Although the KPI “Variation in the number of Authorized Economic Operators” (AEOs) (expected outcome: “Increased trust in the relationship with trade”) shows an increase in certain WCO regions, the KPI “AEO involvement in trade”, which measures the percentage of the trade value generated by AEOs for importation and exportation, is rather small.
The KPI “Share of e-commerce shipments” in import and export shipments (expected outcome: “More efficiency of clearance and delivery in e-commerce”) shows large discrepancies across the 24 administrations which provided data on this indicator. In terms of numbers of shipments, the average share of shipments identified as having resulted from transactions effected digitally through a computer network reached 50.7% in those countries.
When it comes to the KPI “Degree of maturity of risk management on goods and passengers” (expected outcome: “Increased use of technical targeting and detection capabilities on goods and passengers”), most administrations (82.5%) indicated that their risk management practices were advanced. According to the KPI “Ratio of inspections carried out on the basis of risk profiles versus the total number of inspections”, on average, 70.2% of the inspections were carried out on the basis of risk profiles. This means that the number of inspections carried out on the basis of manual processes (e.g. random inspections, selection/assessment by inspectors, investigative leads/tips and investigations by other law enforcement agencies that are not included in the risk engine) is still relatively high.
The KPI “Gender Balance Ratio” (expected outcome: “Improved gender balance of staff at all levels”) shows some discrepancies among respondents. In the case of most of them, however, senior managerial positions are mostly occupied by men.
Among the KPIs for which insufficient data were collected is the KPI “Maturity of competency development” which measures the level of adoption of a competency-based HR system. Over 75% of the administrations participating in the PMM first cycle did not provide the necessary data. This could indicate that implementing such an approach remains challenging for them.
Use of the WCO’s instruments and tools
Respondents were asked to provide information about their awareness and use of the WCO instruments and tools related to the KPIs. This information was then used to look for correlations between well or low-performing KPIs and the use of WCOs standards and guidance material.
WCO instruments linked to the KPIs related to revenue collection had the highest usage rates. They include the Harmonized System Nomenclature, the HS Explanatory Notes, the Compendium of Classification Opinions, the Technical Guidelines on Advance Rulings for Classification, Origin and Valuation, and the Guidelines on Customs Infrastructure for Tariff Classification, Valuation and Origin.
A total of 76.4% of the respondents declared having used the WCO Data Model when digitalizing electronic Customs declarations. Given that the Data Model serves as a common language enabling information to flow seamlessly across different IT systems and connecting private and public entities involved in a trade transaction beyond Customs, efforts should be made to ensure that even more Customs administrations make use of it.
It is worth noting that the lack of use of some WCO instruments could indicate a need for a review or update to address the rationale behind the KPIs concerned.
Informing capacity building
Participating in the PMM has also enabled Customs administrations and the WCO Secretariat to identify areas where capacity needs to be built or strengthened. Challenges include making AEO programmes more attractive and digitalizing Customs procedures while making use of WCO norms, conducting post-clearance audits, implementing a competency-based human resource management policy and a human resource development policy, ensuring gender equality and diversity, and developing national databases to capture seizure statistics.
The next cycle of the PMM is scheduled to start in late 2025.
Participation of a larger number of administrations in future cycles is crucial to ensure that the PMM brings the expected benefits to the Customs community, such as establishing regional or global benchmarks and identifying areas where capacity building is needed. With this in mind, some KPIs are being reviewed by the Performance Measurement Mechanism Project Team (PMMPT) while new ones are being developed.
Those administrations that participated in the first cycle of the PMM will be able, after the second cycle, to evaluate the progress they have made and the impact of any assistance they may have received.
Administrations that have not participated in the first cycle are invited to nominate a coordinator who will be responsible for managing access to the PMM online platform at national level.
More information
https://www.wcoomd.org/en/topics/capacity-building/instrument-and-tools/pmm.aspx
[1] Angola, Argentina, Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Belarus, Belgium, Bhutan, Bolivia, Brazil, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Canada, China, Côte d’Ivoire, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Eswatini, France, Georgia, Greece, Guatemala, Honduras, Hong Kong (China), Iceland, Indonesia, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Jordan, Kenya, Lesotho, Liberia, Lithuania, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Malta, Mauritius, Mexico, Moldova, Mongolia, Namibia, New Zealand, Niger, Norway, Papua New Guinea, Peru, Qatar, Rwanda, Senegal, Serbia, Singapore, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Tanzania, Togo, Uganda, Ukraine, Uruguay, Vietnam, Zambia and Zimbabwe.
