|
||
|
TWN Info Service
on Sustainable Agriculture Geneva, 25 Jul (D. Ravi Kanth) -- Trade envoys and senior officials of developing countries have brought to the center-stage the mandated issues on agriculture, especially the permanent solution for public stockholding (PSH) programs for food security and the special safeguard mechanism (SSM), demanding that these two issues need to be addressed along with the discussions on the purported agriculture reform, said people familiar with the development. At the first meeting of the Doha agriculture negotiating body on 21 July following the 12th ministerial conference (MC12), the developing countries such as Indonesia on behalf of the Group of 33 developing country coalition, China, India, Jamaica on behalf of the ACP (African, Caribbean, and Pacific) group, South Africa, and several other countries mentioned these two issues with varying emphasis, said people, who asked not to be quoted. In sharp contrast, the Cairns Group of farm-exporting countries led by Australia, the United States, the European Union, Japan, Switzerland on behalf of the farm-defensive countries of the G10, and Brazil among others suggested a rupture with the Doha mandate on agriculture, calling for a new approach to set the markers for agricultural reform, said people who took part in the meeting. RETREATS ON AGRICULTURE It appears that the WTO Director-General, Ms Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, and the Cairns Group are planning to host separate retreats for brainstorming on agriculture in the week beginning 12 September, following the failure to include any work program on agriculture at MC12. While the DG's retreat is being planned for around 13 or 14 September, the Cairns Group retreat is being scheduled for 15 or 16 September. The venue and the exact dates for the retreats are yet to be finalized, said a person, who is familiar with the situation. Perhaps, the two retreats are apparently intended to bury the Doha mandate on agriculture once and for all. They could pave the way for new approaches and new emphasis aimed at targeting the specific entitlements for developing countries, such as the "development box" in Article 6.2 of the WTO's Agreement on Agriculture (AoA), the de minimis provision of 10%, and several other special and differential treatment (S&DT) provisions, said the person, who asked not to be quoted. At the meeting on 21 July, the outgoing chair of the Doha agriculture negotiations, Ambassador Gloria Abraham Peralta of Costa Rica, presented a six-page report on her assessment on the state of play in the negotiations. Many members paid tributes for her dedicated work during the last two years. Surprisingly, members hardly referred to the points she made in her intervention, said people, who asked not to be quoted. Before MC12 last month, Ambassador Peralta was severely criticized in several meetings for her alleged bias towards the Cairns Group, and for undermining the permanent solution for public stockholding programs for food security among others. MEMBERS' INTERVENTIONS In its intervention, the United States said it is disappointed on the substance for not achieving more than the two outcomes - the Decision on the World Food Programme (WFP) and the Declaration on Food Security. The US suggested that it reflects the fundamental divergence on various issues, arguing that pushing for an outcome is not realistic, said people, who took part in the meeting (see SUNS #9551 dated 7 April 2022). Never in the recent history of the Doha agriculture negotiations has a chair played such a divisive role by allegedly "rigging" the mandate with asymmetrical proposals, the person said. On behalf of the G-33 group of developing countries, Indonesia said that it is disappointed in not achieving an agricultural outcome. Indonesia said the need of the hour is to build trust and goodwill among members. It said that though members agreed on the World Food Programme Decision and the Declaration on Food Security, it is important to ensure inclusivity and transparency. More importantly, it argued that the chair's report should be based on members' reports and in consultations with members. Indonesia called for advancing the Bali and Nairobi mandates with S&DT being an integral part. The G-33 coalition and other developing countries, according to Indonesia, will continue to pursue the special safeguard mechanism (SSM) for developing countries and the permanent solution for public stockholding programs for food security. According to Indonesia, negotiations on other pillars such as domestic support, market access and cotton must also progress. It called for establishing modalities to pave the way forward. On behalf of the African Group, Cameroon said that the African Group members are disappointed at the failure "to secure an outcome of level playing field" for developing and least-developed countries (LDCs), and failing to provide further "policy space for developing countries and LDCs." Also, MC12 failed to address the cotton issue. The African Group argued that members need to define their priorities and issues that continue to undermine trust- building, underscoring the need for giving top priority to food security. Cameroon said its members will engage for equitable and balanced outcomes at MC13. Jamaica, on behalf of the ACP group, said that it has placed "high value on an equitable and inclusive outcome at MC12." The absence of an agricultural outcome is a bad signal for the world's subsistence farmers, Jamaica said. The ACP group argued that "imbalance in AoA continues to result in those with deep pockets benefiting at the expense of global food and nutrition security." While endorsing the Decision on the World Food Programme food purchases without any trade restrictions and the Declaration on Food Security, Jamaica said it hopes the Decision will further assist the WFP in its operation. It ought to have provided "policy space for countries like ours to address existential food security challenges," it said. The ACP group said that "tangible outcomes on PSH, SSM and DS (domestic support) are required to have an Ag outcome." It emphasized on the need for an outcome on cotton as well as discussing SSM. The ACP group argued that primary and durable solutions to the food security crisis lie in addressing the AoA imbalances. It said that the elimination of the aggregate measurement of support above de minimis, limiting green and blue box subsidies and preserving Article 6.2 of the AoA should continue to guide members. China said that the Doha Development Agenda was intended to address food security and livelihood security, adding that the existing imbalance together with current crises increases the challenges for members. It expressed sharp concern over not achieving an outcome on the PSH issue due to the existing rule-deficit. Commenting on how to explore new approaches and new paths, China said over the past 20 years no substantial progress was made, asking members to identify causes and solutions. China said that agricultural outcomes should contribute to the realization of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). China proposed three markers to continuing the negotiations, as members' divergences have not been bridged. The markers include: 1. China said some members only seek blunt reductions of tariffs etc, ignoring other members' need to achieve sustainable development. Reform should deliver on policy tools for development and food security needs of all members. 2. China said that developed members have resources that others cannot match and their support distorts trade and wipes out others' local production. 3. More importantly, China argued that high agriculture subsidies and concentration in specific products severely impact the agriculture of developing members. Developing countries have specific food security needs and to protect the interests of their farmers to grow food. China said that the agricultural reform must provide effective policy tools for such members. Otherwise, their reform will stagnate or regress, as trade alone cannot meet domestic food needs. Russia said that the threat to global food security was to a large extent due to sanctions against it, including leading to price hikes in energy products and fertilizers. Sri Lanka, which is facing food and fuel riots, called for progress, especially on the permanent solution for public stockholding programs for food security, SSM for developing countries, and domestic support. Egypt, which is also adversely affected by high food prices and shortages of wheat, said that "future work should be based on realistic expectations on all pillars," underscoring the need for calibration and proper sequencing across all pillars. Egypt said PSH is an appropriate tool to address these concerns, emphasizing that transparency and special and differential treatment are both cross-cutting issues to be considered. In its intervention, South Africa said that it is frustrated that the WTO is still unable to address the principal issue at the heart of agricultural reform: distortive DS (domestic support) and its concentration of specific subsidies. While welcoming the WFP Decision and the Declaration on Food Security, it emphasized on the need to take into account the role of public stockholding in addressing the FS (food security) crisis. South Africa highlighted the need to attach importance to poor subsistence farmers and make rapid progress on DS and the mandated issues of PSH and SSM. India expressed grave concern over the failure to deliver on PSH. It reminded members that given the past mandate, lack of closure would cast aspersions on the commitment of members and future negotiations. India argued that not delivering on a mandated issue is back-sliding. India said that the WTO "cannot solve problems with the same solutions, but we hear members preaching the same solutions they have been preaching for 20 years." India reiterated that "PSH allows India to ensure food security for its own population and help other countries in need." Such an outcome should help members to build a successful FS (food security) model without creating distortions, it said. India said there will be no progress in agriculture without delivering on the mandated issues, adding that countries should not look for a scapegoat. It argued that "times have changed since 1994 and developing countries now understand their interests better", and the developing countries "seek protection from those preaching free trade." It said that half-information can be dangerous, suggesting that "it is not a major wheat exporter and our measure on wheat has no big impact on the world market." India said its wheat exports were hoarded and speculated on. It pointed a finger at some countries that could buy three times their needs while others could not buy sufficient amounts. Fluctuations after India's wheat export ban were small, it said. It warned that targeting India is misplaced. Lastly, India called for discussions to start on addressing mandated issues on PSH and SSM and adopt them at the General Council without waiting for MC13. The US claimed that there was no consensus on the Doha mandate, but the majority of developing countries demanded the continuation of the Doha negotiations. According to paragraph 30 of the Nairobi Ministerial Declaration, "We recognize that many Members reaffirm the Doha Development Agenda, and the Declarations and Decisions adopted at Doha and at the Ministerial Conferences held since then, and reaffirm their full commitment to conclude the DDA on that basis. Other Members do not reaffirm the Doha mandates, as they believe new approaches are necessary to achieve meaningful outcomes in multilateral negotiations. Members have different views on how to address the negotiations. We acknowledge the strong legal structure of this Organization." It states in paragraph 31, "Nevertheless, there remains a strong commitment of all Members to advance negotiations on the remaining Doha issues. This includes advancing work in all three pillars of agriculture, namely domestic support, market access and export competition, as well as non-agriculture market access, services, development, TRIPS and rules. Work on all the Ministerial Decisions adopted in Part II of this Declaration will remain an important element of our future agenda." The US said the current approaches would not work, underscoring the need to identify current challenges in order to have a common negotiating approach. It maintained that a new approach would not be found overnight, emphasizing the need for pragmatism. The EU said it is disappointed over agriculture reform, adding that the PSH issue proved again to be a visible dividing point. Brussels maintained that there are many other issues on which divergences remain. It called for a new negotiating approach based on cooperative and constructive attitude. The EU argued that the new way forward ought to be anchored around important issues such as poverty and fisheries subsidies. Brazil, which led the G20 coalition of developing countries and endorsed the draft modalities text in 2008 based on the Doha agriculture mandate, said at the meeting that "the old concepts and architecture from Doha round cannot serve the way forward." It demanded a fresh start based on Article 20 of the WTO's Agreement on Agriculture. Brazil called for an assessment on domestic support/PSH and market access. Canada called for a dialogue on how food security, sustainability and climate change could be incorporated. Japan, on behalf of the G-10 countries, called for a balanced approach to ensure a balanced outcome for food security. The G-10 countries, according to Japan, are committed to the reform process under Article 20 of the AoA. In short, the coming months are going to witness an uphill battle on framing agricultural reform. For it to be credible, members should address the mandated issues first in order to create trust and confidence among developing countries. +
|
||
