
Facilitation in Times of Crisis’ was incorporated into plans.
21 See Asia-Pacific Trade Facilitation Report 2021: Supply Chains of Critical Goods Amid the COVID-19 Pandemic — Disruptions,
Recovery, and Resilience, available at https://www.unescap.org/kp/2021/APTF
22 ESCAP, 2021, Trade Facilitation in Times of Crisis and Pandemic: Practices and Lessons from the Asia Pacific Region, available at
https://www.unescap.org/sites/default/d8files/knowledge-products/Regional%20report-Trade%20facilitation%20in%20
times%20of%20crisis%20and%20pandemic_0.pdf
23 Ibid.
38 Digital and sustainable trade facilitation: Global Report 2021
Figure 28. State of implementation of Trade Facilitation in Times of Crisis measures globally
Agency in place to manage TF in times of crises and 
emergencies
Coordination between countries on emergency TF measures
Online publication of emergency TF measures
Additional trade facilitation measures to facilitate trade in 
times of emergencies
Plan in place to facilitate trade during future crises
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Fully implemented Partially implemented Pilot stage of implementation
Not implemented Don’t know
Source: The UN Global Survey on Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation, 2021. Available at untfsurvey.org
Box 7. Good practices in trade facilitation in times of crisis
[Indonesia] To facilitate international trade during the COVID-19 pandemic, Indonesia intends to receive electronic/
scanned Phytosanitary Certificates from all countries. Indonesia also kindly requests trading countries to officially
inform Indonesia about implementing electronic/scanned Phytosanitary Certificates for their products exported to
Indonesia. Electronic certificates will be supported with access to validate the document. This aims to accelerate
inspection works of import documents at entry points in Indonesia. In line with this measure, Indonesia kindly
requested reciprocal measures from trading partner countries to receive the electronic/scanned Phytosanitary
Certificate from Indonesia and has developed a technique for validating the certificate through the IAQA portal.
Source: Available at https://ppkonline.karantina.pertanian.go.id/checkcert
[Georgia] For ensuring business continuity and providing information to economic operators, the Revenue Service
has used all possible communication channels as a 24/7 operated hotline, SMS, e-mail, website, Facebook and
TV programmes. Information leaflets are published in Georgian, English, Turkish, Azeri, Russian and Armenian
languages and provided to all truck drivers. The Government of Georgia has set up a website to inform the public
of all measures taken. The   Revenue Service website provides practical information for traders and travellers
during the COVID-19 pandemic, including temporary trade facilitation measures.
Source: Available at https://rs.ge/Covid19-en?cat=1&tab=1
[India] A centralized helpdesk for COVID-19 response to trade was established by the Central Board of Indirect
Taxes and Customs (CBIC). COVID-19 Helpdesk for “International Trade Issues” was also established on 26 March
2020 by the Directorate-General of Foreign Trade for extending immediate support to the trading community. Of
1,300 requests received by the helpdesk more than 900 were resolved.
In the face of COVID-19, India has implemented an E-delivery PDF-based Gatepass, and Out of Charge copy of
the Bill of Entry (BoE) to custom brokers/ importers across India to support and expedite the contact-less Customs
clearance process. A machine-based automated release of import consignments has also been launched across
India. 
Sources: Available at https://www.cbic.gov.in/resources//htdocs-cbec/Indian-Customs-Fighting-COVID-19-summary.pdf; Paperless
Customs – Electronic Communication of PDF based Gatepass, and OOC Copy of Bill of Entry to Custom Brokers/Importers,
available at  https://www.cbic.gov.in/resources/htdocs-cbec/customs/cs-circulars/cs-circulars-2020/Circular-No-19-2020.pdf
Implementation of trade facilitation measures: A closer look 39
Box 7. (continued)
[Australia] Australia introduced temporary alternative arrangements to use original paper import certificates
for a range of imported plant-based, animal, biological and animal-based goods. Where an importer is unable to
supply the original paper document from the exporting country as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, the electronic
copy is accepted.
Following the outbreak, in January 2020, the “Human coronavirus with pandemic potential” became a “listed human
disease” by the legislative instrument under the Biosecurity Act. In accordance with subsection 477(1) of the Act,
the Health Minister has made the Biosecurity (Human Biosecurity Emergency) (Human Coronavirus with Pandemic
Potential) (Essential Goods) Determination 2020 (the Determination), which clearly defines “essential goods” and
prohibits the practice of price gouging, and imposes requirements to ensure that those who breach relevant
restrictions surrender these goods to law enforcement.
Sources: Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment Australia, available at  https://www.agriculture.gov.au/import/
industry-advice/2020/97-2020; Australia Federal Register of Legislation, Explanatory Statement, available at https://
www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2020L00355/Explanatory%20Statement/Text
[Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Republic of Moldova] In March/April 2020, the Republic of Moldova adopted measures
with regard to public digital signatures. Azerbaijan set up services to verify the authenticity of digitally signed
documents, one of the earliest of its kind in their subregion. As part of the Law on Consumer Protection in
Kazakhstan, the Government plans to launch a unified platform for receiving complaints from consumers based
on the Single Window principle.
Source: ECE (2021) Regional Report on Post-Pandemic Recovery: E-commerce and Trade Facilitation, available at https://
unece.org/sites/default/files/2021-04/ECE_TRADE_C_CEFACT_2021_15E_RegReport-eCommerceTF.pdf
[Botswana and Zambia] The two countries cooperated in clearing traffic, which had built up at Kazungula during
the first week that member States implemented national COVID-19 measures, by joint clearance and collaboration
between border agencies as well as the use of a temporary construction bridge.
Source: SADC, 2020, SADC Regional Response to COVID-19 Pandemic, Bulletin No. 6.
[Kenya] According to the COVID-19 Supply Chain and Markets Update of 5 June 2020 by the World Food
Programme’s Kenya Country Office, four of the eight assessed customs border stations reported completely normal
operations, i.e., Busia (Kenya–Uganda), Lokichogio (Kenya – South Sudan), Moyale (Kenya – Ethiopia) and Lunga
Lunge (Kenya – United Republic of Tanzania). For example, the Kenyan Ministry of Health sent a taskforce to the
Webuye-Malaba highway to collect samples from queuing truck drivers. The samples are taken to either Moi
Teaching Referral Hospital in Eldoret or Kisumu District Hospital for test results that require between 24 and
48 hours to process. This has reduced the length of the queues. An accelerated lane for truck drivers with a valid
COVID-19 certificate has also been created, and the movement of inbound trucks into Kenya has been completely
cleared.
Source: WFP, 2020, Kenya Country Office, COVID-19 Supply Chain and Markets Update, 5 June 2020.
[Kyrgyzstan] To combat and respond to the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Government of
Kyrgyzstan has taken several measures. Among others, it established the State Council to implement economic
measures to minimize the consequences of external shocks and stimulate economic development. A “green corridor”
was created for imports of food and essential goods. Customs barriers, inspections and cost controls have been
eliminated. As part of the “Plan of Measures” of 6 May 2020, the Government created an anti-crisis fund to subsidize
domestic entrepreneurs, especially export-oriented companies. In addition, within the framework of the Act, “Towards
New Economic Freedom and Development”, adopted on 30 April 2020, the long-term activities include simplifying
the procedure and reducing the time for inspections by 2.5 to 3 times.
Source: National Trade Facilitation Roadmap of the Kyrgyz Republic, 2021-2025, available at  https://unece.org/sites/default/
files/2021-06/ECE_TRADE_464E.pdf
40 Digital and sustainable trade facilitation: Global Report 2021
Box 7. (continued)
[European Commission] The European Commission has issued guidance on Customs issues related to the
COVID-19 emergency in order to provide solid and practical solutions for all stakeholders in such exceptional
circumstances and to ensure a uniform application of the Union Customs Code (UCC) even during this time of
crisis.
Source: Available at https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/business/covid-19-customs-guidance-trade_en#heading_6EU
[Collective Response] As part of the collective response to combat COVID-19, Australia, Brunei Darussalam,
Canada, Chile, the People’s Republic of China, the Lao People’s Democratic Republic, the Republic of the Union
of Myanmar, Nauru, New Zealand, Singapore, the United Arab Emirates and Uruguay have jointly committed to
keep supply chains open and to remove any restrictive trade measures on essential goods, especially medical
supplies.
Source: https://www.mfat.govt.nz/en/trade/covid-19-and-trade/
[Collective Response] To build resilience and safeguard from a future crisis, the Green Corridor has been formed
between CEFTA/Western Balkan region and the European Union member States to support trade and transport
facilitation and ensure a fast flow of goods during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond. Some crossing points at
which Customs and other inspection agencies are present, have been designated as points at which the traffic
flow of all essential goods is guaranteed 24/7, forming the so-called “Green Corridor” in the region. Prioritized
movement of essential goods is secured through electronic dissemination of pre-arrival information within the IT
system named “System of Electronic Exchange of Data” (SEED) used in the whole region.
Source: https://www.wb6cif.eu/2021/04/27/establishment-of-green-corridors-between-cefta-wb6-and-eu-member-states/
[COMESA] On 14 May 2020, Ministers responsible for commerce, trade and industry in the COMESA region agreed
on guidelines to facilitate coordination and uniform application of measures across borders while ensuring public
safety and safe trade. The Ministers agreed that the guidelines would be applicable during the COVID-19 pandemic
period and reviewed as and when necessary. This has led to tripartite guidelines trade and transport facilitation
adopted in July 2020, harmonising best practices in movement of goods and people across three regions: COMESA,
the East African Community (EAC), and the South African Development Community (SADC). The African Union
Commission has further built upon the success of this harmonisation to issue and adopt continental guidelines to
facilitate free and timely flow of cross-border trade during the pandemic.
Sources: Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa, 2020, Guidelines for the Movement of Goods and Services Across
COMESA Region During the COVID-19 Pandemic, 10 June 2020. Available at www.comesa.int/wpcontent/uploads/2020/06/
Guidelines-for-the-Movement-of-Goods-Services-Across-COMESARegion.pdf ; https://covid.comesa.int/wp-content/uploads/2021/
06/TRIPARTITE-GUIDELINES-29-JULY-2020-signed-Aug-2020.pdf ; https://www.uneca.org/storys/africa%E2%80%99s-customs-
chiefs-commit-implementing-new-continental-covid-19-trade-facilitation
Conclusion and the way forward 41
4
Conclusion and the
way forward
This report presents data on trade facilitation and paperless
trade implementation from 144 countries around the world.
The survey covers the implementation of general trade
facilitation measures, including many of those featured
in the TFA, as well as advanced ICT-based measures,
sustainable trade facilitation measures catering to the
special needs of SMEs, the agricultural sector, women and
other measures that link trade finance and trade facilitation
measures supporting inclusive and resilient trade.
Figure 29 confirms the strong negative relationship between
international trade costs and the implementation of general
and digital trade facilitation measures (also see box 8 for
the impact of digital trade facilitation measures in trade cost
reduction). In turn, based on the data collected, a strong
positive relationship can be observed between logistics
performance and trade facilitation implementation (figure 30).
The global average trade facilitation implementation rate
stands at 64.7%. Most countries across the globe have
implemented general trade facilitation measures to improve
transparency, expedite and streamlining formalities, and
develop adequate institutional frameworks. This reflects the
country commitments to implementing the WTO TFA.24 The
report reveals that most countries have been actively
24 A total of 17 of the 31 common measures discussed in this report can
be directly related to TFA commitments (both binding and non-binding).
This implies that the minimum implementation rate that an economy would
need to achieve to be fully compliant with the TFA stands at almost 55%
(17/31=54.8%). See also Annex 5 on the state of implementation of WTO
TFA-related measures.
42 Digital and sustainable trade facilitation: Global Report 2021
Figure 29. Trade facilitation implementation and trade costs
500%
400%
300%
200%
100%
R2 = 0.5358
0%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120%
Trade facilitation implementation
Source: ESCAP-World Bank Trade Cost Database and the UN Global Survey on Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation, 2021. Available
at untfsurvey.org
Figure 30. Trade facilitation implementation and logistics performance
5.0
4.5
4.0
3.5 R2 = 0.5356
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120%
Trade facilitation implementation
Source: World Bank Logistics Performance Index 2018 and the UN Global Survey on Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation, 2021.
Available at untfsurvey.org
Trade costs, excluding tariff (ad valorem equivalent)
Logistics performance index: 2016
(1 = worst performer; 5 = best performer)
Conclusion and the way forward 43
Box 8. Assessing the impact of trade facilitation
Based on the survey data presented above, the impact of the implementation of trade facilitation measures on
trade costs is estimated. Following ADB/ESCAP (2021), two econometric models are estimated to quantify the
potential effects of different groups of trade facilitation measures (general and digital trade facilitation measures,
as defined in table 2) on trade costs. Model 1 captures the impact of the overall implementation rate of 31 main
trade facilitation measures, while model 2 separates general and digital trade facilitation measures. Results are
presented in table 4. The estimated trade cost reductions are calculated based on all countries considered achieving
different levels of trade facilitation implementation. The first two levels include partial and full implementation of
only binding trade facilitation measures under WTO TFA, while the following two levels assume partial or full
implementation of both binding and non-binding WTO TFA measures. The third level goes beyond the WTO TFA
measures, with additional paperless and cross-border paperless trade facilitation measures implemented.25
Model 1 shows that the implementation of WTO TFA binding measures only leads to a limited decrease in trade
cost, with a 3.76% reduction when full implementation is achieved. This limited impact is explained by the fact
that many countries have already implemented these measures. Non-binding measures under WTO TFA still have
the potential to facilitate trade further and reduce unnecessary trade costs, as reflected by the moderate decreases
in trade costs of 2.96% and 6.78% when partially and fully implemented, respectively. The most significant change
in trade costs is estimated when paperless and cross-border paperless trade measures are incorporated into the
scope of trade facilitation efforts, as the trade cost reductions reach 7.62% and 13.47%, respectively. Indeed,
model 2 confirms that digital trade facilitation measures serve as a greater catalyst for trade cost reduction than
general measures do.
Table 4. Changes in trade costs resulting from the implementation
of trade facilitation and paperless trade (per cent)
WTO TFA+ (binding +
WTO TFA WTO TFA non-binding + other
Global: trade (binding only) (binding + non-binding) paperless and cross-border
costs model paperless trade)
Partially Fully Partially Fully Partially Fully
implemented implemented implemented implemented implemented implemented
Model 1       
Overall trade -1.52 -3.76 -2.96 -6.78 -7.62 -13.47
facilitation
Model 2       
General trade -0.55 -1.34 -0.89 -2.09 -1.06 -2.33
facilitation
measures
Digital trade   -1.27 -2.42 -8.13 -12.54
facilitation
measures
Source: ADB/ESCAP, 2021, Asia-Pacific Trade Facilitation Report 2021.
Figure 31 presents estimated trade cost reductions in various regions. Noticeably, differences in levels of trade
cost reductions are pronounced, especially in the third scenario when paperless and cross-border paperless trade
measures are implemented. Full implementation under WTO TFA + scenario, on average, could reduce trade costs
25 In the partial implementation scenario, all countries who have not yet implemented any of the considered facilitation measures or are
currently at the pilot stage, act and achieve at least partial implementation of these measures. In the full implementation scenario, all
countries that have not yet fully implemented any of the considered trade facilitation measures act and achieve full implementation.
44 Digital and sustainable trade facilitation: Global Report 2021
Box 8. (continued)
by 13 percent, ranging from 7 percent in Developed Economies to 26 percent in Pacific Islands. The varying extent
of trade cost gains suggests that there is considerable room for improvement in terms of trade facilitation, such
as streamlined processes and interoperability between Customs, among others. These improvements require strong
cooperation between countries, which could be supported by regional initiatives such as the Framework Agreement
on Facilitation on Cross-Border Paperless Trade in Asia and the Pacific.
Figure 31. Impact of trade facilitation implementation
on trade costs in various regions
South and 
East Europe, Latin America Middle East 
Global Pacific Sub-Saharan Caucasus and and the and South-East Developed
Average Islands South Asia Africa Central Asia Caribbean North Africa and East Asia Economies
0%
-5% -3%
-5%
-6% -6%-7% -7%
-10% -8%
-11% -11%
-12% -12%
-15% -13% -13% -13%
-20% -18%
-21% -20%
-25%
-26%
-30%
Effect of implementation of WTO TFA binding + non-binding + other paperless trade measures
Effect of implementation of WTO TFA binding + non-binding measures
Effect of implementation of WTO TFA binding measures
Source: United Nations Global Survey on Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation, 2021. Available at untfsurvey.org
engaged in implementing measures to facilitate trade, global average implementation level of ‘Cross-Border
despite the ongoing disruptions that COVID-19 Paperless Trade’ remains substantially lower than the
pandemic put on international trade. As a result, the other trade facilitation sub-groups considered in the
global average implementation rate has increased by survey. However, significant progress has been made
approximately 5 percentage points compared with the in ‘Cross-Border Paperless Trade’ during the past two
2019 survey result, suggesting a stable upward trend years. For example, the ASEAN Single Window has
during the pandemic.26 progressively expanded its scope and coverage
during the pandemic, including more partners and
While the global average implementation of enabling the exchange of more trade documents.
‘Paperless Trade’ measures has exceeded 60%, the That said, the implementation of ‘Cross-Border
26 The evolution is calculated based on the common 88 countries that participated in both the 2017 and 2019 surveys. The average
implementation rate of those 88 countries in 2017 and 2019 was 56.3% and 64.4%, respectively.
Partial implementation
Full implementation
Partial implementation
Full implementation
Partial implementation
Full implementation
Partial implementation
Full implementation
Partial implementation
Full implementation
Partial implementation
Full implementation
Partial implementation
Full implementation
Partial implementation
Full implementation
Partial implementation
Full implementation
Conclusion and the way forward 45
Paperless Trade’ remains largely incomplete in many implementation of trade facilitation as a step-by-step
regions and countries. This is not surprising given process,28 based on the groups of measures included
that, on one hand, many developing countries are at in this survey. Trade facilitation begins with the setting
an early stage of developing paperless systems. On up of the institutional arrangements needed to
the other hand, more advanced countries face prioritize and coordinate the implementation of trade
challenges in changing their existing systems for facilitation measures. The next step is to make trade
readily interoperable ones. In that regard, given the processes more transparent by sharing information
large potential benefits associated with the cross- on existing laws, regulations and procedures
border digitalization of trade procedures – amounting as widely as possible, and consulting with
to US$600 billion for the Asia-Pacific region alone.27 stakeholders when developing new ones. Designing
It is in the interest of all countries to work together and implementing simpler and more efficient
and develop the regulatory framework and technical trade formalities is next. The re-engineered and
protocols needed for the seamless exchange of streamlined processes may first be implemented
trade-related data and documents in electronic form based on paper documents but can then be further
along the international supply chain. improved through information and communications
technologies and the development of paperless trade
While new technologies such as blockchains can systems.
help, strong political will and intergovernmental
cooperation are essential to making real progress. Sustainable and digital are highly correlated
Efforts in this regard include the Framework dimensions of trade facilitation. When it comes to
Agreement of the Pacific Alliance (which covers trade “Sustainable Trade Facilitation”, the implementation
facilitation and Customs cooperation), the expansion of inclusive measures to promote SMEs and the
of the ASEAN Single Window Agreement, the participation of women in trade remains low. SMEs
Framework Agreement on Facilitation of Cross- represent about 90% of businesses and more than
border Paperless Trade in Asia and the Pacific, and 50% of employment worldwide,29 yet trade facilitation
the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) measures tailored to SMEs are insufficient. SMEs are
Agreement – which apart from removing tariffs on still facing disproportionate barriers to trade due to
90% of goods and services – requires the member inadequate access to digital infrastructure, insufficient
States to implement trade facilitation reforms to IT skills and a lack of financial resources. This is
remove non-tariff barriers and harmonize some of particularly the case in the context of COVID-19.30
these areas. These initiatives promote the exchange Recommendation 33 of UN/CEFACT recognizes the
and mutual recognition of trade data and documents significance of the single window for trade generally
in electronic form and strengthen the compatibility and SMEs specifically. Facilitation for AEOs is also
between national and subregional paperless trade one of the two TFA measures that specifically
systems. They will further enrich the cooperation in mention SMEs. Therefore, building the capacity of
trade facilitation, enhance trade connectivity and SMEs and taking them into account in trade
contribute to faster post-COVID-19 economic facilitation policies are of critical importance in
recovery. achieving sustainable trade facilitation.
Moving forward, digitalization offers immense Similarly, there is a lack of awareness regarding the
potential for improving trade facilitation implementation importance of gender mainstreaming in trade
and further reducing trade costs. Figure 32 shows the facilitation. Guiding women in understanding trade
27 See, ESCAP, 2017, Digital Trade Facilitation in Asia and the Pacific. Available at https://www.unescap.org/publications/digital-trade-
facilitation-asia-and-pacific-studies-trade-investment-and-innovation-87
28 This step-by-step process is based on, and generally consistent with the UN/CEFACT step-by-step approach to moving trade facilitation
towards a Single Window environment. In practice, however, trade facilitation measures are often very much interrelated across borders.
It is not necessary to implement all measures in one category before moving to the next and, as explained in UNNExT Brief No.17 (see
https://unnext.unescap.org). Much time and cost can be saved by adopting a more integrated approach based on a long-term vision.
29 ITC, 2021, SME Competitiveness Outlook: Empowering the Green Recovery.
30 WTO, 2020, World Trade Report 2020: Government policies to promote innovation in the digital age, available at https://www.wto.org/
english/res_e/booksp_e/wtr20_e/wtr20_e.pdf
46 Digital and sustainable trade facilitation: Global Report 2021
Figure 32. Moving up the trade facilitation ladder towards seamless
international supply chains
Cross-border
paperless trade 100
Paperless trade
80
60
Formalities
40
Transparency
Institutional 20
arrangement and 
cooperation 
0
Performance area Frontier (full implementation)
Global Average Developed Economies
Latin America and the Caribbean Middle East and North Africa
Pacific Islands South and Europe, Caucasus and Central Asia
South Asia South-East and East Asia
Sub-Saharan Africa
Source: The UN Global Survey on Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation, 2021. Available at untfsurvey.org
Note: Figure 31 shows global cumulative trade facilitation implementation scores for different regions for five groups of trade facilitation
measures included in the survey. The scores are based on the equally weighted implementation of 31 trade facilitation measures, but
the number of measures varies in each of the five groups. Full implementation of all measures = 100.
procedures, setting guidelines for standards bodies times of crisis, trade facilitation strategies should be
to ensure a more balanced representation of the designed in a more holistic and inclusive manner.
interests of women and men, and promoting the
participation and decision-making of women in trade The availability and adequate provision of trade
facilitation and standards-related activities, could finance is essential for a healthy trading system. This
have a significant impact on increasing exports is particularly true for developing economies and
and enabling women to achieve higher income SMEs seeking to benefit from trade opportunities.
opportunities.31 Given the importance of these groups However, in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic,
with special needs in achieving sustainable and access to trade finance has become more difficult
inclusive development of economies, particularly in and costly. Awareness of trade finance processes
31 ECE, 2017, Briefing note on the contribution of UN/CEFACT to United Nations Sustainable Development Goal 5, Executive Committee,
Centre for Trade Facilitation and Electronic Business, twenty-third session.
Conclusion and the way forward 47
appears to be limited among trade policy and trade countries are not sufficiently prepared at the national
facilitation specialists. Therefore, trade facilitation or regional levels, especially when it comes to
policymakers need to work together with stakeholders long-term measures for a resilient recovery. It is
in the financial sector to see how trade finance can imperative for regional connectivity to be enhanced
be made more easily available and integrated into through coordinated trade facilitation actions at
trade facilitation implementation strategies, including this pivotal time. Continued and sustained efforts
Single Window development plans. should be made to further enhance cooperation,
make trade information transparent, and strengthen
Last, the COVID-19 pandemic has undoubtedly countries’ capacity to contribute to recovery and
exposed the weaknesses of the global trading prepare adequately for future crises. This includes
system. Results of the newly incorporated Trade the climate crisis, in which trade facilitation certainly
Facilitation in Times of Crisis group show that has a mitigating role to play.32
32 Duval and Hardy, 2021, A primer on quantifying the environmental benefits of cross-border paperless trade facilitation., ESCAP Working
Paper No. 206. Available at https://artnet.unescap.org/publications/working-papers/primer-quantifying-environmental-benefits-cross-border-
paperless-trade
48 Digital and sustainable trade facilitation: Global Report 2021
Annexes
Annex 1. Definitions of the various stages of implementation
Stage of implementation Coding/Scoring
Full implementation: The trade facilitation measure implemented is in full compliance 3
with commonly-accepted international standards, recommendations and conventions
such as the Revised Kyoto Convention, UN/CEFACT Recommendations, or the WTO
Trade Facilitation Agreement (TFA); it is implemented in law and practice; it is available
to essentially all relevant stakeholders nationwide, and supported by adequate legal and
institutional frameworks as well as adequate infrastructure and financial and human
resources. A TFA provision included in the commitments given under Notifications of
Category A may generally be considered as a measure that is fully implemented by the
country, with a caveat that the provision will be implemented by a Least-Developed
Country (LDC) member within one year of the TFA agreement coming into force. If
a country registers a positive response for all sub-questions concerning a given trade
facilitation measure, that measure should be considered fully implemented.
Partial implementation: A measure is considered to be partially implemented if at least 2
one of the following is true: (1) the trade facilitation measure is in partial – but not in full
– compliance with commonly-accepted international standards, recommendations and
conventions; (2) the country is still in the process of rolling out the implementation of
the measure; (3) the measure is being used but on an unsustainable, short-term or
ad-hoc basis; (4) the measure is implemented in some – but not all – targeted locations
(such as key border crossing stations); or (5) some – but not all – targeted stakeholders
are fully involved.
Pilot stage of implementation: A measure is considered to be at the pilot stage of 1
implementation if, in addition to meeting the general attributes of partial implementation,
it is available only to a very small portion of the intended stakeholder group (or at
a certain location), and/or is being implemented on a trial basis. When a new trade
facilitation measure is at the pilot stage of implementation, the old measure is often
continuously used in parallel to ensure that the service is still provided even when there
has been a disruption with the new measure. This stage of implementation also includes
relevant rehearsals and preparation for the full implementation.
Not implemented: A measure has not been implemented at this stage. However, this 0
stage may still include initiatives or efforts towards implementation of the measure. For
example, under this stage, (pre)feasibility studies or planning for the implementation
can be carried out; and consultation with stakeholders on the implementation may be
arranged.
Annexes 49
Annex 2. Groupings of countries with special needs
The following countries are included in the three groups of countries with special needs considered in the
survey.32
Least Developed Economies (30): Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia,
Comoros, Ethiopia, Guinea, Guinea -Bissau, Kiribati, the Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Madagascar,
Malawi, Mauritania, Mozambique, Myanmar, Nepal, Niger, Rwanda, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Solomon Islands,
Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, Timor-Leste, Togo, Tuvalu and Zambia.
Landlocked Developing Countries (24): Afghanistan, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bhutan, Botswana, Burkina Faso,
Burundi, Ethiopia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, the Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Malawi, Republic of
Moldova, Mongolia, Nepal, Niger, Paraguay, North Macedonia, Rwanda, South Sudan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan,
Zambia, Zimbabwe.
Small Island Developing States (26): Antigua and Barbuda, Bahrain, Belize, Cabo Verde, Cuba, Dominican
Republic, Fiji, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Kiribati, Maldives, Mauritius, Micronesia, Nauru, Palau, Papua
New Guinea, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, Singapore, Solomon Islands,
Timor-Leste, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Tuvalu and Vanuatu.
32 More details are available at http://unohrlls.org/
50 Digital and sustainable trade facilitation: Global Report 2021
Annex 3. Trade facilitation implementation by countries in different
groups (%)
Figure 33. Average implementation rates of trade facilitation measures
in developed economies
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Transparency Formalities Institutional arrangement Paperless trade Cross-border paperless trade
and cooperation
Source: The UN Global Survey on Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation, 2021. Available at untfsurvey.org
Figure 34. Average implementation rates of trade facilitation measures
in Latin America and the Caribbean
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Transparency Formalities Institutional arrangement Paperless trade Cross-border paperless trade
and cooperation
Source: The UN Global Survey on Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation, 2021. Available at untfsurvey.org
Andorra
Antigua & Barbuda
Australia
Argentina Austria
Belize Belgium
Bulgaria
Brazil
Canada
Chile Croatia
Cyprus
Colombia
Czechia
Costa Rica Estonia
Cuba Finland
France
Dominican Republic
Germany
Ecuador Greece
Hungary
El Salvador
Ireland
Guatemala Italy
Guyana Japan
Lithuania
Mexico
Luxembourg
Panama Malta
Paraguay Netherlands
New Zealand
Peru
Norway
Saint Kitts and Nevis Poland
Saint Vincent and the Portugal
Grenadines Spain
Trinidad and Tobago Sweden
Uruguay Switzerland
Latin America and the United Kingdom
Caribbean Developed Economies
Annexes 51
Figure 35. Average implementation rates of trade facilitation measures
in the Middle East and North Africa
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Transparency Formalities Institutional arrangement Paperless trade Cross-border paperless trade
and cooperation
Source: The UN Global Survey on Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation, 2021. Available at untfsurvey.org
Figure 36. Average implementation rates of trade facilitation measures
in the Pacific Islands
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Transparency Formalities Institutional arrangement Paperless trade Cross-border paperless trade
and cooperation
Source: The UN Global Survey on Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation, 2021. Available at untfsurvey.org
Fiji Bahrain
Kiribati Egypt
Iran, Islamic
Micronesia Republic of
Nauru Iraq
Palau Jordan
Papua New Guinea Lebanon
Samoa Morocco
Solomon Islands Palestine
Tonga Saudi Arabia
Tuvalu Syria
Vanuatu Tunisia
Middle East and 
Pacific Islands North Africa
52 Digital and sustainable trade facilitation: Global Report 2021
Figure 37. Average implementation rates of trade facilitation measures in
South and East Europe, Caucasus and Central Asia
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Transparency Formalities Institutional arrangement Paperless trade Cross-border paperless trade
and cooperation
Source: The UN Global Survey on Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation, 2021. Available at untfsurvey.org
Figure 38. Average implementation rates of trade facilitation measures in South Asia
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Transparency Formalities Institutional arrangement Paperless trade Cross-border paperless trade
and cooperation
Source: The UN Global Survey on Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation, 2021. Available at untfsurvey.org
Albania
Afghanistan
Armenia
Azerbaijan
Bangladesh
Belarus
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Bhutan
Georgia
Kazakhstan
India
Kyrgyzstan
Republic of Moldova
Maldives
Montenegro
North Macedonia
Nepal
Russian Federation
Serbia
Pakistan
Tajikistan
Turkey
Sri Lanka
Ukraine
Uzbekistan
South Asia
South and East Europe, 
Caucasus and Central Asia
Annexes 53
Figure 39. Average implementation rates of trade facilitation measures
in South-East and East Asia
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Transparency Formalities Institutional arrangement Paperless trade Cross-border paperless trade
and cooperation
Source: The UN Global Survey on Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation, 2021. Available at untfsurvey.org
Figure 40. Average implementation rates of trade facilitation measures
in Sub-Saharan Africa
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Transparency Formalities Institutional arrangement Paperless trade Cross-border paperless trade
and cooperation
Source: The UN Global Survey on Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation, 2021. Available at untfsurvey.org
Burkina Faso
Botswana Brunei Darussalam
Burundi
Cabo Verde Cambodia
Cameroon
Comoros China
Congo
Cote d’Ivoire
Indonesia
Equatorial Guinea
Ethiopia
Lao PDR
Gabon
Guinea
Guinea - Bissau Malaysia
Kenya
Madagascar Mongolia
Malawi
Mauritania Myanmar
Mauritius
Mozambique Philippines
Namibia
Niger
Republic of Korea
Nigeria
Rwanda
Singapore
Senegal
Sierra Leone
Somalia Thailand
South Sudan
Sudan Timor Leste
Togo
Zambia Viet Nam
Zimbabwe
Tanzania South-East and East Asia
Sub-Saharan Africa
54 Digital and sustainable trade facilitation: Global Report 2021
Annex 4. Trade facilitation implementation: Full dataset versus limited
dataset
To track the progress made by countries in implementing trade facilitation measures since 2019, the analysis
was limited to 128 countries that participated in both the 2019 and 2021 surveys (tables 5).
It was also checked whether the implementation rates of these 128 countries are a good representation of
the entire dataset (144 countries). Table 6 shows that the difference is minor, indicating that these 128 countries
were good representatives of the survey results of the 2021 survey.
Table 5. Breakdown of countries that participated in the 2019 and 2021 survey
South and East Europe,
Latin America and South-East and
Developed Economies Caucasus and Central
the Caribbean East Asia
Asia
1 Andorra* 1 Antigua & Barbuda 1 Albania 1 Brunei Darussalam
2 Australia 2 Argentina 2 Armenia 2 Cambodia
3 Austria 3 Belize 3 Azerbaijan 3 China
4 Belgium 4 Brazil 4 Belarus 4 Indonesia
Bosnia and
5 Bulgaria 5 Chile 5 5 Lao PDR
Herzegovina
6 Canada 6 Colombia 6 Georgia 6 Malaysia
7 Croatia 7 Costa Rica 7 Kazakhstan 7 Mongolia
8 Cyprus 8 Cuba* 8 Kyrgyzstan 8 Myanmar
9 Czechia 9 Dominican Republic 9 Republic of Moldova 9 Philippines
10 Estonia 10 Ecuador 10 Montenegro 10 Republic of Korea
11 Finland 11 El Salvador 11 North Macedonia 11 Singapore
12 France 12 Guatemala 12 Russian Federation 12 Thailand
13 Germany 13 Guyana 13 Serbia 13 Timor-Leste
14 Greece 14 Mexico 14 Tajikistan 14 Viet Nam
15 Hungary 15 Panama 15 Turkey                       
16 Ireland 16 Paraguay 16 Ukraine
17 Italy 17 Peru 17 Uzbekistan
Saint Vincent and
18 Japan 18
the Grenadines                 
19 Lithuania 19 Trinidad and Tobago
20 Luxembourg* 20 Uruguay*
21 Malta 21 Saint Kitts and Nevis*
22 Netherlands         
23 New Zealand
24 Norway
25 Poland
Annexes 55
Table 5. (continued)
Developed Economies Pacific Islands South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa
26 Portugal 1 Fiji 1 Afghanistan  1 Botswana
27 Spain 2 Kiribati 2 Bangladesh 2 Burkina Faso*
28 Sweden 3 Micronesia 3 Bhutan 3 Burundi*
29 Switzerland 4 Nauru 4 India 4 Cabo Verde*
30 United Kingdom            5 Palau 5 Maldives 5 Cameroon
6 Papua New Guinea 6 Nepal 6 Comoros
7 Samoa 7 Pakistan 7 Congo
8 Solomon Islands 8 Sri Lanka 8 Cote d’Ivoire
9 Tonga Middle East and 9 Equatorial Guinea*
10 Tuvalu North Africa 10 Ethiopia
11 Vanuatu 1 Bahrain* 11 Gabon
2 Egypt 12 Guinea
3 Iran (Islamic Rep. of) 13 Guinea - Bissau
4 Iraq 14 Kenya*
5 Jordan 15 Madagascar
6 Lebanon* 16 Malawi
7 Morocco 17 Mauritania
8 State of Palestine* 18 Mauritius
9 Saudi Arabia 19 Mozambique
10 Syrian Arab Republic 20 Namibia
11 Tunisia 21 Niger*
22 Nigeria*
23 Senegal
24 Sierra Leone
25 Somalia
26 South Sudan
27 Sudan
28 Rwanda*
29 Togo
30 Tanzania
31 Zambia
32 Zimbabwe
* Note:  these countries participated in the 2021 survey but not in 2019 survey.
56 Digital and sustainable trade facilitation: Global Report 2021
Table 6. Comparison of regional average – full versus limited dataset
South
Latin Middle and East
Developed America East and Pacific Europe, South South- Sub- Global
2021 data
Economies and the North Islands Caucasus Asia East and Saharan Average
Caribbean Africa and Central East Asia Africa
Asia
Limited sample (128) 83.7% 71.7% 63.3% 40.1% 68.8% 58.5% 75.3% 49.6% 66.1%
Full sample (144) 81.8% 72.1% 58.7% 40.1% 68.8% 58.5% 75.3% 49.1% 64.7%
Annexes 57
Annex 5. Implementation stages of selected WTO TFA-related measures
globally
Figure 41. Implementation stages of selected WTO TFA-related measures in general trade
facilitation and paperless trade globally
Art. 7.4: Risk management
Art. 7.3: Separation of Release from final determination of 
customs duties, taxes, fees and charges
Art. 2.2: Stakeholders' consultation on new draft regulations 
(prior to their finalization)
Art. 4: Independent appeal mechanism
Art. 1.2: Publication of existing import-export regulations 
on the internet
Art. 8: National legislative framework and/or institutional 
arrangements for border agencies cooperation
Art. 7.5: Post-clearance audits
Art. 23: National Trade Facilitation Committee or similar body
Art. 7.1: Pre-arrival processing
Art. 2.1: Advance publication/notification of new trade-related 
regulations before their implementation
Art. 3: Advance ruling on tariff classification and origin of 
imported goods
Art. 7.7: TF measures for authorized operators
Art. 10.2: Acceptance of copies of original supporting documents 
required for import, export or transit formalities
Art. 7.8: Expedited shipments
Art. 7.2: E-Payment of Customs Duties and Fees
Art. 7.9: Special treatment for perishable goods
Art. 7.6: Establishment and publication of average release times
Art. 10.4: Electronic Single Window System
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Fully implemented Partially implemented Pilot stage of implementation
Not implemented Don’t know
Source: The UN Global Survey on Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation, 2021. Available at untfsurvey.org
58 Digital and sustainable trade facilitation: Global Report 2021
Figure 42. Implementation stages of selected WTO TFA-related measures in
transit facilitation globally
Art. 10.5: Limit the physical inspections of transit goods and 
use risk assessment
Art. 8: Alignment of working days and hours with neighbouring 
countriest at border crossings
Art. 11: Cooperation between agencies of countries involved 
in transit
Art. 8: Alignment of formalities and procedures with 
neighbouring countries at border crossings
Art. 11: Supporting pre-arrival processing for transit  facilitation
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Fully implemented Partially implemented Pilot stage of implementation
Not implemented Don’t know Not applicable
Source: The UN Global Survey on Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation, 2021. Available at untfsurvey.org
Digital and Sustainable Trade Facilitation in Asia and the Pacific 2021 i