Previous Page  102 / 162 Next Page
Information
Show Menu
Previous Page 102 / 162 Next Page
Page Background

Single Window Systems

In the OIC Member States

92

The legacy client server systems in the Cameroon Single Window made difficult

increased maintenance costs and made changing to newer technology impossible

without a complete re-engineering. The e-GUCE lack of interoperability and

interconnectivity with the Customs Management System, ASYCUDA ++ is due to the

distributed architecture of ASYCUDA++, and will continue even with the new second

generation.

These shortcomings explain why all three Single Window operators launched a second general

design phase that fundamentally changes the IT architecture and SW strategic design. The

second generation developments in Cameroon and Moroccan are comprehensive designs that

attempt a broader flow of procedures and processes from the arrival of the vessel to the exit of

the goods, including goods and documents centric interventions.

The three Single Windows also struggle to introduce paperless procedures.

The lack of legal framework for electronic documents and signature in the Kyrgyz

Republic leads to the de facto duplication of electronic and paper based procedures.

Duplication reduces adherence of users to the Single Window.

In Cameroon, the duplication of paper and electronic procedures is due to individual

resistance by some agencies.

The Moroccan Single Window gradually integrates paperless procedures into the

Single Window through legal acts despite resistance from traders/transporters and

agencies.

The financial management is a challenge for the three Single Windows, although PorNet’s fully

financial autonomy.

The Cameroon and Kyrgyz Republic Single Windows both face revenue constraints as

the fees only cover a minor part of their operational expenses. They are therefore

dependent on government budget support and third parties funding for updates and

innovation. When relying on third party funding they have limited involvement in the

procurement, development, and acceptance of the system.

None of the three Single Windows adopted a cost estimation methodology that would

allow appropriately predicting budget requirement and allocating resources. The

current budget process is done on an ad hoc basis and this cannot provide a proper

planning.

The outsourcing of the design, development and production of the IT system has caused

difficulties in all three Single Windows. The internal staff was little involved and trained for

maintenance and changes. Vendor or proprietary lock-in it makes the Single Window operator

dependent on a vendor products and services, without possibility to use another vendor.