A/HRC/4/WG.2/TF/2 page 11 44. Comments prompted by the WTO statement concerned the following: the nature and type of WTO complaints by LDCs; the need to address more closely the impact of trade and trade negotiations on the right to development; the implications of an aid-for-trade mechanism; the significance for the right to development of the reference in the preamble to the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization to “sustainable development” and to the “need for positive efforts designed to ensure that developing countries, and especially the least developed among them, secure a share in the growth in international trade commensurate with the needs of their economic development”; and finally, the need for “ex ante” poverty analysis and social impact assessments to be considered as useful tools for evaluating the impact of any kind of reform impacting on the state of development on the ground. 45. On the third partnership considered, the representative of OECD spoke about how the Paris Declaration relates to the right to development, enumerating four reasons why the Declaration could make a difference: broad consensus; monitoring of progress; effective accountability; and follow-up mechanisms. This roadmap for change is organized around five principles (ownership, alignment, harmonization, managing for results, and mutual accountability), accompanied by 12 indicators of aid effectiveness, 12 targets to encourage progress, and country-level targets. He emphasized that the Declaration is a compromise among countries, and does not address every aspect of aid; for example, the document is not policy prescriptive. He concluded that the links between the Paris Declaration and the right to development were to be found in the stress on emancipating countries from external dependence and enhancing good governance, thus making it desirable for the development and human rights communities to work together on their mutually reinforcing strategies. 46. Solita Collas Monsod, member of the task force, welcomed the Paris Declaration from the perspective of both donor and partner countries, aiming to improve the quality of aid in light of pledges of increased quantity, in recognition of challenges related to management and efficiency of procedures, as well as problems concerning tied aid. Strong features were the identification indicators for progress, a timetable and targets, together with arrangements for monitoring and evaluating performance. 47. However, an assessment based on the right-to-development criteria, four issues of concern arose. First, despite the emphasis on country ownership, only 4 of the 56 partnership commitments and 1 of the 12 indicators concern ownership. The second issue concerns the theme of managing for results, with six partnership commitments, but only one indicator of progress and a relatively weak 2010 target. The third is the non-systematic inclusion of gender throughout the Paris Declaration framework, with only one reference to gender (para. 42). The fourth issue concerned the fact that untied aid was the only indicator with no target for 2010, merely stating as a benchmark “continued progress over time”. 48. Task force members and observers raised a number of important issues in the discussion on the Paris Declaration. Some reinforced the potential of the criteria to contribute towards enhancing its effectiveness; others raised the need for long-term aid continuity and predictability, aid-absorption capacity and the fact that, as a non-binding document, non-compliance with the Declaration would not result in any sanctions. Particular emphasis was placed on the value of the studies commissioned by OECD from the Overseas Development Institute relating human rights to each of the five principles of the Paris Declaration.