WTO Negotiators Undertake Intensive
Preparatory Work as Agriculture Talks Resume
At a meeting of the Committee on Agriculture in Special
Session on 5 February, WTO members discussed the latest reports from
“facilitators” covering seven topics: domestic support, market access, export
competition, export restrictions, cotton, public stockholding and the special
safeguard mechanism. The Chair of the talks, Ambassador Gloria Abraham Peralta
(Costa Rica), said the facilitator-led process was an essential phase in the
run-up to the 12th Ministerial Conference (MC12) and encouraged members to
contribute new ideas in preparation for more comprehensive negotiations.
On domestic support, the facilitators — Mr Greg MacDonald (Canada), Ms
Fenny Maharani (Indonesia) and Ms Elisa Olmeda (Mexico) — said diverging views remain on key issues
covered in their bilateral consultations. These include the categories of
subsidies that should be deemed as trade-distorting, transparency obligations
and their potential burden on developing countries. They reported positive
feedback on Costa Rica's presentation on “trade distorting potential” in
relation to “proportionality”, the idea that members would take on commitments
commensurate with the potential impact of their subsidies on global markets.
The facilitators urged members to suggest more topics for discussions and
presentations.
On market access, the facilitator — Mariya-Khrystyna Koziy (Ukraine)
— shared her assessment of how to advance discussions regarding possible
elements for MC12 based on her bilateral consultations and members' responses
to specific questions she sent them in December. She said there was a general
reluctance among members to narrow down the topics for discussion and they
remained interested in a comprehensive and balanced outcome. An outcome on
transparency in relation to changes in applied tariffs and the treatment of
shipments en route when tariffs change continued to
garner support among members. She said she would engage with members in
different formats based on members' inputs.
On export competition,
the facilitator — Ms Laura Gauer
(Switzerland) — highlighted further discussions on transparency and her
intention to promote synergy between the regular committee meetings and those
of the Special Session, especially in light of the upcoming Triennial Review of
the Nairobi Decision in the regular committee.
The
facilitator on export restrictions, Mr
Leonardo Rocha Bento (Brazil), summarised the work
undertaken on the proposal not to impose export restrictions on foodstuffs
purchased by the UN’s World Food Programme (WFP). He
referred to the joint statement (WT/L/1109) issued by a large group of
members in January and said he will continue working with members to reach a
text agreeable to all by MC12. Meanwhile, he announced his intention to pursue
discussions on transparency, with a view to enhancing compliance with current
obligations.
The
facilitators on cotton, Mr Sergio Carvalho (Brazil) and Mr Emmanuel
Ouali (Burkina Faso), said that their first phase of
consultations with all major cotton trading members confirmed the clear desire
to focus first on transparency and to deepen discussions based on a
contribution by the Cotton-4 group (Benin, Burkina Faso, Chad and Mali) made
recently on this theme.
On public stockholding
(PSH), the facilitator, Mr Craig
Douglas (Jamaica), said that four meetings will be held between now and May.
The next meeting, scheduled for 22 February, will provide an opportunity for
members to discuss changes needed to the Bali Decision for an outcome on this
issue. It will also review how the negotiations should address members’ food
security challenges while balancing the need to prevent market distortions or
adverse effects on others’ food security. The meetings planned for March, April
and May will focus on notifications and transparency,
anti-circumvention/safeguards, and monitoring and implementation.
On
the special
safeguard mechanism (SSM), the facilitator, Ms
Renata Cristaldo Oviedo (Paraguay), said a wide range
of issues were raised in her consultations with members. These would be further
developed in follow-up sessions. She said the issues deserving consideration
included: evaluation of import surges; triggers and cross checks; remedies;
scope (including coverage and treatment of preferential trade); and transparency.
She observed that the facilitator-led process might not be immune from the
broader political challenges and linkages generally faced in the SSM
discussions.
Approximately
40 members participated in the discussions. Domestic support remained the topic
of greatest interest to most members. A high level of importance was attached
to food security by both developed and developing members, in particular in the
context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Several members confirmed the widely shared
interest in supporting WFP humanitarian work by exempting its food purchases
from export restrictions. Singapore called upon other members to co-sponsor the
joint statement and said it will continue to seek a multilateral agreement on
the issue. Some members considered that funding, rather than export
restrictions, was the main obstacle facing the WFP.
Many
developing members reiterated their demand for progress on food security,
including reaching a permanent solution on public stockholding programmes and allowing them to use a SSM to counter import
surges and price drops in food commodities and cotton.
On
domestic support, the key issue for most members, discussions confirmed
divisions on how to further discipline trade-distorting support and where to
start. Many developing members reiterated their request for aggregate
measurement of support (AMS) above de minimis to be addressed as
a first step and for support in per capita terms to be taken into account.
Other members supported limiting trade-distorting entitlements based on the
approach put forward by the Cairns Group of major agricultural exporting
countries and some other countries. Transparency was considered by some members
as a potential outcome at MC12. It was generally agreed that more technical
work is needed to close the existing gap in members' views.
On
market access, the proponents of specific topics such as shipments en route presented their work plans while others continued
to emphasize the need for an overall balance and prior progress on domestic
support. Several developing members
supported the C-4's call for an outcome on cotton domestic support going beyond
transparency, while other members considered such a target to be out of reach
by MC12.
One
member suggested that time should not be wasted in repeating positions and that
members should focus on the issues closest to achieving a consensus, such as
the WFP exemption from export restrictions and across-the-board transparency.
The
Chair thanked all the facilitators for their work since the last negotiation
meeting. She said the process “constitutes an essential preparatory phase” for
future negotiations.
Highlighting
the importance and complexity of domestic support, she commended Costa Rica's
presentation and the first technical discussion on the issue. She called on
other members to make similar presentations as “more clarity regarding the
proposals and concepts can only be beneficial to the negotiations process in
this priority area”.
The
Chair noted the strong push for reaching a permanent solution on public
stockholding as the COVID-19 crisis has brought to the fore the issue of food
security. She said the pandemic has also triggered the call for an early
outcome on the SSM. Seeing that no significant progress was reported on both
fronts, the Chair encouraged members to submit new ideas for the technical
discussions while she continues to work with the facilitators and hold
consultations in different formats.
Technically
complex issues such as market access may take more time but an outcome on
transparency could be within reach, the Chair noted. The possible elements for
an outcome “will comprise of both substantive elements and transparency-related
elements,” she said, adding that the appropriate balance must be found across
the board to identify the appropriate level of ambition for MC12.
Looking
ahead, she said a critical question to be answered in the coming months is when
and how to move from the topic-by-topic discussion process “to a more comprehensive
integrated high-level negotiating phase to build convergence on the elements
for an overall outcome on agriculture at MC12”. She noted that the response to
this question would depend on the date of MC12.