63
manufacturing companies. This is hardly ever surprising considering that trade of goods
happens through mostly manufacturing companies.
While there is more convergence across the OIC AEO programs in mining, energy and other
services, the same is true for agriculture, wholesale and retail trade as well as transportation
and storage services across the APEC AEO programs. These results seem to highlight the
comparative advantage sectors of these two country groups. Many of the OIC members do have
rich mineral resources that give rise to more convergence in mining and energy in OIC AEO
programs. On the other hand, APEC members tend to be among the trade champions of the
world where manufacturing trade needs to be supported by services production and trade,
which gives rise to better convergence in traditional services sectors such as wholesale/retail
and transportation services.
Table 3.8. Sectoral Convergence across OIC and APEC
Sector OIC APEC
Agriculture, Forestry, & Fishing 50.0% 63.6%
Mining & Quarrying 50.0% 18.8%
Manufacturing 100.0% 100.0%
Energy 37.5% 36.4%
Wholesale & Retail Trade 50.0% 72.7%
Transportation & Storage 62.5% 72.7%
Other Services 62.5% 45.5%
Source: Authors’ compilation using survey data.
Comparison of convergence in terms of the types of operators between the OIC AEO programs
and the APEC AEO programs are presented in Table 3.9. The most noteworthy result is related
to the exporters. While there is 100 percent convergence in exporters in the APEC AEO
programs, it is 75 percent convergence in the OIC AEO programs. This is due to the higher
export-orientation of the APEC member countries. However, when it comes to the bridging
elements of the international supply chains, in other words Customs brokers, warehouse
operators and logistics operators, the OIC AEO programs maintain a much higher convergence
than their counterparts in APEC.
Table 3.9. Operator Type Convergence across OIC and APEC
Types of Operators OIC APEC
Importer 87.5% 88.2%
Exporter 75.0% 100.0%
Customs Broker 75.0% 64.7%
Warehouse Operator 75.0% 58.8%
Logistics Operator 62.5% 35.3%
Manufacturer 87.5% 52.9%
Port/Terminal Operators 12.5% 35.3%
Other 50.0% 11.8%
Source: Authors’ compilation using survey data.