|
||
|
TWN
Info Service on WTO and Trade Issues (Feb26/02) Geneva, 30 Jan (D. Ravi Kanth) — Ahead of the Doha agriculture negotiating body meeting on 30 January, the African Group issued a comprehensive proposal for the World Trade Organization’s 14th Ministerial Conference (MC14) that is “consistent with the existing mandates”, said people familiar with the development. The proposal, contained in a restricted three-page room document (RD/AG/149) issued on 29 January, “seeks to engage constructively with the range of written positions already tabled by Members, and to identify elements that could help advance discussions toward MC14, consistent with the existing mandates.” The African Group proposal offers a clearer way forward in the WTO agriculture talks because it treats MC14 as the moment to take decisions, not to restate old promises, said farm trade negotiators, suggesting that “Jamaica’s draft declaration on trade and global food security essentially does the latter.” The Jamaican proposal “repeats familiar concerns, reaffirms special and differential treatment and pledges to advance negotiations, but it does not say what Ministers should decide, where to focus effort on or how work should proceed after Yaounde,” said an African farm trade negotiator, who asked not to be quoted. In practice, it keeps all options open, including the option of doing very little. In contrast, the negotiator said, “the African Group text is built around the idea that movement in agriculture now depends on concrete instructions,” while treating “agriculture as one negotiating problem, not a set of disconnected files, bringing the various submissions on the table on cotton, domestic support, market access, public stockholding and a special safeguard mechanism under a single decision with a defined line of work through to MC15.” The framing is also more grounded, said another negotiator, arguing that “the African Group proposal does not create new mandates or reopen settled debates.” “Each element sits within existing ministerial decisions and negotiating directives, which makes it institutionally defensible,” the negotiator said. At the same time, it reflects real compromise, drawing on language from Jamaica’s own draft; from Brazil and Mercosur on market access; from Indonesia and the LDC group on public stockholding (PSH) and the Special Safeguard Mechanism (SSM); and from the C-4 on cotton, while still holding the line on policy space, food security and special and differential treatment. Substantively, it is the African Group text that would change the trajectory of the talks after MC14, said a former African trade envoy, adding that it “calls for intensified work on cutting trade-distorting domestic support, mandates specific technical engagement on tariffs, tariff escalation and non-ad valorem duties, and sets out a pathway towards a permanent solution on public stockholding and an operational SSM, including a long-overdue review of the 1986-88 reference price.” In its proposal, the African Group stated unambiguously that it “has demonstrated flexibility and has adjusted aspects of its own positions in the spirit of compromise and with the objective of identifying a credible landing zone in the current negotiating context, without prejudice to its longstanding positions and priorities.” It emphasized that “food security has long been recognized as a core and unresolved issue in the agriculture negotiations, with clear implications for economic stability, social resilience and Members’ ability to manage systemic shocks in an increasingly uncertain global environment.” “Against this background,” it said, “the Group considers it important that Members are able to provide Ministers with meaningful guidance on work to be carried forward post-MC14.” The African Group warned that “a failure to move beyond a purely declaratory outcome would risk sending an unhelpful signal about the WTO’s capacity to address long-standing challenges in the multilateral trading system at a time of heightened global uncertainty.” The draft ministerial decision recognizes “the urgent need to strengthen global food security, particularly for developing country Members, including Least-Developed Countries (LDCs) and Net Food-Importing Developing Countries (NFIDCs), in light of increased volatility in agricultural markets, supply disruptions and other global challenges affecting food systems.” It noted that “Special and Differential Treatment for developing country Members is an integral part of the agriculture negotiations.” Expressing sharp concern over the limited progress “achieved to date in agriculture negotiations,” the African Group underscored the “need to revitalize them in a balanced, transparent and development-oriented manner, with a view to making concrete progress across all pillars by MC15.” It spelled out what needs to be done on several unresolved issues in the agriculture negotiations. On cotton, the African Group stated: “Ministers commit to pursue and intensify negotiations on the trade-related component of cotton, ambitiously, expeditiously and specifically within the agriculture negotiations, in accordance with the Hong Kong, Bali and Nairobi mandates, with a view to substantially and progressively reducing trade-distorting domestic support affecting the cotton sector.” The US has repeatedly stated that it will not discuss the trade-related component of cotton to slash its subsidies unless market access is also discussed alongside the subsidy issue. The African Group stated that “Ministers further commit to improving market access for cotton and cotton- related products from cotton-producing LDCs and C-4 countries, including through duty-free and quota-free access, and to strengthening transparency and monitoring through the Dedicated Discussions on Cotton.” It said that “the work under paragraphs 1 and 2 shall advance toward possible modalities and other outcomes for consideration by Ministers at MC15 and beyond, consistent with the ambition, urgency and specificity of the cotton mandates.” On domestic support, the African Group called for intense negotiations with “a view to achieving substantial and progressive reductions in trade-distorting support in a fair and equitable manner, by targeting the most inequitable elements first, while safeguarding special and differential treatment for developing countries, and to advance work toward possible modalities and other outcomes for consideration by Ministers at MC15 and beyond.” It stated: “Ministers further agree that, as an interim and exceptional matter, the Committee on Agriculture in Special Session shall examine options to provide additional flexibility for developing country Members experiencing severe food crises, including with respect to the application of product-specific de minimis support beyond existing thresholds, including indicative levels and duration, for consideration by Ministers at MC15 and beyond.” On market access, the African Group called on Ministers to “instruct the Committee on Agriculture in Special Session to undertake technical work on market access reform, including tariff simplification through the conversion of non-ad valorem tariffs, the treatment of tariff escalation, and disciplines on high tariffs and tariff peaks, with a view to improving predictability, reducing distortions and supporting food security, while taking into account development needs and special and differential treatment for developing countries.” It suggested that the technical work “will inform possible modalities and other outcomes for consideration by Ministers at MC15 and beyond.” On public stockholding programmes for food security purposes, which remain unresolved since the WTO’s 10th Ministerial Conference (MC10) in Nairobi, Kenya, the African Group set out its demands unambiguously. They include: 1. Ministers recall the existing mandate to conclude a permanent solution on Public Stockholding for Food Security Purposes and instruct the Dedicated Session of the Committee on Agriculture in Special Session to negotiate such a solution, pursuant to the Bali, General Council and Nairobi Decisions, with a view to advancing work toward possible outcomes for consideration by Ministers at MC15, consistent with the mandate, without prejudice to negotiations and outcomes on other pillars. 2. Work toward a permanent solution shall build on elements with broad support, including strengthened legal certainty for developing country Members operating PSH programmes, flexibility regarding the coverage of foodstuffs and programme design, inclusion of programmes implemented after the Peace Clause, and appropriate safeguards informed by existing WTO rules for all developing countries, including LDCs and NFIDCs. 3. Ministers instruct the Committee to undertake a review of the use of the 1986-1988 fixed external reference price based on eligible production in the calculation of market price support under PSH, taking into account inflation, evolving market conditions and the specific circumstances of developing countries, with a view to making recommendations by MC15. On the Special Safeguard Mechanism, the African Group states: “Ministers reaffirm the importance of a Special Safeguard Mechanism as a food security and development instrument for developing country Members and instruct the Dedicated Session of the Committee on Agriculture in Special Session to intensify work toward an effective, transparent and accessible Special Safeguard Mechanism, with a view to advancing work toward possible outcomes for consideration by Ministers at MC15, consistent with the mandate, without prejudice to negotiations and outcomes on other pillars.” “In this context, the Special Safeguard Mechanism shall be responsive to import surges and price volatility and take into account the needs of developing countries, including LDCs and NFIDCs, in the design and operationalisation of such a mechanism, in accordance with the mandate.” On the negotiating process and roadmap, the African Group states: “Ministers instruct the Committee on Agriculture in Special Session to revitalize the agriculture negotiations, drawing on existing submissions, and to pursue an inclusive, transparent and Member-driven process, organised around negotiating pillars, with a view to strengthening food security and development outcomes.” It requested “the Chairperson of the Committee on Agriculture in Special Session to facilitate the implementation of this decision in a transparent, Member-driven and inclusive manner.” Senior Officials shall review progress one year after MC14 and provide guidance on the way forward. A further review shall take place six months prior to MC15, with a view to enabling Ministers to take decisions, the African Group suggested. +
|
||
