For three days in Geneva, the WTO Public Forum 2026 examined a trading system under pressure. Geopolitical tensions, regulatory fragmentation, digital dependence and recurring supply-chain disruptions formed the backdrop to discussions about how trade can continue to support growth and development. Under the theme Powering the Future, the Forum placed services at the centre of that debate, reflecting their growing weight in the global economy and their increasingly important role in keeping trade moving.
Customs was not presented as a standalone theme, but it formed a structural and cross-cutting dimension of many of the Forum’s debates. This article draws on four Forum discussions that offer useful perspectives for the customs community. While representing only a small part of a much broader programme, they gave relevant insights on several forces reshaping the customs environment: changes in the global trading system, growing pressure on supply chains, the convergence of physical and digital infrastructure, and the increasing importance of trusted data. Together, they show how Customs forms part of a wider infrastructure connecting regulation, logistics, technology and information across the global supply chain.
The rules still hold but the world around them has changed
The global trading system is becoming more fragmented, contested and difficult to navigate. That tension framed both the launch of the World Trade Report 2026 and the Public Forum panel The tectonic plates of trade are moving- a new equilibrium?
The WTO describes the current moment as the most serious and sustained disruption to the multilateral trading system since its creation 80 years ago. Yet approximately 72% of global merchandise trade still takes place under WTO most-favoured-nation terms. The framework continues to underpin most international trade, even as tariffs, industrial policies, security measures and geopolitical tensions place it under pressure.
Part of the difficulty is that trade has changed faster than the rules governing it. The Uruguay Round, concluded in 1994, remains the last comprehensive reform of the multilateral trading system. The Doha Round, launched in 2001, has not concluded as a single undertaking, although it has produced important outcomes, notably the Trade Facilitation Agreement. Meanwhile, digital commerce, global value chains, environmental regulation and economic security have reshaped what governments expect from trade policy.
The panel brought these pressures into focus. Brazil’s Foreign Trade Secretary, Tatiana Prazeres, observed that trade is now seen both as an opportunity and as a risk: efficiency must increasingly be weighed alongside security, resilience, sustainability and industrial capacity. Adam Posen, President of the Peterson Institute for International Economics, pointed to the system’s resilience. Although major economies have introduced unilateral trade measures, most countries have not retaliated with similar measures. Meanwhile, trade between developing economies and trade outside the US–China relationship have continued to grow.
That resilience does not remove the need for reform. As Prazeres cautioned, a new equilibrium cannot be designed solely around the major powers; it must also offer predictability, development and meaningful participation to the rest of the WTO membership. WTO modelling illustrates the stakes: stronger multilateral cooperation could raise global GDP by 2.9% by 2050, while fragmentation into geopolitical blocs could reduce it by 5.1%. These are scenarios, not forecasts, but they show how much depends on the choices governments make.
For Customs, those choices become operational complexity. Each new preferential arrangement, trade remedy, security restriction or regulatory divergence must be translated into tariff treatment, origin requirements, documentary obligations, controls and risk rules. Customs must manage that growing complexity while preserving predictability and keeping legitimate trade moving.
The next trading order will not be shaped only at negotiating tables. It will take effect at the border, through every classification, origin decision, risk assessment and shipment released. Trade policy may define the new equilibrium, but Customs will have to make it work.
A border can fail without closing
The port is open, trucks are arriving, yet cargo cannot be released because the customs platform has lost connectivity or the payment system is down. The disruption is invisible from the road, but its effect on trade is immediate.
That was a clear implication of the WTO Public Forum’s discussion of services and supply-chain resilience. Ingo Borchert, Professor of Economics at the University of Sussex, distinguished between services used to produce goods, such as engineering and testing, and those that coordinate their movement across international supply chains. Both matter when companies need to identify alternative suppliers, change routes or respond to a disruption.
Sabina Coifu, International Policy and Strategy Lead at techUK, described technology as “the nervous system of international trade.” The metaphor points to a vulnerability that can be hard to see: a company or customs administration may use several technology providers, only to find that they all depend on the same cloud platform or data centre. When that shared infrastructure fails, having multiple providers offers little protection.
The answer is not necessarily to replace foreign providers with domestic ones. What matters is knowing where dependencies lie, ensuring systems can work with alternatives and having a credible way to keep operating when a service fails. Digital rules matter too: incompatible standards or restrictions on data exchange can make it harder to coordinate a response across borders.
For Customs, business continuity now extends beyond the customs system itself. Administrations need to know whether traders can still submit information, make payments and obtain a release when a supporting service is unavailable. A border does not have to close for trade to stop moving.
Building borders that work under pressure
The WTO Public Forum panel Hard & Soft Infrastructure for Resilient Logistics began with a simple distinction: hard infrastructure determines how much cargo can move; soft infrastructure determines how efficiently it moves. For Customs, the second part of that equation is particularly important.
Marie-Caroline Laurent, Vice President for Government Affairs at MSC Group, made the problem concrete. A country may invest in ports, terminals and rail connections, but that capacity delivers little if containers remain in port because clearance and cargo-release processes do not function effectively. Physical expansion must therefore develop alongside digitalisation and coordination among the authorities responsible for the movement of goods.
This relationship becomes even more important during disruption. Stéphane Graber, Director General of FIATA, observed that the logistics systems best able to adapt were not necessarily those with the greatest physical capacity. They were those able to reroute cargo, reissue documents and restore trust between trading partners quickly. In his assessment, the weakest links are often the interfaces between transport systems and institutions . Customs operates at those interfaces, where cargo movement depends on information reaching the right actors.
Thailand’s experience illustrated one approach to integration. Pimchanok Pitfield, Thailand’s Ambassador and Permanent Representative to the WTO, pointed to the combined role of customs facilitation, information systems, connectivity and cooperation between government and business. She also highlighted the connection between national Single Windows and the ASEAN Single Window as a means of exchanging information across borders.
The WTO Trade Facilitation Agreement provides part of this soft infrastructure. Pre-arrival processing, electronic payment, risk management, Single Windows and transparency measures can reduce the procedural friction surrounding physical trade. The panel also raised a further challenge: systems need contingency procedures, interoperable data and coordinated decisions that continue to work when normal operations are disrupted.
For Customs, the test is what happens to a shipment when something goes wrong. Can an inspection result reach the officer who needs it? Can another border post access the same information? Can cargo keep moving if a system fails? Scanners, facilities and digital platforms deliver value when they help answer those questions in practice.
Data moves only where trust exists
The WTO Public Forum panel Trust, Data, Trade: Powering Digital Services examined a basic tension in the digital economy: trade increasingly depends on data, but data will move across organisations and borders only when the parties involved trust how it is created, exchanged and used.
That trust cannot be reduced to cybersecurity or privacy. It also depends on knowing who submitted the information, whether that person or company was authorised to do so, whether the record has been altered and whether another authority will recognise it as legally valid. Marshall Pribadi, founder and CEO of Indonesian digital identity provider Privy, captured the challenge clearly: “The internet solved the problem of speed, but it did not solve the problem of trust.”
Indonesia’s experience illustrates what building that trust can involve. Certified electronic signatures are being used to connect verified identities with purchase orders, goods-receipt records and tax documents. This creates a traceable chain linking the parties, the transaction and the supporting documentation. The objective is not simply to convert paper into PDF, but to establish the authenticity, integrity and legal reliability of the information exchanged.
The same distinction matters for Customs. Electronic declarations and supporting documents create little value if their origin cannot be authenticated, their integrity cannot be verified or their legal status changes when they cross a border. Digital trade therefore requires more than paperless procedures. It requires trusted identities, reliable electronic signatures, clear responsibilities and mechanisms through which authorities can recognise information issued in other jurisdictions.
Interoperability is central to this effort, but it does not require every country to adopt identical laws or technology. One of the panel’s clearest messages was that systems do not need to be the same; they need to be capable of connecting. This means agreeing on standards, data fields, authentication mechanisms and legal effects while allowing jurisdictions to maintain different regulatory models.
Yose Rizal Damuri, Executive Director of CSIS Indonesia, argued that practical interoperability should begin with frequently used services capable of generating wider benefits. He identified payments, Customs and logistics among the areas where connecting systems can produce immediate value. The ASEAN experience-including regional payment links and the ASEAN Single Window-shows how interoperability can be built incrementally around concrete transactions rather than waiting for complete regulatory harmonisation.
For Customs, trusted data can enable earlier risk assessment, more targeted controls and faster release. But this depends on confidence not only in the data itself, but also in the institutions, businesses and systems that produce it. Cross-border data exchange becomes meaningful when authorities can establish who provided the information, what it represents, whether it has changed and whether it can be relied upon for a regulatory decision.
A paperless border is not necessarily a trusted border. Without authentication, interoperability and legal recognition, digitalisation may simply replace paper with uncertainty.
Key takeaway: Customs must govern the connections
The Forum’s discussions reveal a customs environment being reshaped from several directions at once. Trade fragmentation adds regulatory complexity. Supply chains depend on services whose importance may become visible only when they fail. Ports and border facilities deliver less value when procedures and information systems remain disconnected. And paperless trade across borders depends on trusted identities, reliable data and legal recognition.
No customs administration can address these challenges alone. Carriers provide advance cargo information; ports and logistics providers make goods visible along the journey; and other public authorities make decisions that affect their release. Shared responsibility needs clear arrangements: what information will be exchanged, which standards will apply, how risks will be communicated and who will act when the normal flow of trade is disrupted.
The WTO Public Forum did not place Customs at the centre of every discussion. At the border, however, those discussions become operational:
- New trade restrictions become classification, origin and control requirements.
- Disruptions to services become delays in clearance.
- Disconnected infrastructure leaves cargo waiting.
- Weaknesses in digital trust make information harder to use in regulatory decisions.
The lesson from the Forum is that Customs can no longer view trade policy, infrastructure, logistics and digital systems as separate concerns. They shape the same operation and often depend on one another. Governing the connections means understanding the border as a whole and working with the actors who make it function, so that facilitation, control and resilience advance together.
