Authorized Economic Operator Programs
In the Islamic Countries:
Enhancing Customs-Traders Partnership
35
 Leveraging technology and adaptability for the future
 Enhancing measurability of evidence-based outcomes and benefits
 Optimizing available resources
 Stronger partnerships between Customs and the industry (CBSA, 2018)
The PIP program is in line with the objectives and commitments of the Government of Canada
under the WCO SAFE Framework. Indeed, the program was successful at enhancing border and
supply chain security, while facilitating the movement of legitimate goods, thus reducing
border-related costs for operators. Recently, PIP members were also granted the benefit of
using FAST lanes into Canada, which had not been the case in the past. PIP has also enhanced
trade relations with third countries through MRAs.
At the technical level, the application process has been simplified with the development of the
Trusted Traders Portal. Phase 1 of Portal launched in 2014, and phase 2 in 2017. The portal
also allows for tracking the application status and facilitates administration and exchange of
information. The PIP program also has a database that includes tools and guidelines for
stakeholders.
Communication with stakeholders is crucial to the success of an AEO program. In this matter,
the CBSA collaborates closely with other governmental authorities and businesses. Currently,
the CBSA and industry communicate through a formal mechanism called the Border
Commercial Consultative Committee (APEC, 2016). Finally, PIP program activities were found
to have contributed to increased awareness regarding security issues and threats. This has
been particularly useful for SMEs, who were hence able to engage in the international supply
chain through PIP membership.
2.4 Developing Country Perspective
Developing countries usually design their respective AEO programs based on international
best cases. Therefore, the implementation steps are very similar to what is presented in this
chapter. Although developing countries are laggards in terms of AEO design and
implementation compared to developed countries, they started to experience the gains from
trade facilitation introduced by AEO implementation. To this effect, Box 2.2 presents the trade
impact of AEO implementation in Mexico.
However, the experience of developing countries is not always as smooth as the best
international cases as expected. There are additional challenges that developing countries face
both during design and implementation.
Legal challenges: An important phase for the best international cases is the design of the legal
basis of AEO which enables the countries to function their programs within a previously
determined framework. Both Japan and the EU had extensive legal framework tailored
towards AEO design and implementation before the launching of their respective AEO
programs. However, the institutional and governance structure of the developing countries
may not allow the Customs Authorities to work under a well-defined legal framework. Instead,
they may be working under a law which does not prevent the operation of an AEO framework
but limits the scope of the AEO program. Case studies from OIC countries presented in Chapter
4 highlight these limitations.