33
constant interaction with other government authorities (OGA) and other stakeholders. The EU
Strategy and Action Plan for Customs risk management includes cooperation between the AEO
program and these authorities with the objective of ensuring security while avoiding
burdensome or redundant procedures and costs for both parties. In the case of the EU,
cooperation with other OGA covers areas such as aviation security, maritime transport and
exports controls.
Mutual Recognition
In the case of the EU, AEOS and AEOF members are eligible to take part at MRAs. These
operators are hence considered safe and secure, and are less likely to undergo further
procedures or requirements.
Recognizing the importance of MRAs, the EU has concluded and implemented Mutual
Recognition of AEO programs with Norway and Switzerland (July 2009), Japan (June 2010),
Andorra (January 2011), the US (May 2012) and China (May 2014). MRAs with other
important trade partners are currently under negotiation. The EU also provides technical
assistance to a number of countries in preparation for future MRAs.
2.3 Evaluation of the AEOs
As it was mentioned before, AEO programs aim at improving the Customs performance in
order to speed up administrative procedure. The objective of this section is to evaluate the
outcome of different AEO programs by looking at different measures of the Customs
performance.
More specifically, the evaluation of the Japanese AEO program shows that it has four important
characteristics (Sawafuji, 2011): First, the AEO program led to a significant decrease in time to
trade. While the AEO program in Japan was preceded by different programs that improved the
Customs procedures, this program significantly reduced clearance time for AEO operators. In
fact, in 1991 a “Pre-Arrival Documentary Examination” was adopted and decreased the time
required from arrival to release from 26 to 20 hours. Later, in 1997, a “One-Stop on-line
service” was implemented and time of clearance reached 5.6 hours. With the “Simplified
Import Declaration” and “First Single Window” in 2003 and “Second Single Window” in 2006,
clearance to clear goods reached 3.3 hours. After adopting the AEO program in 2006, clearance
time was almost 30 times lower for AEO compared to non-AEO (0.1 and 3.1 hours
respectively). This points out the significant improvement in the Customs procedures as an
outcome of the AEO program.
Second, the AEO program was significantly effective in coordination and consultation with
different stakeholders in improving its AEO program. Indeed, it coordinates with the private
sector to obtain its input on the AEO program and takes into consideration its feedback in
implementation. For instance, they modified the Customs Acts legislation governing the
program itself based on the traders’ needs and feedback. Second, it has continuous
government-private sector consultation mechanisms to discuss promoting and implementing
the AEO program. Moreover, the AEO Center has also participated in several business seminars
to present the AEO program to private sector counterparts.