Single Window for Foreign Trade, 5th Edition Module 4: Interoperability
1
1
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
Interamerican Development Bank (IDB) (www.iadb.org), through his Integration and Trade Sector (INT). Course coordinator: Interamerican Development Bank (IDB) (www.iadb.org), through his Integration and Trade Sector (INT), the Institute for the Integration of Latin America and the Caribbean (INTAL), the Inter-American Institute for Economic and Social Development (INDES) (www.indes.org), the World Customs Organization (WCO) (www.wcoomd.org) and the General Secretariat of Central American Integration (SG-SICA) (http://www.sica.int/) Module author: Luisa Escamilla Navarro, ICT Project Manager (Valenciaport Foundation). Pedagogical and edition coordination The Inter-American Institute for Economic and Social Development (INDES) (www.indes.org) in collaboration with Fundación Centro de Educación a Distancia para el Desarrollo Económico y Tecnológico (CEDDET) (www.ceddet.org) and Caribbean Customs Law Enforcement Council (CCLEC) (www.cclec.net)
5th Edition 2016
This document cannot be reproduced, in whole or in part, by any electronic or mechanical means, including photocopy or any recording process. Its information cannot be stored or recovered by any systems whatsoever without the due written authorization from the IDB. Any request for partial or total reproduction must be informed to: BIDINDES@iadb.org These materials have been revised in light of the ministerial decisions taken in the framework of the 9th World Trade Organization Ministerial Conference held in Bali, Indonesia, in December 2013. The adjustments were made in order to reflect a higher alignment between the course topics and the priorities identified in Bali’s Ministerial Declaration and decisions, where all IDB members participated. Bali Ministerial Declaration and decisions 2
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
Table of contents Index of Figures ......................................................................... 6 Index of Tables .......................................................................... 7 Glossary .................................................................................... 8 Introduction ............................................................................... 9 Aim of the module .................................................................... 10 Learning-oriented questions ....................................................... 10 Unit I. Interoperability and Interconnection ................................. 12 Learning objectives ................................................................ 12 I.1. Interoperability and Interconnection ................................... 12 I.2. Definition ........................................................................ 14 I.2.1. Technical Interoperability ............................................. 16 I.2.2. Semantic Interoperability ............................................. 18 I.2.3. Organizational Interoperability ...................................... 19 I.2.4. Interoperability Governance ......................................... 23 I.3. The Benefits of Interoperability .......................................... 26 I.4. Risks and obstacles .......................................................... 27 Unit summary .......................................................................... 30 Unit II. Information Harmonization in Single Window Processes...... 31 Learning objectives ................................................................ 31 II.1. Benefits ......................................................................... 32 II.2. Recommendations ........................................................... 33 II.3. Policies of Harmonization, Organization and Communication . 34 II.4. Steps to Follow in Harmonizing Data.................................. 39 II.4.1. Data Capture ............................................................. 40 3
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
II.4.2. Definition .................................................................. 43 II.4.3. Analysis .................................................................... 44 II.4.4. Reconciliation ............................................................ 45 Unit summary .......................................................................... 48 Unit III. Simplification of processing procedures ........................... 49 Learning objectives ................................................................ 49 III.1. Advantages of Dematerialization ...................................... 51 III.2. Aspects to Consider ........................................................ 52 III.3. Digital Signatures .......................................................... 53 III.3.1. Digital Certificate ...................................................... 56 III.3.2. The Digital Signature in International Trade ................. 58 III.3.3. Regulations in Different Countries ............................... 58 III.4. Electronic Billing ............................................................ 60 III.4.1. Format of the Digital invoice ...................................... 61 III.4.2. Examples of Country Standards .................................. 63 Unit summary .......................................................................... 64 Unit IV. Architecture of a Single Window environment ................... 65 Learning objectives ................................................................ 65 IV.1. What does Single Window Environment Architecture consist of? ....................................................................................... 65 IV.2. Enterprise Architecture.................................................... 67 IV.3. Data Architecture - WCO Data Model ................................ 69 IV.4. Service-Oriented Architecture .......................................... 71 IV.5. Consequences of SOA for the Single Window Environment ... 73 Unit summary .......................................................................... 77
4
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
Unit V. Confidentiality and protection of data ............................... 78 Learning objectives ................................................................ 78 Unit summary .......................................................................... 81 Bibliography ............................................................................ 82
5
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
Index of Figures
Figure 1.1. Types of Interoperability. Figure 1.2. Interoperability Dimensions. Figure 1.3. Semantic Interoperability aspects. Figure
1.4.
Collaboration
agreements
between
authorities
and
organisations. Figure 1.5. Interoperability Dimensions. Figure 2.1. Measures to be implemented in the harmonization process. Figure 2.2. International Trade Recommendations. Figure 2.3. Phases of the Harmonization Process. Figure 3.1. Digital Signature Process. Figure 4.1. Diagram of Relationships. Figure 4.2. Technology Architecture. Figure 4.3. Conceptualization of the Architecture of Interoperability. Figure 4.4. Graph of SOA Architecture Characterization.
6
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
Index of Tables
Table 2.1. UNTDED data element categories.
7
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
Glossary
ICT: The information and communications technologies.
UCR: Unique Consignment Number.
WCO: World Customs Organization.
8
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
Introduction
Trade facilitation is becoming a matter of increasing strategic importance for many public- and private-sector organisations. The variety of public and private actors involved, the need for strict governmental controls and the demand for speed and transparency in all matters related to foreign trade highlight the complexity of the processes related to international trade and the volume of processes that companies have to tackle. There is a need for systems that are able to communicate with one another in order to facilitate the trade processes. However, for various reasons, these systems have been developed separately and are based on different technical, legal and practical realities. Thus, work must be done to make this communication as transparent as possible, using harmonised terminology and a framework of similar policies and regulations, satisfying the same level of requirements, incentives and controls to ensure international trade operations run smoothly. The module is divided into four Units, the aim of which is to improve understanding of the interoperability and interconnection concept, the basic principles for the harmonisation of data and processes, the simplification of administrative processes, the definition of ServiceOriented Architecture and the principle of confidentiality and data protection.
9
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
Aim of the module
To discover and understand the key concepts of interoperability relating to Single Window processes, such as the harmonisation of information,
simplification
of
processes,
digital
signature,
architecture, confidentiality and data protection.
Learning-oriented questions
•
What are the main types of interoperability and what are their benefits?
•
What does the simplification of administrative processes or the dematerialisation of justification documents consist of?
•
What is a Service-Oriented Architecture within a Single Window environment?
•
Why is there a need for digital signatures and electronic invoices?
•
What are the key criteria to take into consideration in data protection processes?
10
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
Module 4. Interoperability Unit I. Interoperability and Interconnection Unit II. Information Harmonization in Single Window Processes Unit III. Simplification of processing procedures Unit IV. Architecture of a Single Window environment Unit V. Confidentiality and protection of data
11
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
Unit I. Interoperability and Interconnection
Learning objectives •
To provide insight into the interoperability concept and its importance in the Single Window process framework.
•
To
analyse
the
basic
principles
of
data
and
process
harmonisation in a Single Window environment.
I.1. Interoperability and Interconnection
Beyond the functional scope described below, it is necessary to indicate
that
different
levels
of
interoperability
can
be
established. The distinction is related to the environment in which the different agencies or administrations involved in the Single Window initiatives interact.
12
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
Figure 1.1. Types of Interoperability
Source: Valenciaport Foundation. In-House Preparation.
There are four specific levels of interoperability: •
Intra-Administrative interoperability administrative
which or
departments
or
Interoperability: takes
place
government agencies
that
unit
Refers
within
the
between
belong
to
to
the same
different the
same
administration. •
Horizontal
Interoperability:
Develops
between
different
administrations within the same level of government (local administration with local administration, regional administration with regional administration, etc …). •
Vertical Interoperability: Occurs when different levels of government
intervene
within
the
same
country
(central
administration or home office with regional administration; regional administration with local administration).
13
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
•
5th Edition
Module. 4
Cross-Border Interoperability: Refers to the interoperability which occurs between agencies or administrations of different countries.
Depending upon the level of interoperability required by a project, concepts such as the selection of authority to lead the initiative, or certain legal subjects, will be more critical and require greater effort.
For example, the selection of the leading authority for a Single Window project is not the same if participating authorities are agencies within the same administration versus if they are the authorities from different countries. Something similar happens with legal matters, where administrations of the same country deal with the same legislation and legal questions, whereas if the participating authorities represent different countries it is an important aspect to analyze the differences.
I.2. Definition
The
Ibero-American
Interoperability
framework
defines
interoperability in the electronic administration environment as “the ability of disparate, diverse organizations and systems to interact with consensual, common objectives for the purpose of obtaining mutual benefits. Interaction implies that the organizations
involved
share
information
and
knowledge
through their business processes by means of the interchange of data between their respective information technology and communications systems�.
14
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
This definition is in line with the definition given by the European Commission at the present time when it presents interoperability as one of the key elements for electronic administration. In the context of this module, the concept of interoperability deals not only with the technology question (diversity of components, variety of programs and programming languages, multiple providers, etc.), but also implies the necessity of defining policies, norms and standards for achieving cooperation between systems. Interoperability is therefore analyzed on the basis of a typology that considers the following four relevant dimensions: technical, semantic, organizational and governance. Figure 1.2. Interoperability type
Source: Compiled by author. Adaptation of INDES design -2013.
15
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
I.2.1. Technical Interoperability
Technical
Interoperability
(hardware,
software
and
covers
the
technical
telecommunications)
questions
necessary
to
guarantee the connection and transmission of data between the participating entities’ computer systems and services. It allows for the provision of common data transfer mechanisms and the invocation of functions naturally transparent to existing computer systems and networks. It includes such key aspects as open interfaces, interconnection services, data integration, presentation and interchange, accessibility, security services and tools that help different computer applications interact or communicate with other applications (also known as middleware). The following stand out among the requirements identified in Technical Interoperability: •
Levels of evolutionary adoption. Heterogeneity of systems in different degrees of technological evolution is generally found among the various entities who participate in a Single Window process. In this situation, to facilitate technological evolution, provisions must be made for various adoption levels. That means, for example, that an entity on a basic level of technological implementation must be able to operate with some functionalities or services, but not with all. As it gradually implements technologies it did not initially have available, its degree of adoption can be extended to the next level, increasing its benefits, and so on progressively, until it reaches a complete level of interoperability.
16
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
•
5th Edition
Module. 4
Security and privacy. The establishment of interoperability between
two
administrations
does
not
imply
that
one
administration’s data is totally accessible to the other or vice versa. Interoperability between two administrations means that if the data an administration needs to develop its functions is available in another administration that information will be shared instead of being requested from the citizen or the business. In this manner, transactions continue to be under the control of each entity with the jurisdiction or responsibility for the transactions. The interoperability platform ensures that only data authorized for each specific operation will be transferred from one system to another. •
Definition and adoption of technical standards. Existing standards must be considered and implemented, especially those utilized by participating authorities. Insofar as possible, some use of alternative models should be considered for a predefined period so that authorities that are not in a position, technically
or
organizationally,
to
immediately
adopt
the
recommended standards can incorporate the Single Window process in a partial and preliminary manner. •
Diversity of platforms and open code. Given that each authority
may
possibly
have
very
different
technological
platforms with respect to the utilization of operating systems, databases and architectures, etc., consideration must be given to the capacity to interoperate with various platforms. Due to the
changing,
evolutionary
nature
of
interoperability,
an
attempt must be made to have sufficient access to the code installed to achieve interoperability in a manner that can be adapted
to
the
changing
nature
of
communications
requirements.
17
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
I.2.2. Semantic Interoperability
The objective of Semantic Interoperability is to have information interchanged have a single meaning that can be assimilated and understood without ambiguity by all the applications participating
in
the
transaction.
Semantic
Interoperability
qualifies the systems to combine the information received with the information they already have and process it adequately. Figure 1.3. Semantic Interoperability aspects
Source: Adaptation of INDES design – 2013.
18
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
The requirements of the Semantic Interoperability are: •
Multiple languages: the possibility of handling the diverse languages being utilized such as, for example: Spanish, English, Portuguese, etc. This requires the definition, by common accord, of basic rules for presenting documents and making automatic translation mechanisms available to reduce the problem. The application of an international codification of the data facilitates this multilingual capability. For example, the use of international merchandise nomenclature such as the Harmonized Commodity Description and Coding System – HS, international country and location
codes,
types
of
equipment,
ship
identification,
identification of businesses, etc. •
Creation of metadata: For the purpose of attaining the benefits of growth, repositories of global, reusable metadata must be set up from the beginning of the implementation process. This will assist in the incorporation of new participating authorities or applications,
utilizing
defined
semantic
specifications
and
incorporating new particularities, avoiding the duplication of effort and broadening the scope of interoperability.
I.2.3. Organizational Interoperability
Organizational Interoperability is concerned with defining business objectives, modelling processes and facilitating the collaboration of administrations that wish to interchange information and may have differing internal organizational structures and processes. This
implies
generating
collaboration
agreements
between
administrations and organizations that need to be interconnected. 19
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
Figure 1.4. Collaboration agreements between authorities and organisations.
Source: Adaptation of INDES design – 2013.
Organizational Interoperability is very much connected to aspects related to the review and reconciliation of processes treated in the foregoing module. In practice, Organizational Interoperability implies the
collaborative
definition
of
why
and
when
information
is
interchanged, the standards and rules that guarantee security in such interchanges and plans that guide the implementation of such initiatives.
20
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
Organizational Interoperability requirements are: •
Country particularities. Policies and governance structures differ in each country, so it is not possible to create a single scheme that adequately accommodates them all. The architecture defined must be flexible enough to allow countries to choose a route to follow that is feasible under its present conditions.
•
Principle of legality. Government action is ruled by each country’s legal framework, which indicates what governments do and how they must do it. Sometimes that principle is not in alignment
with
the
development
and
modernization
of
technological electronic services in public agencies. Moreover, computerized solutions that are implemented in one country are not necessarily valid or applicable in another country. The interoperability defined here needs to ensure that the particular aspects of the authorities’ processes and autonomy are adequately reflected. •
Transversal services and applications. The integration of information from different systems and areas of government to attain complete interaction focused on facilitating business and citizens is a characteristic aspect of Single Windows. Such integration is a relevant attribute at the local as well as international level. At the international level, the interactions between the citizens and businesses of one country with the government of another country, it is even more critical. The implementation of interoperability between countries must foresee and provide mechanisms to carry out complex services.
21
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
•
5th Edition
Module. 4
Definition of business processes. The flow of a particular activity’s process may be different in each country. That requires the
creation
of
intermediation
mechanisms
that
allow
the
reconciliation of information with minimal adjustments and without the necessity of always redesigning the information flows of the processes in the systems. In addition, the processes and activities must be allowed to evolve and change independently with no great impact on the rest of the related processes and activities in order to provide an environment for continual improvement. In such an environment a weak coupling between the different participating systems allows each of them to evolve and improve in an independent manner. In other words, insofar as possible, the creation of such strong ties between systems that the modification of one of those systems affects the functioning of the rest should be avoided, as it makes the evolution of the system difficult. •
User and the community requirements. Due to cultural differences, the particular necessities of each locality and the usual practices consolidated in each country, it is necessary to have a prior internal analysis of semantic, organizational and technical compatibilities. This analysis provides channels that make it possible to meet the requirements of the authorities or parties involved at any time in a flexible manner to resolve problems that arise in using the services.
•
Equitable and efficient services. The intention is not to ask the citizen for information already available in government records and to obtain a homogeneous quality of services.
22
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
I.2.4. Interoperability Governance
Interoperability Governance includes the
accords between
governments, their ministries, agencies and other public organisms, and the actors who participate in achieving interoperability between processes, along with the manner of attaining such interoperability. Consequently, it is concerned with the
political,
legal,
and
structural
conditions
relevant
to
the
development and utilization of interoperable applications, with the objective of identifying and eliminating potential obstacles that might impede integration. With governance, public authorities seek to attain the framework of collaboration
and
standards
interoperability,
of
institutionalism
necessary
ensure
its
to
establish
adoption,
and
the
enable
agencies with the necessary organizational and technical capacity to put interoperability into practice. The essentials for interoperability governance are: •
Non-centrality. For the purpose of respecting the autonomy and equal rights of participating countries, it is necessary to develop regional interoperability on the basis of a noncentralized architecture. This helps
preserve the
existing
autonomy of those participating with multiple distributed platforms and clearly separated functional areas available. This also allows each country and agency, with jurisdiction, to establish its particular internal working rules. Provisions must be made, however, for the communications capacities of existing information platforms and systems, making it possible to create common repositories and functionalities that can be shared.
23
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
•
5th Edition
Module. 4
Public goods and services. The effort necessary for the construction of an interoperability solution in the context of Single Windows implies a significant investment of time and resources. For example, the technical specifications for the development
of
the
architecture
and
the
interoperability
platform, the data, metadata specifications and schematics, the technical specifications of electronic documents, standards and methodologies,
the
computer
solutions
and
other
such
intermediate sub products of the project, represent a patrimony of knowledge, a high value economic and market asset, in business language. The property and use rights of that patrimony must be preserved as “Public Goods” offering a “Public Service,” so that its adoption on the part of those who participate in the Single Window allows the use of that public good to be empowered, preserved and offered. This concept keeps it from being converted to an exclusive right of any of the parties involved, either as patrimony or a third party private patent, which could endanger the supply of that public service. •
Cooperation
and
reutilization.
As
an
integrating
and
enduring option, cooperation and reutilization make it possible for each new country that joins the project to advance more rapidly, with lower costs and efforts than the costs of its predecessors,
with
the
process
of
automation
and
interoperability between the applications of the countries involved evolving.
24
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
•
5th Edition
Module. 4
National interoperability strategies and programs. One of the lessons learned in analyzing international experiences and “good practices” is that the successful implementation of interoperability processes requires creating a specific work program as a precondition. To assist the work of governments that need it, the possibility of creating multinational institutional support groups must be considered for the purpose of aiding and facilitating the entry of new countries to the proposed Single Window interoperability network.
•
Dissemination
of
digital
signatures,
certificates
and
electronic identities. The dissemination of knowledge in regard to electronic signatures as an essential part of the strategy of dematerializing government transactions and the progressive widening of the use of electronic signatures, do not depend on technical aspects alone. Electronic signatures require developing the institutional organization, standardization and providing
the
necessary
investments
to
promote
their
acceptance. Only in that manner can this form of authentication be expected to reach the critical mass of public servants, citizens
and
businesses
to
make
its
utilization
feasible.
Paragraph 4 of this Module will go deeper into the matter of Digital Signatures and Certificates. •
Clear
interoperability
leadership
/
sponsorship
/
management. Governance that begins with the analysis of experience and “good practices” indicates the definition of the roles to be played by each responsible party, as well as controlling the implementation of activities that become the engine that drives the collective effort.
25
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
I.3. The Benefits of Interoperability
Some of the benefits incorporated in interoperability initiatives include:
•
The possibility of cooperation between entities without distinctions of technological development levels; that is, the use of proprietary systems does not make it impossible to communicate and interchange data between systems.
•
Simplification of administrative activities and business processes, providing greater efficiencies to public administrations.
•
The possibility of reducing technology costs by utilizing open standards and technological applications more easily.
•
Decreasing the costs of developing information systems by encouraging the reutilization of data and functionalities.
•
Greater simplicity in the realization of participating agents, saving time and money.
•
Capacity to promote transparency and performance between the parties involved, the public agencies and the private businesses.
•
Improved decision making as a consequence of obtaining more data and higher quality information.
•
Promotion of international cooperation in fields that require new tools.
•
Providing an integral and integrated vision of public service on the part of public administrations and the other actors involved, independent of the number of organisms or processes that participate.
transactions
by
26
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
I.4. Risks and obstacles
Interoperability initiatives between authorities, and more concretely between the authorities of different countries, are not exempt from risks or obstacles that call into question the real possibility of attaining the final objectives. •
There are strong internal legal restrictions in each country that
require
great
effort
to
implement
Single
Window
interoperability initiatives. •
Low collaboration levels, in general, there is no extensive collaboration culture between or among public administrations. In spite of the existence of trade associations and formal meetings, administrations do not generally cooperate with each other in any systematic way. This problem becomes more acute when the administrations are of different countries and when aspects of organization, communications, legalities, etc., make collaboration more difficult.
•
Scarcity of public information management policies, government
administrations
do
not
generally
assume
an
attitude of information transparency. That precondition is aggravated when interoperability initiatives occur between different countries and the foregoing difficulties are augmented by legal restrictions on data and information sharing. •
System inertia. There is a generic systems attitude among persons, standards, processes, etc., a proclivity to maintain the status quo and let the other party do the adapting.
27
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
•
5th Edition
Module. 4
Different level of technological maturity, the norm is that the
organizations
implementation characteristics
involved
of of
display
technologies. infrastructures
differences This
in
the
conditions
the
available
and
resource
investment levels. Thus, difficulties can arise such as: o No standardization of data structures. o Data is not digital, and even when digital, it lacks quality, consistency or availability. o There are computer security problems that affect data quality. o There is a lack of knowledge about what data is produced and where. o There is little practice in the use of standards. o The
information
systems
and
the
technological
infrastructure of the different organizations involved are not compatible. o The principle of technological adequacy is not met and there is a tendency to depend too much on third party’s technology, which is neither technically nor economically sustainable. Finally, in any project, it is a big challenge to achieve systematic, generalized interoperability between different public administrations. It is more so, specifically in building a Single Window environment. It is necessary to see interoperability as an integral process, in which there is no room for isolated actions or temporary treatments because the weakness of a system is determined by its weakest point. That is unless that point is the coordination between measures that are individually adequate but improperly assembled in the overall Single Window context. 28
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
Figure 1.5. Interoperability Dimensions.
Source: Valenciaport Foundation. In-House Preparation.
The following paragraphs go into more depth on the most important aspects
to
take
into
account
in
implementing
interoperability
initiatives to be incorporated into the construction of a Single Window.
29
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
Unit summary
In this unit we have explored what interoperability means at greater length, its benefits and the barriers or risks inherent to its implementation. The unit highlights that the concept of interoperability is not only related to technology, but also refers to the need to define policies, regulations and standards to ensure cooperation between systems. In light of this, interoperability can be divided into four aspects: •
Technical interoperability: technical questions related to hardware, software and telecommunications are reviewed. This ensures the connection and transfer of data between the participating entities' IT services and systems.
•
Semantic interoperability: the interchanged information is given a single meaning, which can be clearly understood by all the applications involved in the transaction.
•
Organisational interoperability: focuses on defining business objectives,
modelling
processes
and
facilitating
collaboration
between participating authorities. •
Interoperability governance: comprises the accords between the different organisations and authorities involved, focusing on the
political,
legal
and
structural
aspects
related
to
the
development and use of interoperable applications.
30
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
Unit II. Information Harmonization in Single Window Processes
Learning objectives
•
To analyse the need to harmonise data and procedures
•
To further explore the key measures that should be taken in the harmonisation process
•
To identify the steps to take when harmonising data
•
To discover some of the internationally agreed standards, such as the WCO Customs Data Model.
In many countries, computerized automation systems are designed and developed, and information requirements are established, with little coordination between the regulatory agencies and without consulting
other
authorities
involved.
As
a
result,
entities
participating in foreign trade must meet a series of electronic formulas and messages that generate elevated costs and in many cases result in imprecise information. A Single Window Environment is a solution to the problem of different message formats. It also improves the accuracy of the data if it utilizes agreed upon international standards, such as the World Customs Organization (WCO) Customs Data Model.
31
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
EXTRA CONTENT The WCO Customs Data Model The WCO Customs Data Model is a customs standard that facilitates the implementation of data requirements and the electronic submission and processing of declarations and supporting documents. It is utilized as a basis for the development of common electronic messages based on international standards. http://www.wcoomd.org/
II.1. Benefits
The harmonization of data and procedures, along with the use of international standards, must be the fundamental basis of a Single Window Environment.
Utilizing data specific to each country and to each agency or authority is highly inefficient in terms of costs and accuracy of information for the government as well as for commerce in general. Not utilizing standards obliges governments to develop and maintain specific systems for each department or administration with duplicate and redundant information. This is also evident in any paper-based, non-computerized system, when it forces the submission of redundant forms.
32
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
The situation is especially critical for international operators who must interact with different customs administrations and other government entities. The costs and complexities of complying with these requirements are very high. Governments and trade communities are understandably concerned with the size of the data set at the beginning of the development of a Single Window. In order to keep the amount of data as small as possible, it is necessary to attempt to include only the information the government agencies
are
authorized
to
collect,
i.e.,
the
really
necessary
information. That, in turn, facilitates the stability of interchanged information, once the government cannot request any type of information outside the defined data set. That also provides a greater level of transparency and information quality, as sending and receiving information electronically offers fewer opportunities to manipulate it.
II.2. Recommendations
It is recommended that governments considering the development of
a
Single
Window
begin
with
the
standardization
and
harmonization process. This recommendation also applies to countries that have a Single Window and do not harmonize data. The following is a list of the principal measures governments ought to implement in the harmonization process.
33
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
Figure 2.1. Measures to be implemented in the harmonization process
Source: Adaptation of INDES design – 2013.
II.3. Policies of Harmonization, Organization and Communication
The objective of harmonizing data is to eliminate redundancies and
duplications
in
data
required
for
the
submission
of
commercial information to government authorities such as customs and other regulatory agencies. The final result must be a set of data requirements
and
standardized
messages
that
fully
meet
the
information necessities of all the authorities participating in the process.
There are standards to facilitate this task such as the WCO Data Model that provides directives designed to assist governments in data harmonization and standardization
34
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
There are standards to facilitate this task such as the WCO Data Model that provides directives designed to assist governments in data harmonization and standardization, ensuring the compatibility of the information requirements needed by government agencies and allowing information interchanges between the agencies involved. These directives are based on best practices and on the Single Window implementation environment recommended by UN/CEFACT Recommendations 33, 34 and 35. Specifically,
Recommendation
34
“Data
Harmonization�
and
a
proposed project on Single Window Interoperability (Rec. 36 SWI), in order to facilitate the growing demand for interconnectivity with other single Windows, whether bilateral or regional. Figure 2.2. International Trade Recommendations.
Source: UNECE.
35
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
It is important to mention that most of the data requirements of the WCO Data Model are conditional data, so that, although at first glance it might appear to be an elevated number, in practice it is considerably reduced when implemented. That is due to the fact that it is based on all possible cases for the purpose of maintaining a unique definition, eliminating possible ambiguities.
For example: The WCO Customs Data Model covers all transactions (export, import and transit), all modes (air, sea, highway and rail) and all requirements related to cross border activities. It is logically and logistically impossible to require all the data in any one transaction.
As
commented
earlier
in
previous
modules,
UN/CEFACT
Recommendation 33 enumerates the key factors in the successful establishment of a Single Window environment. All these factors are fundamental to the development of a Single Window Environment, but at this point it is worth emphasizing the importance of the choice of a leading authority to a successful harmonization process.
‌ it is advisable to have a project team to execute the data harmonizing process... The harmonization project team must also include personnel with knowledge of computer architecture and business modeling processes.
The leading authority is the principal organism charged with the preparation of planning the commitment of the necessary resources.
36
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
Additionally, it is advisable to have a project team to execute the data harmonizing process. Members of this project team must have a broad knowledge of international trade procedures, specifically knowledge of the legal information requirements to be met. The harmonization project team must also include personnel with knowledge
of
computer
architecture
and
business
modelling
processes. It is also useful to assign a person whose principal function is act as liaison with the different organisms and authorities participating in the process. This “go to� person serves as the information channel to and from the leading authority. Additionally, the participating agencies must identify a primary contact in the organization in charge of the data inventory and harmonization. Communication of the policies, procedures and stages of the harmonization process is fundamental. The next step after organizing the harmonization project team is to carry out a series of meetings and informative sessions with all the participating agencies for the purpose of clearly defining the functions and responsibilities of the harmonization project team. After this informative kick-off, the participating authorities must understand the entire process on which the harmonization of data is going to be based and the goal of the individual meetings they will have with the data architects and business process modeless. All the participating authorities must have identified the working meetings, participating and preparing themselves as much as possible. It need not be said that the participants must be conscious of the role the leading authority must play and its responsibilities.
37
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
EXTRA CONTENT In August of 2012 the WCO published a study of Single Windows implementation and presented the principal results of a questionnaire from 58 countries. http://www.wcoomd.org/files/1.%20Public%20files/PDFandDocuments/r esearch/17_SW_Survey%20Analysis_Choi_IN.pdf The study probed deeply into the “how” and “to what extent” customs administrations are pursuing the concept of interoperability, in particular the application of data harmonization standards, interfaces and standard messages. The following conclusions were reached: •
It appears that the majority of customs administrations have implemented data harmonization with international norms such as the WCO Data Model. Standards such as UNTDED and UN/EDIFACT are used as well.
•
77% of the customs administrations queried indicate that they utilize international norms in data harmonization. Among the most utilized are the WCO Data Model (40%), UNTDED (26%) and UN/EDIFACT (22%). Other standards also appear, such as UN/CEFACT Core Component Library, Universal Business Library and EBXML.
•
In general, customs data interchange systems are incorporating or have incorporated applications based on Web services, XML messages or EDI.
•
27% utilize Web services, 24% messages in EDIFACT format and 40% in XML.
•
The use of the Unique Consignment Number (UCR) needs to be promoted: very few customs administrations incorporate UCR to their Single Window system.
•
Only 10% of customs administrations have incorporated UCR to their system.
38
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
II.4. Steps to Follow in Harmonizing Data
Data harmonization is an iterative process that consists of four phases: capture, definition, analysis and reconciliation of regulatory information requirements. Figure 2.3. Phases of the Harmonization Process. Valenciaport Foundation. In-House Preparation
Source: Valenciaport Foundation, In-house preparation.
It is not very likely for any government to be capable of achieving the harmonization of all participating authorities at the same time. It is therefore advisable to consider prioritizing the authorities and their requirements, taking harmonization step by step. Prioritization could be based on necessities such as volume, inputs, the security of the supply chain, etc.
39
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
For example, each international trade operation generates information for customs, transportation and statistics and that could be the order of levels to consider in harmonizing their requirements.
Another characteristic, important at the time of choosing an authority, could be based on its willingness and desire to participate in the Single Window – a very important characteristic for the execution and success of the project. Once the harmonization process of one hierarchy level has been completed, it is repeated for other participating organisms, along with additional requirements identified along the way. Below we go into more depth on each of the phases that constitute harmonization.
II.4.1. Data Capture
The objective of capturing data is to complete the inventory of the
necessities
identified
by
the
authorities
and
regulatory
agencies. This inventory of data and requirements is completed with the review of the forms requested, the automated required data systems, the regulations, etc. Initially, the data can be kept in an electronic file as a spreadsheet. As recommendations, the following information can be collected in regard to each data item: 40
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
•
Reference Number: Identifies the data element (datum).
•
Name: Name of the data element defined. The datum name must reflect the terminology the authority uses, not a term based on technology.
•
Description: Definition of the data element in as much detail as possible.
•
Representation: type of data (numeric, alphanumeric, entire, real, etc.), as well as the number of delimiter positions if necessary.
•
Data Domain: If the data element is encoded, a list of values, range or reference must be provided.
For example, the data
element “Country” may be restricted to the values of ISO Country code tables. •
Transport Mode: Indicates the mode of transport (highway, air, sea, rail, piping, etc.) used to transport the goods.
•
Process: Catalogues the necessity in the export, import or transit processes.
•
Usage Category: Shows if the element is necessary for transportation, the crew, cargo, goods or equipment.
•
Permit: This information identifies whether the agency has permission to consult or store the element. For example, permission can be indicated with the word COLLECT or VIEW.
•
Authority: Cites the source of the authority that consults or stores the information. The authority may derive from a specific formula, regulation, legal mandate, or other source. It is necessary to cite all the applicable legal authorities if there are various sources. It is not necessary to provide the text of the citation.
•
Expiration Date: provides the date that the authority’s legal permit to collect or consult the data expires. If the data do not expire it may be marked N/A. 41
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
•
5th Edition
Module. 4
Source of the Datum: Indicates who provided the datum or the party responsible for submitting the information. A table of possible roles may be created.
•
Source Classification: Indicates for whom the information is provided. One possible classification could be: <Trade> indicates if the datum is completed by trade. <Government> indicates if the datum is created by the regulatory agency or authority.
For example: The customs duty rate can be extracted from a customs information file or by calculating the datum from one or more elements.
<Derived> if is a case of a datum calculated or extracted from a reference file. <U> Unknown. •
Organism:
if
the
classification
of
the
Source
is
<GOVERNMENT> it identifies the Regulatory agency that creates this element. •
Required:
Identifies the
point in
the
life
cycle
of
the
transaction in which the authority expects to have access to that data element.
For example, the following values may be suggested: <PRE-ARRIVAL>, <ARRIVAL>, <RELEASE>, <CLEARANCE>, <POST RELEASE> or <DATAWAREHOUSE> etc. If it is not sure, the value <U> may be indicated.
42
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
â&#x20AC;˘
5th Edition
Comments: Free
Module. 4
text that may
be
utilized to
indicate
observations on the data element.
II.4.2. Definition
Once all the information has been compiled by each of the authorities participating in the process (response to the questionnaire or spreadsheet
explained
in
the
preceding
phase),
the
data
harmonization project team combines the agenciesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; responses on a common spreadsheet. This phase tackles a review of the description set forth in the definition of the data element, for the purpose of determining similarities of data elements and aggregating the information. An example of information aggregation is shown below. Name
Port of discharge
Airport of discharge
Description Location where the goods are unloaded from the ship Airport where the shipment is unloaded from the aircraft National place where
of discharge
the goods are unloaded from the mode of transport
National
National airport where
airport of
the shipment is unloaded
National place
discharge
Foreign place where Foreign place of discharge
International port/airport of discharge
Representation Alphanumeric (4 digits) Alphanumeric (4 digits)
Alphanumeric (5 digits)
Alphanumeric (5 digits)
the goods are unloaded from the mode of transport
Alphanumeric
Port/airport where the shipment is unloaded
Alphanumeric
(5 digits)
(5 digits)
Domain
Source of datum
Mode of transport
Own Code
Loader
Sea
Own Code
Loader
Air
Loader
Air, Rail,
Intermediary Importer
Sea, Highway
Loader
Air
UNLOCODE
UNLOCODE
Own Code
UNLOCODE
Loader
Air, Rail,
Exporter
Sea, Highway
Loader
Air, Sea
43
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
II.4.3. Analysis
The process of analysis of the information consists of the compilation of similar elements of data, together with a complete comprehension of the definition and the information required. Following the preceding example, analysis of these six elements reveals a similarity of the names with some small variations in the definitions: “shipment” or “discharge”, “national” or “foreign.” The essence of the definition is the place when the goods are removed from the conveyance. It can be determined that the terms “disembark” and “unload” are synonyms. And the terms “foreign” and “national” can be defined in accordance with the type of transaction: in an export the place abroad is identified; and in an import the national place is shown. Analysis of the data also reveals that there are three different code representations for these elements: an in-house code of four digits, an in-house code of five digits, and utilization of the UN/LOCODE code.
44
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
EXTRA CONTENT UN/LOCODE is the international locations code approved and maintained by the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE). It consists of 5 characters; the first two indicate the country in accordance with ISO Standard 3166 and the following three indicate the locality. To download the complete archive in different formats or to consult directly follow these links: http://www.unece.org/cefact/locode/service/location.htm http://www.unece.org/cefact/locode/service/main.htm
II.4.4. Reconciliation
The last step in harmonization is reconciliation, when the utilization of the data element name, its common definition, code, etc., must be agreed to and, if possible, reconciled with a standard model such as the WCO Data Model. In keeping with the previous example: The results of the analysis must be taken into consideration in the selection of the datum name. Therefore, in the case of the concepts of “disembark” and “unload,” as they are synonyms, the decision can be made to utilize the term “disembark.” In the case of “national” or “foreign”, the function (export or import) can determine which can be eliminated. Therefore “point of discharge” can be indicated as the name.
45
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
After
accepting
the
5th Edition
term,
it
Module. 4
is
reviewed
with
the
UNTDED
international norm, where “point of discharge” is not listed as an UNTDED term. The UNTDED term is “place of discharge”. With respect to the code representation, it is resolved by agreeing to adopt the international norm of UN/LOCODE, described earlier. The localization of information redundancies will be relevant during the process of data harmonization and standardization. The data harmonization team can carry out the greater part of this work of harmonization and standardization, assuming the WCO Data Model as a base (although that is not a requirement), but such decisions must be verified and agreed to by all the participating agencies. Given the broad range of existing data requirements, it is advisable to orient meetings with authorities by specific groups of data elements to review, facilitating their verification and accord. A possible manner of establishing these groups is utilizing the UNTDED data element categories. The use of this classification can be taken into account to order the elements. Table 2.1. UNTDED data element categories Group 1
Reference Documentation (0001 to 1699).
Group 2
Dates, time, time periods (from 2000 to 2799).
Group 3
Entities, addresses, places, countries (3000 to 3799).
Group 4
Clauses, conditions, terms, instructions (4000-4799).
Group 5
Imports, rates, percentages (from 5000 to 5799).
Group 6
Measures, identifiers, quantities (non-monetary) (6000-6799).
Group 7
Products and articles: descriptions and qualifiers (7000 to 7799).
Group 8
Modes and means of transport, containers (from 8000 to 8799).
Group 9
Other elements (Customs, etc.) (9000-9799).
Source: “WCO Data Model, SINGLE WINDOW DATA HARMONISATION”. Adapted by Valenciaport Foundation.
46
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
Continuing with the example: a “place of discharge” meeting can be held with the authorities interested in definitions that correspond to Group 3: Entities, addresses, places, countries (3000-3799), for the purpose of their accepting the term “place of discharge” and the UN/LOCODE representation. In the example that we have been reviewing, the elimination of redundancies and duplications has allowed a reduction of six elements to one and three code schemes to one.
EXTRA CONTENT As a consequence of the work carried out by the United Nations, the importance of structured trade and business data is recognized. This has resulted in the development of normalized codes and data elements for use in the interchange of electronic and paper supporting information. These standards have been compiled in a United Nations publication titled A Trade Data Element Directory (UNTDED). The definitions of the elements of data (including those utilized in EDIFACT/United Nations) appear in UNTDED along with the ISO Standard 7372 (which it maintains jointly with CEPE and the ISO Central Secretariat) and in CEPE recommendations.
47
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
Unit summary
In this unit we have studied the importance of Harmonizing the Information in Single Window Processes. As key elements, the unit highlights data harmonization and how it can be achieved through the use of standards like that of the WCO Customs data Model and the UN CEFACT. This unit presents, among others: â&#x20AC;˘
Begin with the standardization and harmonization process. The
main
Objective
of
harmonizing
data
is
to
eliminate
redundancies and duplications in data required â&#x20AC;˘
Data harmonization is an interactive process. It has four phases:
capture,
definition,
analysis,
and
reconciliation
of
regulatory information requirements. â&#x20AC;˘
Data Capture: it is necessary to complete the inventory of the necessities identified by the authorities and regulatory agencies, including other tasks related with definition, analysis of the information, and finally the reconciliation of data.
It is always recommended to follow the standards instead of creating new ones. Many countries first explore the standards used by their main
commercial
import
and
export
partners
to
decide
the
predominance of one standard over another.
48
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
Unit III. Simplification of processing procedures
Learning objectives
â&#x20AC;˘
To discover the importance and need to simplify document administration processes in order to speed up international trade operations and make them more efficient.
â&#x20AC;˘
To understand the simplification of the administrative processes or the dematerialisation of justification documents.
â&#x20AC;˘
To identify and understand the advantages of the digital signature and digital certificate.
A generic characteristic of behaviour in international trade is the management of various authorization documents and permits that must be completed at each one of the border entry posts and, in turn, presented at each one of the border exit posts. These documents, the justification documents, are documents required by the majority of border authorities and constitute one of the principal causes of trade delays. They are documents that are being interchanged all along the supply chain; they travel with the goods and the means of transport from the point of origin to the destination, from the seller to the purchaser, from the place of export to the place of import.
49
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
The certificate of origin is required to obtain customs and technical advantages in accordance with existing bilateral or multilateral trade agreements. Occasionally the authority that controls imports receives certificates of origin from multiple issuers, utilizing different formats and presenting different individuals as responsible party, which makes control difficult due to the existence of such a variety. Questions arise about the degree of reliability of the control of origin and the information contained in the document or even the document itself.
The Single Window should offer an overall solution with respect to this problem. It encourages the use of digital media that allows the presentation and verification of electronically channelled information. The process is called dematerialization. Dematerialization can be defined as the transferring of information stored on paper to information stored digitally. Dematerialization
of
justification
documents
does
not
merely
comprehend the digitalization of such documents, but also the redefinition of existing procedures, the revision of interchanges and the reduction of activities involving these documents, all for the purpose of simplifying procedures as much as possible.
Continuing with the previous Certificates of Origin example, the implementation of a foreign trade Single Window will facilitate automation of the process of creating certificates by electronic means. And if the utilization of digital signatures is incorporated, it can make possible the recognition and electronic transmission of the certification data between government agencies.
50
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
III.1. Advantages of Dematerialization
The principal advantages of the dematerialization of justification documents and its associated simplification of the procedures these documents support are: •
Dematerialization permits a more rapid, secure flow of forms
and
electronic
documents
by
making
possible
information submission and transfer from any distance. •
Dematerialization drastically reduces the number of physical appearances and displacements of the customs dispatchers to offices for the purpose of processing justification documents on paper by utilizing digital signatures.
•
Dematerialization increases security on the part of the authorities in the management of data and information of the dispatches.
•
Dematerialization obtains lower costs, reduces the amount of effort required and produces reductions in the use of time, material and economic resources.
•
Dematerialization provides a greater facility to archive, search and recover information.
•
Dematerialization offers transparency in the operation and greater subsequent auditing capacity.
•
Dematerialization facilitates distribution and consultation on the part of all the government agencies and departments involved, including the border control points, increasing the informational base.
•
Dematerialization prepares the government risk analysis systems to broaden their information base to more adequately define and automate criteria (for example, the customs weight and code indicated on the certificate of origin of a food product 51
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
should coincide with the customs weight and code of the health certificate and with the weight and code of the import declaration).
However, the process of dematerialization must continue to meet the same existing requirements and regulations as the paper justification document. Dematerialization must comply with the
verification
procedures
and
the
documents
must
remain
inalterable and have juridical and probative value.
III.2. Aspects to Consider
The application of electronic media to the management of justification documents must be preceded by the realization of an analysis of functional redesign and simplification of the procedures with which the documents are associated. That analysis must consider the following aspects: â&#x20AC;˘
Organization and communication: The establishment of a working group and a defined lead agency is recommended. Members of the working group must be designated by each of the intergovernmental organisms. Each participating authority must be clear about its specific function in the process and keep involved in each of the phases.
â&#x20AC;˘
Documentation and description of the procedures: A compilation
of
the
documents
generated
in
the
actual
processing is required. This compilation must be accompanied by a detailed description of all the activities and tasks carried out by each one of the participating authorities. And all the steps taken must be perfectly defined, who takes them, the 52
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
legal requirements that must be respected, etc. iagramming each of the procedures to offer a global view of the process will assist in subsequent analysis. â&#x20AC;˘
Acceptance of the simplification analysis: The simplification study of the procedures seeks the possibility of suppressing or reducing required documentation by substituting data, transfers or certifications directly obtained or by data transmitted. This analysis must be defined and accepted by all the participating authorities.
â&#x20AC;˘
Legislative Matters: Possible legislative or regulatory matters that might appear must be analyzed and managed in order to comply with all legislation of all the countries participating in the process.
III.3. Digital Signatures
Increased services offered by the use of the Internet and the utilization
of
electronic
data
interchange
have
increased
the
dependence of the organizations when transmitting data through the network. This dependence has awakened consciousness of the necessity to protect interchange of the information and guarantee the authenticity of data and messages, particularly taking into account the numerous and well-known risks (pirating, capture of information, destruction of data, etc.) this means of communication presents One
security
element
the
information
and
communications
technologies (ICT) contribute to the logistics chain security strategy is the digital signature.
53
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
The digital signature is a mathematical perspective that serves to demonstrate
the
authenticity
of
a
message
or
electronic
document. It provides the recipient with assurance that the message was created by the sender and was not altered during transmission. Technically it consists of a cryptographic method that functions in the following manner: •
It establishes the use of digital certificates made up of a pair of keys for each partner participating in the interchange: a public key and a private key (exclusive and secret property of the interchange partner). These keys are tied together. A document encrypted with one key can be decoded only with the other key, and the possession of one key does not allow the other key to be figured out.
•
When a document is to be sent, a mathematic algorithm is applied to the contents of the document, calculating a summary value that unequivocally identifies the text.
•
Then the document sends the signature algorithm to the document, utilizing the private key generated by the electronic signature for that purpose.
•
The sender, utilizing the associated public key, can decipher the document and obtain the identification and authentication of the sender during the operation.
54
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
Figure 3.1. Digital Signature Process.
Source: Valenciaport Foundation. In-House Preparation.
EXTRA CONTENT The term digital signature and electronic signature are frequently used as synonyms. However, in spite of their extensive use and similar utilization, they are not the same. Electronic Signature is a term that is fundamentally legal in nature. The type of signature is not linked to the technology utilized to implement it. Legally an electronic signature has the same value as a handwritten signature as long as its link to a document identifies the author and states his conformity with the contents. The characteristics of the digital signature and the electronic signature are very similar, with the only difference being the type of support on which they are stored. The electronic signature is stored on hardware, while the digital signature can be stored not only on hardware but on software as well. This differentiation gives the electronic signature the quality of not being modifiable, which contributes a higher degree of security. The electronic signature has an extended use and electronic signatures are utilized in access cards, telephone cards, RFID tags and other activities in which it is necessary to unequivocally identify a person or an object.
55
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
Advantages of the digital signature: •
Verifies the authenticity of the signer. Confirms that the message received has been sent by the person who says he has sent it and that the message received is the one sent.
•
Verifies the integrity of the document. Ensures that the data have not been altered voluntarily or involuntarily during their journey through the network.
•
Guarantees non-repudiation. Permits proof of the sending and reception of the information so that neither the sender nor the recipient can deny the transmission.
•
Ensures
confidentiality.
Makes
safe
transmission
of
documents possible. Only the recipients will possess the information. The information is unintelligible to unauthorized third parties.
III.3.1. Digital Certificate
One of the problems that come with the search for a public key on the Internet is the problem of identifying persons or entities, that is, how can we be sure that a public key we have found on the Internet really belongs to the person it is said to belong to. A possible solution is the utilization of a digital certificate. A digital certificate is a non-transferable, non-modifiable electronic document, by means of which a certification authority guarantees the connection between the identity of a subject or entity and a public key. The certificate is composed of such data as: •
The identity of the owner of the certificate (certified identity).
•
The public key associated with that identity.
•
The identity of the entity that issues and signs the certificate. 56
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
•
5th Edition
Module. 4
The cryptographic algorithm used to sign the certificate.
Who authorizes the creation of a certification authority or a provider of certification services in the various countries? Some cases: •
In Spain, such organisms as the Fábrica Nacional de Moneda y Timbre [National Coin and Stamp Factory], the Ministry of Industry, Tourism and Trade, the Catalan Certification Agency, the Autoritat de
Certificació de la Comunitat Valenciana
[Valencia Community Certification Authority], etc., authorize certifications. •
In Argentina, it is the office of the Cabinet of Ministers (Jefatura de Gabinete de Ministros).
•
In Guatemala, the Ministry of Economy.
•
In Mexico, the Secretariat of Economy.
•
In Colombia, the Sociedad Cameral de Certificación Digital Certicámara
[Chamber
Society
of
Digital
Certification
(CERTICÁMARA)] and GSE Gestión de Seguridad Electrónica [Electronic Security Management (GSE)]. •
In
Costa
Rica,
the
Ministry
of
Science
and
Technology
(Ministerio de Ciencia y Tecnología), under the National Digital Certification System (Sistema Nacional de Certificación Digital). •
In Peru, the National Institute of Defense of Competition and Intellectual Property Protection (Instituto Nacional de Defensa de la Competencia y de la Protección de la Propiedad Intelectual).
•
In the Dominican Republic, the Instituto Dominicano de las Telecomunicaciones [Dominican Telecommunications Institute].
•
In Uruguay, the National Postal Administration (ANC - Correo Uruguayo).
57
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
â&#x20AC;˘
In
Venezuela,
5th Edition
SUSCERTE
Module. 4
[Superintendency
of
Electronic
Certification Services].
III.3.2. The Digital Signature in International Trade
The digital signature, or public key infrastructure, can play an important role to ensure the electronic interchange of information in international trade. The customs control linkage makes it possible for foreign trade agents to present their declarations to export country or import country customs administrations in advance. Cross border recognition of digital certificates would allow economic operators to sign all messages to the customs administrations electronically. That would help increase security and facilitate and simplify the work of foreign trade agents. Customs administrations are therefore encouraged to apply the WCO Recommendation on electronic transmissions and the authentication of customs information and standards. But in order for a digital certificate to be legally valid, the Certification Services Provider must be accredited in each country in accordance with the standards that each country defines.
III.3.3. Regulations in Different Countries
â&#x20AC;˘
European Union: The essential specific requirements of products must be satisfied with an electronic signature for the purpose of guaranteeing free circulation in the internal market and to promote
confidence
in
the
electronic
signature.
Directive
58
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
1999/93/CE sets for the common trademark for the electronic signature. •
Spain: Law 59/2003 defines three types of signature: Simple (the signer, authenticity are identified), Advanced (the signer is identified, the integrity of the document and the integrity of the key utilized are guaranteed) and Recognized (the advanced signature is supported by a recognized certificate).
•
Argentina has electronic billing and digital signatures. Argentine Customs employees the María Computer System.
•
Bolivia.
In
October
2007
Bolivia
passed
the
Documents,
Signatures and Electronic Trade Law. •
Chile. Law 19,799 on Electronic Documents, Electronic Signatures and Electronic Signature Certification Services was published in 2003 by the Ministry General Secretariat of the Presidency. The Law recognizes that State agencies can execute or realize acts, celebrate contracts and issue any document within the scope of their jurisdiction and sign the documents with a simple electronic signature.
It
also
provides
that
such
acts,
contracts
and
documents signed with an electronic signature will be valid in the same manner and produce the same effects as documents issued on paper. •
Peru has issued the Law of Digital Signatures and Certificates. Law 27,269 regulates the utilization of electronic signatures, granting it the same validity and juridical efficacy as the use of a handwritten
signature
or
other
analogue
that
entails
the
manifestation of will.
59
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
III.4. Electronic Billing
An electronic invoice is an electronic document that meets the legal and regulatory requirements of traditional invoices, guaranteeing the authenticity of its origin and the integrity of its contents. Spanish legislation defines an electronic invoice as “an electronic document that complies with the enforceable legal and regulatory requirements of an invoice and also guarantees the authenticity of its origin and the integrity of its contents, which allows the invoice to be attributed to its tax-obligated issuer.” Extending this definition to the entire market transmits three conditions for the implementation of electronic billing: •
An electronic invoice format of more or less complexity, such as EDIFACT, XML, PDF, html, doc, xls, gif, jpeg or txt, among others, is needed.
•
Telematics transmission is a necessity. It must be issued from a computer and be received by another computer.
•
Its integrity and authenticity must be guaranteed by a recognized electronic signature.
It may therefore be said that electronic billing is the digital equivalent and the logical evolution of the traditional invoice on paper, where the principal difference is that computer support is employed for its storage instead of such physical support as a piece of paper.
60
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
In countries where the legislation allows it, the validity of an electronic invoice is exactly the same as that of the traditional invoice on paper and, thanks to the digital signature, even guarantees its integrity and a high level of traceability. It is, legally, considered a binding document and needs no further proof or confirmation of its own existence. An electronic invoice is constructed in two phases: â&#x20AC;˘
The invoice is created as always and stored in a data file.
â&#x20AC;˘
Then it is signed with a digital or electronic certificate the property of the issuer that encodes the contents of the invoice and adds the digital seal to it.
Outstanding among the direct benefits provided by the use of electronic billing are: cost savings, the facility of the auditing processes, the lower probability of falsification, ease in locating the information and more rapid and efficient administrative processes.
III.4.1. Format of the Digital invoice
There are no formal requirements with respect to the form to be followed in the coding of the invoice, but the most usual modalities are the following: â&#x20AC;˘
PDF. When the addressee is an individual, a professional or a business whose interest would only be to save the invoice electronically, not to avoid retyping the data since this format does not facilitate the entry of the invoice data into the destination computer.
61
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
•
5th Edition
Module. 4
EDIFACT. Usual syntax when sent computer to computer. The addressee is a business with the technological capacity to treat the document received in an automated manner, so that the data is entered
in
the
destination
computer
automatically.
Certain
standards facilitate the construction of these messages. •
XML. When sent computer to computer this type of syntax may be used as well.
For each format there is a particular form of encoding the electronic signature: •
PDF. The Adobe signature format is embedded within the PDF format and allows associating an image so that it is one of the most adequate because of its visualization. The appearance of the signature is very visual, since, it is now possible to associate it to a graphic with a digitalized signature or a business seal.
•
EDIFACT. The signature is accomplished by means of security headings and feet, although there is a specific EDI message for that (AUTACK).
•
XML. The electronic signature is called XAdES. Of the different modalities provided for in the standard, the most advisable is the IS-XL which includes information on the time at which the electronic signature was inserted and information on the validity of the accompanying electronic certificate.
There are numerous international initiatives and standards among which the following may be mentioned: UN/CEFACT-UNECE, the NES, CEN /ISSS Group, International Expert Group on eInvoicing, etc.
62
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
III.4.2. Examples of Country Standards
While a great deal of effort has been devoted to unifying electronic billing standards, electronic billing at the present time is subject to different standards and different legal requirements decreed by each countryâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s tax authorities. So it is not always possible to use electronic billing, particularly in the relationships of foreign businesses that have different standards than those of the particular country. Among the countries with electronic billing standards are Argentina, Chile, Mexico, Costa Rica, Colombia and Australia, in addition to the entire European Union, in function of the adoption of Directive 2001/115.
63
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
Unit summary
This unit deals with the following items in greater depth: â&#x20AC;˘
The
simplification
of
the
administrative
processes
or
the
dematerialisation of justification documents. Dematerialisation is defined as the process of transferring information stored on paper to a digital format. The dematerialisation process enables the presentation
and
verification
of
information
via
electronic
channels, while maintaining the legal and certification value required. â&#x20AC;˘
Digital signatures. A mathematical scheme that demonstrates the authenticity of a message or electronic document. It provides the recipient with the assurance that the message was created by the sender and was not altered during transmission.
â&#x20AC;˘
Electronic billing.An electronic document that meets the legal and regulatory
requirements
applicable
to
traditional
invoices,
guaranteeing the authenticity of its origin and the integrity of its contents.
64
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
Unit IV. Architecture of a Single Window environment
Learning objectives â&#x20AC;˘
To understand what the concepts of Enterprise Architecture and Single Window Architecture consist of and how the processes associated with such architecture are managed.
â&#x20AC;˘
To understand the different aspects into which the concept of Enterprise Architecture can be divided.
â&#x20AC;˘
To further the understanding and scope of data confidentiality.
IV.1. What does Single Window Environment Architecture consist of?
As we have seen throughout this module, the Single Window Environment may be understood as a conjunction of services in which the regulatory agencies and the parties involved in trade are organized in support of the basic functions of the services, utilizing information technologies. For those responsible for developing a Single Window, it is easy to begin with the development of simple services. Augmenting its scope, however, brings on more and more complex tasks. Project risks begin and increase the cost, time and need for the quality required. Procedures are more and more important in order to meet planning requirements.
And
the
participation
and
coordination
of
the
participating entities and technology specialists becomes more vital.
65
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
All large systems are made up of several principal components, and the manner in which these components relate to each other defines the structure of the system, its Architecture. These components interact in a complex manner; system Architecture defines these interactions and the principal components, helping to provide a shared sense
of comprehension
of the
entire
Single
Window
Environment. Figure 4.1. Diagram of Relationships.
Source: Valenciaport Foundation. In-House Preparation.
We may describe the services as based on the information provided by the users or use cases. These descriptions contain not only the functional requirements but the non-functional as well. The functional requirements reflect business logic and have minimal impact on the Architecture. What impacts the Architecture more profoundly are non-functional requirements, such concepts as reliability, security, accessibility, availability, quality, usability, etc.
66
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
IV.2. Enterprise Architecture Enterprise Architecture has no single definition but it is appropriate to mention the following definitions, among others: •
“The logic of the business processes of an organization and ICT infrastructure
reflecting
integration
and
the
normalization
necessities of the operational model of the business” (Source: Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT): Centre for Information Systems Research). •
“The fundamental organization of a system, represented by its components, the relationships between them and with its environment, and the principles that govern its design and evolution.” (Source: ANSI/IEEE Standard 1471-2000).
•
“A formal description of a system; the structure of components, their interrelationships, and the principles and guidelines that govern its design and evolution over time.” (Source: TOGAF The Open Group Architecture Framework).
It may therefore be stated that Enterprise Architecture Business is a discipline that specializes in offering an architectural solution that helps to produce an ICT strategy based on enterprise strategy, accompanying the organization’s background to improve its efficacy. Enterprise Architecture attempts to find direct connections between the necessities of business and the use of technology for the purpose of achieving some sort of alignment between the two. Such alignment increases the possibility of an optimal use of resources and sheds redundant resources. Specifically, the framework or work diagram defined by TOGAF Enterprise Architecture is divided into four dimensions: •
Architecture of Business: is centred on the business’s capacity, its resource structure and how it utilizes them to 67
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
produce the value of the business. It defines the strategy of its negotiations,
its
governance,
its
structure
and
the
key
processes of the organization. •
Architecture of Applications: provides a plan for each of the application systems that are required, the interactions between those systems when implemented, and their relationships with the organization’s central business processes. It includes the ICT systems, ICT services and functional use cases.
•
Architecture of Data: describes the organization’s physical and logical data structure, and the resources to manage that data, including the data, electronic messages, rules and information controls.
•
Architecture of the Technology: structures the description of the hardware, software and networks required to support implementation of the principal applications. Figure 4.2. Technology Architecture
Source: Valenciaport Foundation. In-House Preparation.
68
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
EXTRA CONTENT There are other methodologies or Architecture alternatives the one proposed by TOGAF: •
Zachman framework (1980s IBM concept)
•
DoDAF (United States Department of Defense Architectural Framework)
•
FEAF (United States Office of Management and Budget Federal Enterprise Architecture)
•
MODAF (United Framework)
•
AGATE (French Délégation Générale pour l'Armement Atelier of Gestion of l'ArchiTEcture des systèmes d'information et of communication)
•
Service-Oriented Modeling Framework (SOMF) (Methodologies Corporation enterprise modeling framework)
•
OBASHI (The framework)
Kingdom
OBASHI
Ministry
Business
of
&
Defence
IT
Architectural
methodology
and
IV.3. Data Architecture - WCO Data Model
As mentioned earlier, the Single Window environment brings together a series of information systems that interact with each other. It is necessary to implement common data architecture to allow those information systems to work together and interchange data in an efficient manner.
69
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
This data architecture is essential to eliminate possible conflicts between the data of the individual systems that participate in the Single Window. Conflicts commonly occur between the information models of the participating agencies:
•
Conflicts in the definition of data. Different definitions of the term “Exporter” in the different government systems.
•
Conflicts in the form of data representation. Different sets of values are used for the same component. Different codes are used to describe a coded data element. Representing the value of the exporter encoded with a maximum of 13 characters in one system and in another system with a maximum of 15 characters.
•
Conflicts in the syntax, mode of structuring information. Mode of structuring an address, incorporating diverse fields such as address, number, district, city, country. Or incorporating all the information in a single text field.
These conflicts can be resolved only when a common information model is utilized by all participants. For guidance in the use of architecture data standards in a Single Window, the WCO Data Model defines the generic content of information for regulatory agencies in cross border trade situations. By aligning with the WCO Data Model, cross border authorities and regulatory agencies can produce and utilize common Single Window Environment contents, semantics, syntax and structure.
70
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
IV.4. Service-Oriented Architecture
Service-Oriented Architecture (SOA) is a methodology that proposes to establish a form of working consisting of aligning and optimizing existing systems with the organizationâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s objectives, making possible its integration with systems and solutions in a simple and flexible manner. From
the
technological
point
of
view
SOA
is
configured
as
architecture composed of independent modules or logical units within the negotiation process, denominated services. These Services are connected weakly and are highly interoperable. They interact with each other through the network, facilitating the interchange of information with complete independence of the hardware-software system,
platform
programming
on
which
language,
they
operate
equipment
(operating
characteristics,
manufacturer, etc.). Figure 4.3. Conceptualization of the Architecture of Interoperability.
Source: H. Moreno, S. Silveira-Netto, H. Sin. CEPAL Information Society.
71
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
The intention of this architecture is for the software components to be reusable, improving creation or modification times and augmenting quality and productivity. The SOA model modifies the vision of information technologies and can be summarized in the following graphic. Figure 4.4. Graph of SOA Architecture Characterization.
Source: Valenciaport Foundation. In-House Preparation.
The finality of the SOA architecture is to manage to combine different functional modules to generate applications of a specific nature, based on all the preexisting services. The greater the functionality these modules provide, the less will be the number of interfaces necessary to attain the desired objective.
72
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
However,
each
5th Edition
interface
Module. 4
entails
the
expenditure
of
additional
processing resources and when the modules become excessively large reusing them becomes more complicated. Consequently, it is necessary to attain an adequate level of equilibrium. Correct application of the concepts present in SOA should lead to avoiding
duplications,
favouring
integration
and
interoperability, making the information more accessible and widely shared, offering more value-added services and reducing waiting times.
IV.5. Consequences of SOA for the Single Window Environment
A Single Window Environment cannot be constructed in a multiagency environment without the definition and knowledge of a common architecture. A Single Window may comprehend very diverse systems (Customs, Agriculture, Animal Health, Plant Health, Inspection Services, etc.) where it is easy to provide a separate vision of their services. The Single Window concept, however, requires that these services be imagined as arising from a joint government and regulatory agency perception. Whatever form it is conceived in, SOA architecture provides a clear route to follow in delivering a unique, scalable and easy to maintain Single Window Environment. On the other hand, Single Window participants often operate on ICT systems based on different technology platforms, business processes and data definitions, so that it is difficult to produce interoperable systems. As described earlier, SOA is not centered on a technical infrastructure and its associated services, but strongly focused on
73
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
negotiating services. SOA is an architecture focus where technology is neutral. In SOA architecture, the components are autonomous units, the performance of which does not depend on the status of other services.
The
autonomous
units
are
logical
encapsulates
of
independent business functionalities. This autonomous nature of such service components allows the developers to make changes in one component without affecting the rest of the system. This is of great utility in the management of business processes in a Single Window Environment. The concept of reusable service components is necessary in the Single Window Environment. In spite of differences in matters of regulations, the regulatory
majority of the
agencies
require
cross border
common
authorities and
businesslike
(enterprise)
services, such as cargo inspections, crew identifications, analysis of transportation documents,
sample-taking, calculating taxes and
duties, evaluating risks, etc. These service components can be reused, not only in the sense of commercial operations, but in the sense of software components as well.
For example: The mode of performing an inspection can vary between government agencies, but the stages of the process are the same. The parameters for calculating taxes and duties may be different, but are always connected to the process of collecting and charging. Payment services can be elevated to a public service level, giving service to all the payments that are produced during the course of the dispatching goods.
74
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
Moreover, it may be said that the development of the architecture is the cornerstone on the creation of capacities. In general, trade facilitation reforms depend on political will. Ideas and initiatives like the Single Window concept need strong political support for prolonged periods of time. Architecture ideas can aid the divergent parties who develop
a
Single
Window
achieve
a
consensus
on
common
necessities. An internal motivation for a country can be found in the architecture
documents.
The
architecture
definition
assists
the
countries in identifying something concrete that will be implemented in future agreements and action plans. For example: a decision by all the partiesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; members of the Single Window environment to utilize digital certification.
75
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
In summary, SOA is recommended for the construction of a Single Window Environment for the following reasons: •
SOA is built on the basis of the notion of service. A Single Windows can be defined as a collection of services, which makes SOA an attractive conceptual base.
•
Public Administration requires that its services contemplate such characteristics as the availability of service, the quality of service, its security, etc. SOA is clearly identified with these concepts.
•
A Single Window environment means the integration of multiple systems implemented by various agencies. SOA facilitates the integration of the services required through a Single Window developed from the ICT architecture perspective.
•
SOA can be designed to be directed by events. The workflow of Single Windows business processes is controlled by events. Each event in the supply chain is the result of incremental data flow. Depending on the state of the transaction, in a Single Window Environment the different actors can have access to different data sets that allow them to advance.
•
The development of SOA is aligned with the life cycle of the software, permitting the integration and implementation of different software components facilitating migration to new applications and existing infrastructures.
76
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
Unit summary
In this unit we have studied the Architecture of a Single Window environment. The unit explains the architecture of a Single Window system and how this one must be divided, how data must be kept confidential, and how the set of services by regulatory agencies and other parts must be technologically represented. This is explained through several sections: â&#x20AC;˘
Enterprise Architecture. It has to do with the logic of the business and its relationships with others, its business needs and components, data application, and technology.
â&#x20AC;˘
Data
Architecture. In
other
units
we
have
explored
the
harmonized data based on the standards. â&#x20AC;˘
Service-Oriented
Architecture:
Every
Single-Window
environment must be built with a common architecture. SOA precisely provides a clear route that makes it possible to escalate a system and orient it to the business process. One of the hardest decisions in the process of the design of the architecture is how the entire business logic of the actors is reflected in the same. It is extremely important to have fully complied with the harmonization of the information and with the standardization, among other tasks, in order to see a full representation in this phase.
77
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
Unit V. Confidentiality and protection of data
Learning objectives
Data interchange across international boundaries, whether between Customs Administrations or between customs and the private sector, must begin only after consulting and establishing the necessary standards of privacy and data protection between the countries affected. In many countries, the legislation on confidentiality and protection of data has been put in place recently for the purpose of protecting the individual’s right of privacy, to protect commercial confidentiality rights and allow individuals access to their own stored personal data to verify its accuracy. This legislation may vary from one country to another, although it contemplates many common provisions. In general, privacy and data protection legislation requires that commercial as well as personal data be subject to automated processing: •
Be justifiable and legally obtained and processed;
•
Be stored for legitimate purposes and not used in a manner incompatible with those purposes;
•
Be adequate, pertinent and not excessive in relation to the purposes for which it is stored;
•
Be accurate and updated when necessary;
•
Be kept in a form that allows the identification of subjects dealt with and kept no longer than required in accordance with the purposes for which it is stored. 78
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
In general, such legislation also incorporates provisions related to the right of interested parties to access their own personal data, as well as provisions in relation to divulging personal or commercial data to other parties, and in regard to the transmission of such data across national borders and beyond the jurisdiction of the country in which it was collected. Confidential data or information, once gathered, cannot be utilized for purposes and under conditions other than those for which it was collected, unless there is a standard to the contrary. The line between the right to information and respect for the citizenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s right to intimacy and privacy must be drawn. The authorities must therefore protect the confidentiality of the information supplied under the terms dictated by the legislation since, in case of non-compliance, they are subject to legally established responsibilities. Confidentiality is guaranteed when supplying information voluntarily (or involuntarily, in the case of a tax matter) to a third party. The existence of this legislation may have consequences to the capability of the businesses or transportation operators to capture personal and commercial data related to a trade transaction, and transmit such information to a foreign government. Obviously, the nature of the data and the use to which it is put must comply with the national legislation of the majority of the countries. Nevertheless, the Tax Administration can share important tax information with other Tax Administrations for fiscal purposes; when it is necessary for the exercise of appropriate functions by the other Tax
Administration.
agreements
among
Tax
Administrations
themselves
that
can
authorize
therefore the
sign
transfer
of
information in a manner that satisfies fiscal purposes.
79
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
EXTRA CONTENT The protection of data and confidentiality is contemplated in the WCO tools, for example, in the Johannesburg Convention and in the Bilateral Accord Model.
One of the proposals of interoperability development initiatives consists of working towards creating a consensus with respect to adequate technical and practical levels to protect the personal data involved
in
the
information
interchange.
UN/CEFACT
Recommendation 26, for example, like the WCO recommendations, deals with the legal aspects of the interchange of data. The interoperability of national or international computer systems encourages the promotion of a clear State policy to guarantee the citizensâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; intimacy and privacy.
80
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
Unit summary
As we have seen, a system's architecture defines the different components of the system and the way in which they interact, helping to provide a shared understanding of the environment. It reflects non-operational aspects of the system, such as reliability, security, accessibility, availability, quality, usability, etc. The Architecture can be divided into different aspects such as Business Architecture, Application Architecture, Data Architecture and Technology Architecture, etc. Therefore, Data Architecture is critical to eliminating possible conflicts between data from each of the participating systems (conflicts regarding defining data, conflicts regarding how data is represented, conflicts in the information's syntax and structure, etc.). These conflicts can only be resolved when a common information model is used by all participants, such as the WCO data model. Service-Oriented Architecture (SOA) is a methodology used to establish a form of working consisting in aligning and optimising existing systems with the organisationâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s objectives, facilitating its integration with systems and solutions in a simple and flexible manner.
81
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
Bibliography
The
following
is
the
bibliography
and
support
documentation
consulted in the preparation of this Module: •
CEPAL (2007). Libro blanco de interoperabilidad de gobierno electrónico para América Latina y el Caribe Versión 3.0 [White Paper on Electronic Government Interoperability for Latin America and the Caribbean Version 3.0].
•
Choi,
J.Y.
(August
2011).
Survey
of
Single
Window
Implementation. WCO Research Paper No. 17 TO. Brussels: World Customs •
Cornejo, R. (2010). Certificación Electrónica Digital. BID. I Taller: Ventanillas únicas de Comercio Exterior. Consideraciones y propuestas para la acción regional en el marco del Foro del Arco
Pacífico
Latinoamericano.
SELA.
[Digital
Electronic
Certification. IDB. I Suchler: Foreign Trade Single Windows. Considerations
and
Proposals
for
Regional
Action
in
the
Framework of the Latin American Pacific Rim Forum (SELA)]. •
Criado, J. I., Gascó M. and Jiménez C. E. (2010). Bases para una Estrategia Iberoamericana de Interoperabilidad [Bases for an Ibero-American Interoperability Strategy].
•
European Commission (2006). Study on Interoperability at Local and Regional Level, Interoperability. Study Final Version. eGovernment Unit DG Information Society and Media.
•
Inter-American Development Bank (2010). Interoperability at the Border.
•
Meza, C. (2010). Ventanilla Única de Comercio Exterior. Para mejorar el intercambio de información entre la industria y el estado. II Encuentro Regional Latinoamericano y del Caribe sobre Ventanillas Únicas de Comercio Exterior Valparaíso 82
Single Window for Foreign Trade,
5th Edition
Module. 4
[Foreign Trade Single Window. Improving the Interchange of Information between Industry and the State. II Regional Meeting of Latin America and the Caribbean on Foreign Trade Single Windows - Valparaíso. •
Spanish Government (2010). Real Decreto 4/2010, de 8 de enero,
por
el
que
se
regula
el
Esquema
Nacional
de
Interoperabilidad en el ámbito de la Administración Electrónica [Royal Decree 4/2010, of January 8, regulating the National Design
for
Interoperability
in
the
Field
of
Electronic
Administration] •
United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (2011). Recommendation
No.
34.
A
Data
Simplification
and
Standardization for International Trade. •
World Customs Organization. WCO
(2004). Package.ISCM
Guidelines. WCO SAFE Chapter 4. Brussels: World Customs •
World Customs Organization. WCO (2007). Single Window Data Harmonization. WCO Data Model, Brussels: World Customs
•
World Customs Organization. WCO (2011). The Professional Practice Guide. WCO Compendium. Chapters 4, 5 and 6. Brussels: World Customs.
83