Search

Developing members at the WTO face a shrinkage in policy space for supporting their agricultural sector due to the limited room available under the provisions of the Agreement on Agriculture (AoA). Contrastingly, most developed members can provide high levels of product-specific support without breaching their commitments on account of their support entitlements. For some of these members, the so-called ‘Blue Box’ under the AoA, plays a pivotal role in expanding the policy space with respect to domestic support to agricultural products. Though a lot of scholarship has discussed and examined other support provisions under the AoA, the ‘Blue Box’ remains relatively shrouded in mystery. Testimony to this is the fact that although the Blue Box has found use amongst developed members, no developing member, except for China in 2016, has ever used the Blue Box to support their producers. Given the impasse in the Doha Round of negotiations and limited flexibilities available under the AoA, this paper examines the feasibility and compatibility Blue Box measures with developing members’ socio-economic situation. Findings of this paper bring to fore the variations in member practice and the operational flexibilities available in implementing Blue Box programmes to support agriculture. JEL: F13, F14, F17, Q17

In the agriculture negotiations, developing members remain concerned about the inherent inequities in the Agreement on Agriculture (AoA) which allows developed members to provide huge product-speci...

The article presents the stages of formation and development of the WTO Agreement on Agriculture, its structure and content of the main sections. It has been established that agriculture is one of the strategic and vulnerable sectors of the economy of any state, the development of which determines the level of national economic and food security. It is determined that the adopted document establishes a system of rules and obligations of countries in relation to agricultural policy measures related to the regulation of market access, domestic support, and export competition. The current trends in the development of the agri-food sector of Belarus in terms of agricultural production, food security, foreign trade are justified. The features of the implementation of the WTO Agreement on Agriculture in the conditions of the republic, taking into account external and internal factors of industry competitiveness, are highlighted. At the country level, directions for the development of agricultural trade policy, improvement of support measures that do not fall under obligations to limit in accordance with international requirements of the World Trade Organization, and ensure competitive advantages in foreign agricultural markets are proposed. It was noted that promising areas and criteria for the effective functioning of the agri-food sector should take into account national priorities, provide measures and mechanisms for the development of competitive and environmentally friendly production of agricultural products, expand market infrastructure, create favorable organizational and economic conditions for the functioning of the industry, and form its scientific and innovative potential. The issues disclosed in the article are of interest in developing a set of measures to increase the efficiency of foreign trade in the context of expanding the country’s participation in international and regional trade and economic integration, justifying mechanisms for improving agricultural regulation, and developing a system for promoting agri-food products on the domestic and foreign markets.

Trading grain and other agricultural items have been the trend in many nations of the world. In previous times, the exchange system that existed for exchange in items was the structure for trade in goods. Gradually, this gave an approach to economic merchants from all over the world, and trade in agricultural products gave strong economic advantages. The SPS Agreement under the Uruguay Round Agreement on Agriculture (URAA) defined the Sanitary and Phytosanitary (SPS) Guidelines as steps taken to ensure human, animal or vegetation or well-being from hazards associated with imported agricultural goods. Technical barriers to trade are legislation and interventions to supervise the supply of goods to the national market, which have as their main objective the correction of market wasteful aspects arising from externalities related to the production, distribution and consumption of those goods. This paper focuses on historical study of Indian foreign health and phytosanitary measures and Trade Barrier Treaties (TBT).

International audience; The legal framework for agricultural trade is marked by a complex dialectic that opposes commercial and non-commercial considerations, such as food security and environment. Although the reform of the WTO Agreement on Agriculture is still not complete, the last decades reveal a substantial normative production around the concept of food security which can bring changes to the WTO and contribute to a transition to sustainable food systems.; L’encadrement juridique du commerce agricole est marqué par une dialectique complexe qui oppose considérations commerciales et non commerciales comme la sécurité alimentaire et l’environnement. Bien que la réforme de l’accord sur l’agriculture de l’OMC ne soit pas achevée, les dernières décennies révèlent une production normative substantielle autour du concept de sécurité alimentaire qui peut amener des changements à l’OMC et contribuer à une transition vers des systèmes alimentaires durables.

El incremento por parte del Gobierno Colombiano a los aranceles en la importación de productos agrícolas originarios de Estados Unidos de América, está circunscrito al marco regulatorio comprendido en el Acuerdo de Promoción Comercial suscrito entre Colombia y los Estados Unidos de América, así como a la normativa de la Organización Mundial del Comercio, dentro de la que se resalta el Acuerdo sobre la Agricultura. Es por esto por lo que, de presentarse la situación en la que el gobierno nacional colombiano decida incrementar los aranceles a la importación de productos agrícolas originarios de USA, se deben llevar a cabo diferentes procedimientos con el fin de negociar nuevamente estos convenios internacionales para no entrar en el vasto campo de la violación de normas internacionales., The increase in tariffs on the importation of agricultural products originating in the United States of America is limited to the regulatory framework included in the Trade Promotion Agreement signed between Colombia and the United States of America, as well as the regulations of the World Trade Organization, within the guidelines of the Agreement on Agriculture. Therefore, if the situation arises in which the Colombian national government decides to increase import tariffs on agricultural products originating in the United States, different procedures must be carried out to renegotiate these international agreements in order to prevent violations of such international conventions.

NAFTA agricultural chapter and the WTO Agreement on Agriculture are external influences to the Mexican agricultural reform, conceived as a historical process in constant transformation, that shapes the terms of the sectoral economic operation in a liberalization and commercial opening context. The work claims that there is clearly an influence of the external trade policy on the domestic agricultural policy and on its outcomes in the institutional framework, that forms the model of sectoral regulation. The methodology reviews three central aspects negotiated in the “access to markets”, “producer support” and “export subsidies” agreements and analyzes the scope for state intervention and the decisions made on each one of them for the 1994-2012 period. The conclusions show that these two agreements complement each other and that there are matters that provide the Mexican State a wide scope for intervention that has not been used sufficiently to promote sectoral development policies. The current international food order is briefly analyzed taking up the theorists of the International Political Economy (Gilpin, 1987; McMichael, 2009; Polanyi, 1957; Gray, 2000).

Trade on Agriculture has been reformed since January 1995. It was a resultof Uruguay Round and staed on Agreement on Agriculture. However, its implementations have given negative aspects to developing countries. It was caused by the malfunction of specific protection mechanism. Besides, special and differential treatment, created by developed countries, is not implemented effectively. Accordingly, sector on Agriculture has been being negotiated since the Doha Round in 2001.

Achieving food security remains a challenge for many low- and middle-income countries, including Indonesia. The aim of this study was to assess the policy space to implement food security policy in Indonesia under the World Trade Organization (WTO). The policy space for developing countries to implement administered prices for agricultural commodities is significantly circumscribed by the Agreement on Agriculture (AoA) under the WTO regime. In particular, the procurement of foodgrains at administered prices is considered “trade distorting support” and limited under the amber box. This study describes the food security policy context in Indonesia, compares existing food procurement expenditure to Indonesia’s commitments within the AoA, and evaluates the implications of different options proposed regarding public stockholding for food security purposes at the WTO. Administered prices and public procurement form part of Indonesia’s long-term commitment to food security policy, and aim to stabilize food prices for producers and consumers. Indonesia’s procurement of rice has been rising as a percentage of value of production (VoP). It is still under the de minimis limit (10%), but the applicable permissible limit on procurement has declined by nearly half, in terms of volume. This indicates that the policy space for providing product specific support is declining, as inflation is not accounted for under the AoA method of calculation. Of the different options that have been tabled to take into account inflation, using the Wholesale Price Index as a deflator increases the policy space the most. The peace clause deliberations at the WTO are of critical importance to the Government of Indonesia, as their policy space becomes increasingly constrained. In the near future, Indonesia may need to invoke the peace clause to restrain other countries from challenging its food security program.

A key issue in the foundation and subsequent evolution of the decisions on agricultural trade under the World Trade Organization (WTO) was the question of price and income support to agriculture. It is generally believed that income support, as opposed to price support, is less trade-distorting, which is also reflected in their classification under the Agreement on Agriculture (AoA). Price support is classified under the trade-distorting Amber box, whereas income support is covered by the provisions of the Green box that are considered as minimally trade-distorting. Most developing countries, however, tend to resort to price-support policies due to budgetary constraints and fiscal concerns. Any redistributive policies like the National Rural Employment Guarantee Program though found to be highly effective in bringing up wages and rural income are often critiqued domestically by neoliberals for the financial burden they allegedly place on the exchequer. This study seeks to engage with a particular aspect of critique of price-support policies that claim that income-support policies extended to farmers in developed countries do not distort prices and output. Though this proposition may be valid in a partial equilibrium perfectly competitive model, it is not necessarily valid in an oligopoly or a general equilibrium framework or a Keynesian/Kaleckian macroeconomic setting. Thus, this study makes a modest attempt to demonstrate that income-support measures, like price-support measures are also trade-distorting.

Liberalisation of Indian agriculture under the World Trade Organisation (WTO) and free trade agreements (FTAs) has always been a sensitive issue due to the crucial role played by the sector in economic development, GDP growth and employment. This chapter provides an overview of the WTO’s Agreement on Agriculture and the issues faced by the Indian agriculture sector under its different pillars. In particular, it examines issues of critical importance for India, such as market price support, import surges, food security and special and differential treatment (S&DT) at the WTO, while also providing insights from negotiations. The chapter also deals with agriculture-specific issues in India’s FTAs, providing a broad view of its commitments and assessing trade performance of Indian agriculture over the years. It concludes by stressing the need to level the playing field in agricultural trade at the multilateral and regional level for Indian farmers.

Fisheries subsidies negotiations have been a protracted issue ever since the launch of the Doha Development Agenda in 2001. Members of the World Trade Organization (WTO) have intensified their efforts to conclude the negotiations by the 12th WTO Ministerial Conference to be held in 2021. At present, significant divergences exist between developed and developing countries in the WTO on the formulation of disciplines on fisheries subsidies. This chapter will discuss the key contentious issues of the various fisheries subsidies proposals, including the recent Chair’s text of July 2020. The chapter discusses the major imbalances, including the lack of policy space for development, the imposition of stringent management measures, compromising the rights of developing countries in UNCLOS and the low ambition of special and differential treatment. The chapter further discusses how the existing proposals benefit the market access agenda of the developed economies. It also cautions that a similar scenario of the imbalance experienced by developing countries in the Agreement on Agriculture will be repeated in the existing fisheries subsidies negotiations if the contentious issues remain unresolved in the final agreement. The paper also provides a strategic way forward in relation to a balanced special and differential treatment for member’s consideration.

Apesar do grande esforço da comunidade internacional, a falta de segurança alimentar persiste e piorou nos últimos anos. Entre os múltiplos elementos que podem afetar a segurança alimentar, o comércio na agricultura desempenha um papel significativo em termos positivos e negativos. Considerando a segurança alimentar no sistema multilateral de comércio, uma das questões mais importantes é o próprio conceito de segurança alimentar adotado pelas partes negociadoras. Esse conceito corresponde à definição mais utilizada a nível internacional, ou seja, a definição da FAO? O fórum da Organização Mundial do Comércio apresentou uma noção clara e consistente de segurança alimentar? Este artigo discute o conceito de segurança alimentar proveniente do sistema legal da OMC, examinando as regras do Acordo sobre Agricultura relevante e levando em conta o atual processo de reforma.

Disciplining domestic support to agriculture remains an unfinished agenda in the WTO negotiations due to the different views and positions of members. Developing members have been consistently demanding an effective special and differential treatment (S&DT) for themselves, along with a substantial reduction in the trade-distorting support entitlement of developed members. However, members have failed to reach a consensus on different aspects, especially coverage and approaches to determine an overall trade-distorting support (OTDS) limit. In this context, this study quantifies and critically examines the implications of various proposals on the policy space to provide trade-distorting support based on floating and fixed reference period models. It estimates trade-distorting entitlements of 9 developed and 16 developing members under the Agreement on Agriculture (AoA) as well as the selected proposals for the years 2020 and 2030. These entitlements have been computed in monetary limits, percentage of the value of production, and on per farmer basis. Results show that many proposals have failed to deliver the effective S&DT, as developing members generally have to undertake higher cuts than developed members, highlighting the asymmetries in negotiations. The study will be useful for members to take an informed position in the agriculture negotiations on domestic support.

This paper reviews the domestic support rules of the WTO Agreement on Agriculture (AoA) and evaluates the space they generate for different members to provide different kinds and levels of support subject to and exempt from limits. Economic analysis of support is reviewed, focused on direct payments to producers and market price support (MPS) measured in the AoA compared to economic price support. A global overview presents the major changes in members’ domestic support as revealed by their notifications to the WTO Committee on Agriculture (CoA) for 1995-2016, complemented by selected subsequent information. Key results are a shift toward less-distorting support (recent support in the United States since 2018 one exception), concentration of support among a small number of members, and the rise of China and India as top support providers, along with the European Union, the United States and Japan. The paper summarizes discussion within the CoA over the notified information and other questions about members’ domestic support. It examines the measurement of MPS for wheat and rice in the recent dispute China ‒ Agricultural Producers and for several products for India, including in three ongoing disputes India ‒ Measures Concerning Sugar and Sugarcane. Our assessments highlight the problematic aspects of the AoA measurement. China’s MPS, when measured in line with the dispute settlement ruling, can be accommodated within its limits while hardly constraining its economic support. Conversely, some measurements of India’s MPS are far greater than the economic support provided. Such divergences underlie contention about the consequences of applying the AoA rules. An alternative is considered that more closely tracks economic support by using lagged international border prices as a reference price. Members continue to debate domestic support options. Whether progress can be made is uncertain as they hold fast to longstanding positions on such issues as the rules and limits applying to domestic support as a whole, to cotton support and to the consequences of acquisition at administered prices of public stocks for food security purposes. New policy priorities have gained prominence, most notably climate change, but related also to productivity growth, biosecurity, water management and biodiversity. Governments have the option to address these and other priorities through green box support exempt from limit. More explicit green box specifications might clarify what support policies in the area of mitigating climate change would qualify for exemption. The paper concludes by assessing how the diverse pressures for change affect the potential of the AoA to contribute to a fair and market-oriented agricultural trading system. We summarize the major problematic aspects of the AoA and from these insights suggest options to improve and strengthen the WTO rules and commitments on domestic support.

This paper assesses key issues in the dispute over the United States’ claim that for certain grains China exceeded its limits on domestic support under the Agreement on Agriculture (AoA) during 2012-2015. The panel first determined that the base years for the reference price in calculating China’s market price support were 1996-1998, rather than 1986-1988 as stipulated in the AoA, and that production in the geographic regions where the support programs operated, not the smaller quantities purchased at administered prices, constituted eligible production. The panel then found China exceeded its limits in each of the four years for wheat, Indica rice and Japonica rice. The possibility was left open that a government can determine eligible production by setting maximum purchases at support prices in its regulatory framework. China used this option to claim that its programs for 2020 implemented the recommendations and rulings of the DSB. We argue that use of outdated fixed external reference prices to measure the price gap, and defining eligible production by limits on purchases, distance calculation under the AoA from economic support measurement. The measurement issues compound the discord among Members over levels of agricultural support.

In the agriculture negotiations, developing members remain concerned about the inherent inequities in the Agreement on Agriculture (AoA) which allows developed members to provide huge trade-distorting support without breaching their commitments. As a result of these flexibilities, developed members enjoy artificial competitiveness in international trade, which subsequently leads to an adverse impact on farm income and livelihood security for millions of farmers in third world countries. Further, developing members have been increasingly finding it difficult to implement domestic support measures due to the constraining provisions of the AoA. From the developing members' perspective, the elimination of trade-distorting entitlement for developed members along with special and differential treatment for themselves are the key demands in domestic support negotiations. However, some developed members have tried to build a narrative to depict developing members as major providers of trade-distorting support. This study has made a modest attempt to bring out the fallacy of this narrative by highlighting the asymmetries and inequities in trade-distorting entitlement of 8 developed and 12 developing members based on their socio-economic conditions. Results show that per farmer Amber box entitlement for developing members under the AoA is a mere fraction of the entitlement enjoyed by the developed members. This study provides a different dimension to the ongoing agriculture negotiations to make trade rules development-oriented and inclusive for all. More specifically, this study examine the following pertinent questions (1) whether the relevance of AMS entitlement for developed members has declined, and if so, why are developing members still asking for AMS elimination; (2) in case the socio-economic conditions of the developing members are considered, whether the narrative that developing members have the huge policy space under the de minimis limit will stand; (3) if policy space under the de minimis limit has increased, then why are the developing members complaining about the constraining provisions of the AoA; (4) In case the number of farmers is considered, what will be the entitlement of the members under the amber box for achieving a level playing field. The study seeks to explore answers to these intriguing questions by examining and evaluating the policy space under the Amber box for 20 selected members; 8 developed members namely Australia, Canada, European Union (EU), Japan, Russia, Norway, Switzerland and the United States, and 12 developing members namely Bangladesh, Brazil, India, China, Egypt, Indonesia, Kenya, Pakistan, Philippines, South Korea, Thailand, and Turkey in 2020 and 2030.

A landmark achievement of the Uruguay Round, and notably, the Agreement on Agriculture, was the full inclusion of agriculture in multilateral rules and disciplines. Since the birth of World Trade Organization (WTO), a significant number of member countries have used the dispute settlement mechanism (DSM) for resolving the disputes in agriculture. The DSM has played an important role not only for those parties involved in the disputes, but also by helping member countries to better understand the WTO rules, and therefore help guide them in developing domestic policies and trade policies that are consistent with WTO requirements. This paper examines trade disputes involving the Agreement on Agriculture since the WTO was formed in 1995 through December 2019. It analyzes who brought the disputes and against whom disputes were brought, and provides details on the natures of the disputes, the duration of disputes, and, the outcome of those disputes.

This paper assesses key issues in the dispute over the United States’ claim that for certain grains China exceeded its limits on domestic support under the Agreement on Agriculture (AoA) during 2012–2015. The panel first determined that the base years for the reference price in calculating China's market price support were 1996–1998, rather than 1986–1988 as stipulated in the AoA, and that production in the geographic regions where the support programs operated, not the smaller quantities purchased at administered prices, constituted eligible production. The panel then found China had exceeded its limits in each of the four years for wheat, Indica rice, and Japonica rice. The possibility was left open that a government can determine eligible production by setting maximum purchases at support prices in its regulatory framework. China used this option to claim that its programs for 2020 implemented the recommendations and rulings of the DSB. We argue that use of outdated fixed external reference prices to measure the price gap and to define eligible production by limits on purchases, distance calculation under the AoA from economic support measurement. The measurement issues compound the discord among Members over levels of agricultural support.

With rising levels of food and livelihood insecurity among poor farmers, many developing members at the WTO are demanding special safeguard mechanism (SSM) for shielding their agriculture from import surges and price declines. Most of developing members do not have any trade instrument under the WTO to address it except by increasing the applied tariff to bound level. Similar to special agricultural safeguards (SSGs) which is available only to few members, SSM seeks to provide flexibility to developing members to breach the bound tariff in special cases of import surges and price dips in order to minimize its adverse impact. In this context, this study identifies the agricultural products facing import surges in selected developing members namely Ghana, India, Indonesia, Namibia, Philippines, Senegal, Sri Lanka, and Turkey. The uniqueness of this study is derived from the fact that it also evaluates the policy space available to selected members on these tariff lines in terms of tariff overhang under their existing schedules as well as proposed tariff reductions under agriculture negotiations. Beside this, it critically scrutinizes various issues such as cross-check conditions, triggers and remedies in order to highlight the sensitivities of developing members in accessibility, effectiveness, and other technical aspects of this mechanism. The study identifies some of the provisions contained in the most recent version of the negotiating texts which could render the SSM an ineffective policy instrument and difficult to operationalise.

The world trade organisation (WTO) has liberalised trade considerably, but there are instances of imbalance and systemic issues persisting although we celebrate two-decade of the existence of this regulatory body. This paper provides insights into how there is a lack of disciplining of WTO compatible non-tariff measures at the multilateral level. It has led to members stretching the use of permissible provisions (Articles 5 and 7) under the sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) agreement, allowing for deviation from international standards and not notifying with HS codes. All these actions, particularly over the last two decades, have increased the level of protection of their domestic industry under pressure from tariff liberalisation and correspondingly led to a rise in protectionism. Especially when the restrictions put on the imports, they are not adequately notified to the WTO. Information asymmetry (of various forms like – the WTO notifications without trade linkage, non-standardised approach to market access, non-codex MRL standards etc.,) is one of the biggest challenges to overcome when it comes to addressing the menace of non-tariff measure created mainly by the SPS and TBT measures. This paper attempts to bring to the forefront some of the imbalances in the global trading arena that have co-existed along with the WTO led tariff alone liberalisation efforts since 1995. To do this, we have analysed ten players in the global arena, considering various strategic consideration for India. In the paper, we have attempted to bridge this by providing what exactly is the level of requirements across ten countries in terms of active ingredients MRL standards. To elaborate on this issue, we have done the mapping of maximum residual limits (MRL) standards on active ingredients as provided by the Global MRL Database for ten countries alongside Codex standards (international). An analysis of the stringency test performed to quantify a comparison MRL standards scenario vis-a-vis the Codex standards for ten countries. The paper highlights the growing importance of MRL standards on active ingredients in determining global players in agricultural exports. This paper also analyses the MRL standards faced by top 33 agricultural products of India in nine markets. Further, there is an attempt to analyse the interface of tariff liberalisation (MFN) with MRL-based SPS standards, which are dominantly present “behind the border”.

This article examines efforts by member states of the World Trade Organization (WTO) to modify international trade laws to further accommodate public food stockholding for food security programmes operated by developing countries. While WTO members have negotiated a temporary Peace Clause to minimise the threat of a trade dispute for countries whose public food stockholding violates their international trade commitments, negotiations to modify existing WTO law have been fraught with political discord. I argue that states are using the WTO’s negotiating function to address perceived conflicts between international trade law and national food security goals rather than pursuing a solution through legal adjudication. The case of public food stockholding reveals important dynamics about the WTO-food security relationship that are overlooked by approaches primarily concerned with supra-national constraints on national policy and the fragmentation of international law.

This paper aims to analyze how developing countries can take full advantage of international trade arrangements and apply the principles and rules of special and differential treatment in the WTO rules of international trade in the context of agricultural sector. This research applied normative legal research as a method that refers to legal norms to understand the application of legal norms to present facts, changing circumstances. This method is also purposively to offer potential solutions to resolve concrete societal issues in order to understand the application of legal norms. The purpose includes to analyze the WTO agricultural agreement by showing the importance of special and different treatment in the context of international trade. This study revealed that there have been a number of special and differential treatment arrangements under Agreement on Agriculture set out in a number of articles. The existence of arrangements concerning special and differential treatment in Agreement on Agriculture (AoA) is expected to provide benefits between all participating countries. The provision provides the obligation for developed countries to pay full attention to the special needs and different conditions of developing countries. This rule includes the recognition of the existing differentiation among WTO members and treatment for all developing member countries. The AoA is implemented by giving more emphasis on agricultural sector, and giving rural development priorities as a main basis for agriculture.

The variable import levy for corn imports in the European Union aims to support European producers by insulating domestic prices from low international prices. Such price-insulating policies have been associated with an increase in global market volatility. Eliminating these distortions has been one of the key issues in international negotiations on agricultural trade liberalization, e.g., the commitment of WTO member states to follow the principle of tariffication as part of the Uruguay Round Agreement on Agriculture. Nevertheless, the Blair House Agreement effectively allowed the EU to maintain a variable import levy regime for grain imports, although the magnitude of this levy is substantially smaller than in the past. Notwithstanding that this policy has been a cornerstone of the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy, empirical evidence on the magnitude of its effects on price volatility is largely missing. This paper employs a multivariate asymmetric volatility model to assess these effects on domestic and foreign corn markets, using Argentina – a large exporter of corn – as an example. In line with the relevant theoretical literature, we find empirical evidence for the 2002–2017 period that the variable import levy reduced corn price volatility in the EU market, while significantly increasing volatility to the same extent in Argentina. In a distorted sense, the import levy of the EU has thus been a success, as its variable application rate has stabilized prices in the EU domestic market. However, our results show that this policy has merely shifted price volatility abroad since it has led to increases in price volatility in Argentina. A less distortionary policy to target the problems of agricultural price volatility should shift its focus away from direct price interventions. For instance, domestic policies that improve farmers’ ability to cope with price-related risks would avoid the negative effects of domestic price stabilization in foreign countries.

Urgency of the research. The article describes the practical aspects of the fish policy, its impact to public food providing in Ukraine and in the world. The proposals of fisheries regulation are considered in the context of the global food system and functioning of national aquaculture and fish products. Target setting. The article aims at studying the problems of fish policy and fisheries functioning. It promotes the development of methodological foundations for solving the problem of food products market. Actual scientific researches and issues analysis. The analyze of fish and seafood products markets are in the focus of many leading scientists and economists: T. Sigbjorn, F. Asche, B. Belton, S. H. Thilsted, N. M. Vdovenko, Y. Sharylo, K. O. Ribalchenko and many others authors. Uninvestigated parts of general matters defining. The lack of focus on the problems of increasing the competitiveness of the fisheries and aquaculture in Ukraine is an example of untapped opportunities that must be implemented to ensure healthy nutrition and food security. The research objective is to study the markets of fisheries products, identifying deficiencies fishing policy in the context of globalization and the development of proposals on food security of the population. The statement of basic materials. Globally, aquaculture is a young sector of the agricultural sector, which is experiencing a period of growth over the past 50 years. World aquaculture production is divided into categories: aquaculture in inland waters and mariculture. Fisheries is on five levels: a) the access to the markets of non-agricultural goods (NAMA); b) agreement on subsidies and compensation measures (ASCM); c) trade and environment, especially environmental protection agreements (MEA); d) agreement on antidumping (ADA); e) general agreement on trade services (GATS). The regulation of international trade in fisheries and aquacultures are complicated by the fact that fish products are not subject of Agreement on Agriculture of the WTO. The main piece of legislation that defines the priority objectives in the field of fisheries is European Regulation "On the Common Fish Policy". Conclusions. Fisheries and aquaculture in inland waters is often underestimated during fo planning future development, land and water using and in decision-making process at the state level. It is practice advisable to consider the global goals of the World Health Organization to improve nutrition by 2025. To this goal, the future need to develop a mechanism of monitoring of global priorities and sustainable fisheries as food products in all its forms that would find opportunities to solve them in the futur

Mega-regional trade agreements (MRTAs) have appeared in response to the prolonged stagnation of the multilateral trading system ruled by the World Trade Organization (WTO). Although this issue has stimulated research in international integration, the specifics of MRTAs have not yet been sufficiently investigated. This article therefore assesses the multilateralization potential of regional commitments using the example of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). It includes commitments in market access liberalization made in regional trade agreements (RTAs) and in intraregional agricultural trade liberalization under the TPP. The central research problem is to identify the regional liberalization commitments that might be promoted to the level of the WTO. The authors use the methodology devised by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development for assessing the potential multilateralization. RTA and MRTA commitments are grouped in two policy areas: WTO-plus (going beyond the normal provisions of the WTO) and WTO-beyond (dealing with issues going beyond the WTO). The TTP is scrutinized in the context of intraregional agricultural trade liberalization. MRTAs can raise regional commitments to the global level because of their large membership, regulatory transparency and high levels of implementation. The multilateralization of regional agreements is expected in services and investments as well as in various aspects of technical regulation. The key features of implementing RTA’s WTO-plus and WTO-beyond commitments in intraregional agricultural trade are discussed. Most RTAs have liberalized tariffs beyond the WTO Agreement on Agriculture (WTO-plus), but only a few have strengthened disciplines in non-tariff barriers and implemented WTO-beyond commitments for export restrictions and export subsidies. The TPP parties are a diverse group in terms of involvement in global agricultural trade and applied tariffs on agriculture and food. The TPP provides the record in eliminating tariffs for agricultural products while keeping a number of exceptions for sensitive products and long implementation periods. Agricultural market liberalization under the TPP is achieved mostly through eliminating tariffs than by renewing non-tariff barriers. The TPP parties share the objective of implementing WTO commitments by supporting the global agricultural trade reform on export subsidies and export bans, and agree to incorporate WTO-plus and WTO-beyond obligations.

The WTO has delivered policy outcomes that are very different from those likely to emerge out of the recent wave of preferential trade agreements (PTAs). Should economists see this as an efficient institutional hand-off, where the WTO has carried trade liberalization as far as it can manage, and is now passing the baton to PTAs to finish the job? We survey a growing economics literature on international trade agreements and argue on this basis that the WTO is not passé. Rather, and subject to some caveats, our survey of research to date suggests that the WTO warrants strong support while a more cautious view of PTAs seems appropriate. (JEL F13, F14, K33, N70)

This memorandum is a redacted version of a confidential research paper on export restriction negotiations in relation to food security under the auspices of the World Trade Organization (WTO). The complete version of this paper has two components: the first provides a sketch of the existing legal framework and negotiation proposals on export restriction; the second provides negotiation proposals. Due to confidentiality considerations, only the first component of analysis is publicly available and presented here. This memorandum is organized into three parts. The first part elaborates on the most relevant WTO treaties, namely the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 (GATT 1994) and the Agreement on Agriculture (AoA). It discusses how ambiguity in the terms in these treaties poses challenges to effective regulation of export restriction. The second part presents proposals from several WTO Members that seek to clarify the ambiguities or fill the void in the existing regulatory schemes. The third part discusses regional trade treaties, including Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA), and Trans- Pacific Partnership (TTP), along with other less prominent WTO agreements.

Several loopholes lie in the domestic subsidy provisions under the Agreement on Agriculture (AoA) which tell upon the health of the agricultural sector of India. Classification of subsidies deliberately favours developed country members by providing them with backdoor-protection mechanism for their agriculture through manipulation of subsidy cuttings and at the same time increasingly corners the weak members of the World Trade Organization (WTO) including India while fulfilling commitments. It also threatens the Indian food security programmes. Agricultural prospects of the country will be further worsened if the developed country members use their policy space to their fullest extent. The domestic subsidy provisions will continue to limit the potential gains of India from its agriculture unless the necessary revision in the provisions is done. The Peace Clause is neither a permanent solution nor a solution ensuring any legal rights. Increase in production efficiency of the Indian agriculture through technological upgradation and side-by-side exertion of continuous pressure jointly by India and other developing country members for necessary revision can help India get rid of the situation of slowdown in its agriculture.

The weave of global free market concept is near to death now. Hope for the free market trade was initiated by the World Trade Center (WTO) under its inspiring agreements as a part of multilateral trade negotiations. Several rounds of WTO showed light for free movement of goods, services even manpower from least developing countries to the developed markets. WTO was successful to negotiate a long list of agreements like Agreement on Agriculture, Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures, Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade, Agreement on Trade Related Investment Measures, Agreement on Anti-Dumping, Agreement on Customs Valuation, Agreement on Pre-shipment Inspection, Agreement on Rules of Origin, Agreement on Import Licensing Procedures, Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures, Agreement on Safeguards, General Agreement on Trade in Services, Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights, Agreement on Government Procurement, and Trade Facilitation Agreement etc. within last three decades. But major challenge bring forward while the agreements started to be enforce in practice. First attract was led by USA who refuses to implement DFQFMA to the LDCs and introduced a condition of 97% products, they had selected these 97% so list of products so comprehensively for the countries that all major export items of the LDC countries like Bangladesh went out of 97%. Various counter proposals were placed and standard, compliance and conditions etc. forms of restrictions made the negotiation complex and time consuming.

The article analyses Canada’s compliance with WTO commitments on domestic support of agriculture sector. It examines measures and support levels for the period from 1995 to 2015.

Food security emerged as a major source of political deadlock in the WTO Doha Round negotiations. Concerns about food security only intensified at the WTO following the 2008 Global Food Crisis, with the Bali and Nairobi Ministerials revealing polarized views between the US and India on the financing of public food stockholding. These ‘food fights’ at the WTO have attracted significant international media, civil society, and scholarly attention. In this article, I argue that inter-state disagreement on food security is not new or specific to the Doha Round but instead has been a recurrent phenomenon in the multilateral trade system for decades. Employing an historical approach, I show that food security has repeatedly been an item of negotiation in successive GATT negotiating rounds and has been steadily codified in international trade law over time. Today, food security is deeply integrated into the rules of the trade regime, making the WTO an important yet largely unacknowledged institution in global food security governance.

Developing countries demonstrated their collective commitment to address their common economic problems through the formation of the Group of 77 (G77). The coalition has attempted to use its caucus to influence the reform of major international trade and investment policies through the United Nations (UN) fora. Two of such successes were the adoption of the Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) and the Agreement on Agriculture (AoA). These instruments seek to improve Africa’s poverty and food insecurity by making the international market accessible to African farmers and prevent dumping of developed countries’ agricultural commodities through phasing out high subsidies. Yet, to adopt a legal instrument at the UN level is one thing, but to implement it by states is another. These and other agro-trade initiatives have grossly failed to benefit the African rural farmers and combat chronic hunger. Against this backdrop, it is logical to conclude that the G77 has failed to transform its lofty ideal into practice. In summary, while this bloc of nations has previously managed to maintain some degree of solidarity along essential socio-economic issues, the existence of its internal differences remain worrying for the advancement of Africa’s food security agenda

The demise of the Doha round of trade negotiations is often attributed to deadlocks in agricultural negotiations between the developed and the developing world. Why has agriculture been so difficult to negotiate? This article explains North-South agricultural negotiations through the lens of coalition politics, especially the shift from bloc to issue-based diplomacy from the developing world. We argue against the proposition in the negotiation literature that multiple coalitions at the international level allow negotiators room to maneuver. Our study shows that bloc coalitions in fact allowed for compromise more than issue-based coalitions in agriculture, which are often supported by strong domestic constituencies. Empirically, the article focuses on the Uruguay Round when the North and South struck an agreement on agriculture and the Doha Round, which remains deadlocked. The article also provides an in-depth case study of India’s agricultural interests and its food security program in the context of thewto.

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to examine the US crop insurance programs in the context of domestic support disciplines under the World Trade Organization (WTO). Crop insurance has become an integral part of many domestic support programs, not just in developed countries, but in important emerging markets as well. An often-cited impetus for the growth in insurance program is the potential treatment of such programs as exempt from WTO reduction commitments. Design/methodology/approach – A detailed examination of the so-called “green box provisions” of the Uruguay Round Agreement on Agriculture is presented with particular emphasis on eligibility criteria for crop yield and revenue insurance programs. Findings – While WTO rules potentially shield green box policies from reduction, few developed countries have notified agricultural insurance policies under Annex 2. Moreover, crop insurance programs have been challenged in recent WTO dispute settlement cases and domestic countervailing duty investigations. Originality/value – The paper presents a unique perspective on a program which has become the largest single farm program in the USA.

Trafficking in drugs is a global problem. The legal response to the challenge of trafficking in drugs is found in harsh penalties usually founded in direct imprisonment for extended periods of time. The worldwide trend towards imprisoning drug traffickers, and indeed drug users, is mimicked in South Africa. This submission examines the sentencing or penal effects of the drug Nyaope, which was included in Schedule I and II of the South African Drugs and Drug Trafficking Act 140 of 1992 (Hereinafter the Drugs and Drug Trafficking Act.), in 2014. The effect of the inclusion is that Nyaope users and traffickers are now punished in the same manner as any other traffickers namely, through direct imprisonment. This submission argues that the inclusion of Nyaope and the resultant effect on sentencing is an example of net widening and results all too often in a one size fits all (The phrase ‘One size fits all’ literally describes commercial products tailored for suitability in all instances. It has since extended to describing effects of methods and measures upon applications, hence its adoption in several fields interpretations including law. As a legal term it differentiates general understanding of the application of particular principles to specific practical application. For example, in multilateral trade, it is used to analyse a perspective inscribing commonness in an uncommon or uncompetitive circumstance such as in the rationale behind the imposition of limitations on special and differential treatment principles for developing and least developed countries against developed countries. This article uses this phrase to argue that although the traditionally harsh sentences fit drug traffickers this is not always the case, especially where perpetrators are victims of drug abuse. For literal interpretation, see http://dictionary.cambridge.org/CambridgeDictionaries and http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/one-size-fits-all. For multilateral trade legal perspective, refer to M.M.M. Monyakane, Special and Differential Treatment under the World Trade Organisation (WTO) with Specific Reference to the Application of the WTO Agreement on Agriculture, Dissertation in partial fulfillment of the LLM degree in Mercantile Law, University of the Free State South Africa http://etd.uovs. ac.za/ETD-db/theses/available/etd-09132006-92208/unrestricted/MonyakaneMMME. pdf 2005,75; as well as S. Michael, ‘One Size Fits All’ An Idea Whose Time Has Come and Gone Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Data Engineering (ICDE 2005) 1084-4627, who explains this concept from a different professional perspective.) approach to the sentencing of drug users and traffickers. This submission uses the previous American practice of using a grid system of sentencing to demonstrate that the inclusion of Nyaope in the Schedules of the Drugs and Drug Trafficking Act has reduced sentencing discretion in a manner not conducive with the limitation clause. The paper argues that the South African approach at present faces the same challenges faced by American courts under the previous grid system of sentencing. The submission argues that the South African approach to sentencing Nyaope users should reflect the principle of fairness and not use an approach which treats all drug traffickers as one and the same for purposes of sentencing.

WTO is a product of Uruguay round of negotiation of world trade and successor organization of GATT.It has lots of agreement regarding agriculture and other parts of the trade but as the developing countries has expecting the positive result on trade of agriculture is not going to fulfill due to deterioration of terms of trade of agriculture products.therefore the true benefit of the formation of WTO is not achieved by the international community in respect of agriculture trade specially the sugar trade of India The obligation and disciplines incorporated in the agreement on agriculture, therefore related to : Increased market access for agricultural trade. Reduce domestic subsidies or domestic support on agricultural trade. Commitments to reduce export subsidies on agricultural products. But developed nations is not fulfilling the above given agreement is also the major setback for free and fair agro trade of the international level.

Since the expiry of the ‘peace clause’ at the end of 2003, it has been unclear which obligations under the WTO SCM Agreement apply to subsidies granted to agricultural products. This is in particular important for export subsidies, which are prohibited under the SCM Agreement, but, to some degree, recognised in the Agriculture Agreement. The matter is regulated by Article 21.1 of the Agriculture Agreement, which has been interpreted by the WTO Appellate Body in different ways, including as an expression of the lex specialis principle. This paper analyses this provision, and considers how it affects different forms of agricultural subsidies. It concludes that it would take an extension of the Appellate Body’s current interpretive framework to save export subsidies from the disciplines of the SCM Agreement.

Trade has long been an axiomatic characteristic of globalization, although international rules governing trade are of more recent vintage. Notably in the post-World War II period, an ever increasing number of countries began negotiating treaties to reduce, first, tariff barriers and, later, non-tariff barriers (government measures of any sort) that could impede the cross-border flow of goods. The rationale, in part, was that countries that became more entwined economically would be less likely to go to war with each other. It wouldn’t be in their own economic interests to do so, or at least that of the firms based within their borders but engaged in transnational trade and dependent upon global supply chains. At first primarily an undertaking of developed (high-income) countries, developing (low and middle-income countries) slowly enjoined in what, in 1995, became the World Trade Organization. The WTO locked in scheduled declines in tariffs (border taxes), albeit with lesser obligations on developing country members (a problematic nomenclature given the vast geographic, economic, and development differences between such countries, but which nonetheless persists within the WTO). Importantly, a slew of new agreements that coincided with the establishment of the WTO also sought to liberalize trade in services (not just goods) (The General Agreement on Trade in Services), create new rules for agricultural trade (Agreement on Agriculture), expand intellectual property rights protections (The Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights), limit trade-distorting government subsidies (Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures), and ensure that government food, health, or environmental regulations would not pose an unnecessary barrier to trade (the Technical Barriers to Trade and the Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures Agreements). Outside of the WTO system, bilateral or regional investment treaties granting special rights to foreign investors to sue governments for actions perceived to affect the value of their investment (such as direct expropriation or passage of new laws and regulations considered ‘tantamount to expropriation’) similarly exploded in number, dispute frequency, and the size of monetary claims. The breadth and depth of these post-1995 Agreements meant that few areas of general public health concern are potentially untouched.

This chapter looks at the WTO agricultural support disciplines and their impact on subsidies that can lead to water overuse or pollution and harm the environment. As the WTO is about trade, the agricultural subsidies are classified according to the degree to which they distort trade, and not according to their impact on the environment. The chapter shows that there is nevertheless some overlap between trade-distorting and environmentally harmful subsidies. Therefore, while limiting trade-distorting support, some of the most environmentally harmful subsidies find themselves also limited. Within those limits however, WTO members are free to pursue different economic, social, and environmental objectives. Depending on the relative importance of each objective, the immediate policy priorities among the members differ. This chapter also shows that while members enjoy significant policy space to pursue their environmental objectives, such space can also be used in a way that may harm the environment.

The WTO Trade Facilitation Agreement 2013 (TFA) has been endorsed by more than 160 members of the WTO by way of Ninth Ministerial Conference held at Bali on 2–6 December, 2013 and has come to effect from 2017. TFA is being taunted as feather in the future prosperity of the WTO especially in the backdrop of virtual demise of Doha Development Agenda and Doha Development Decade (2001). While approving the TFA, the General Council (GC) of WTO took note of the entire gamut of the Bali Package, i.e. trade facilitation, public stockings for food security and package of recommendations for the least developed countries. India initially stalled the TFA by resisting its ratification by demanding the simultaneous resolution of the contentious issue of importance concerning public procurement of food grains for food security. However, due to USA diplomatic endeavors India relented and TFA became a reality. At the same time, GC proposed that a permanent solution has to be found and till then the peace clause of Agreement on Agriculture (AOA) will continue to operate in this area.

The dispute concerns certain market price support measures by China to domestic agricultural producers of wheat, Indica rice, Japonica rice, and corn, which the United States (US) claimed were inconsistent with China's obligations under the WTO Agreement on Agriculture. Specifically, the US considered that China utilized market price measures in the period 2012–2015 to support farmer incomes and increase production of the said agricultural products, but that this support was in excess of China's WTO commitments. At the outset, the Panel found that the support measures for Chinese corn producers had expired, and that there were no factors weighing in favor of making findings on this expired measure. So, no findings were made with respect to this claim.

The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) is a free trade agreement that hopes to eliminate all tariff and non-tariff trade barriers between 12 participating countries. Japan, the fourth-largest trading partner for the United States, is a significant player in the negotiations. Due to cultural and historical significance it is expected that Japan will ask for exclusions on agricultural products, limiting the overall effectiveness of a fully liberalised agreement. Using a computable general equilibrium modelling framework across varying scenarios, we show the difference between the full liberalisation and potential exclusionary scenarios. Estimates show that a 25 per cent reduction in import tariffs on agricultural commodities in Japan results in a difference of net welfare benefits equal to –USD 7 billion, emphasising the importance of these concessions. JEL Classification: F14, F15, Q17

In his 2006 book, Food is Different, Peter Rosset posited we “get agriculture out of the [World Trade Organization] WTO”. This contention, which is the rallying cry for the Food Sovereignty movement, is that the WTO should not have any purview over agriculture and by extension food systems. Getting the WTO out of agriculture encompasses not only dismantling the 1994 Agreement on Agriculture, which governs both global food trade and extends to national food policies, but also nullifying the entire suite of WTO agreements that apply to various aspects of agriculture, including the Agreement on Trade-Related Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS), and the Agreement on Trade-Related Investment Measures (TRIMS) (see Burnett & Murphy, 2014). For activists, policymakers, and scholars who take a firm stance of resistance to the WTO, there is no room for compromise with the institution. From this standpoint, the WTO cannot be transformed into a legitimate space to govern international food trade. The underlying concerns motivating much global civil society resistance to agriculture being governed under the WTO are well documented in the papers in this collection and were discussed at length by participants at the workshop in Waterloo.

This paper elucidates how domestic and external factors have shaped the negotiating policy of the Philippines in bringing about incremental gains not only for its benefit but also for other developing countries during the World Trade Organization (WTO) Agreement on Agriculture Doha Development Round (DDR). The internal factors include the following: (1) executive monopoly of the WTO negotiations; (2) issue-based fragmentation and dispersal of authority; (3) the autonomy and flexibility of the Philippine WTO negotiator; (4) the involvement of civil society in the WTO negotiations, and (4) the central role of the Department of Agriculture as the lead agency in the WTO negotiations. A major reason for this is attributed to an external factor which is the centrality of agriculture as a major WTO issue among developing countries. Other external factors, on the other hand, include the following: (1) the strong solidarity among developing countries and (2) the confinement to particular issues with regard...

This paper is an attempt to analyse the food security issues. It encompasses four sections which are dealing with the, Historical perspectives, National Food Security Bill, WTO Agreement on agriculture and the recent debate which is going around on its success and insufficiency.

The developments of agricultural support policies in Turkey and in the European Union are different from each other. When the EU was applying protectionist policies, Turkey was on the way of liberalising its economy in 1980s. After Uruguay Round (1995), developed countries took steps for reducing protectionist policies in agriculture for the first time. As Turkey and European Union were signatories of the Uruguay Round Agreement on Agriculture, they reduced their support levels. Despite the successful reforms and WTO (World Trade Organization) commitments, support level in the European Union remained high. Only in the last years, producer support estimate had a decreasing trend. Instead, Turkey increased the support policy that requires production and so producer support estimate increased after 2000. While the support level is not as high as in the EU, producer support estimate is at EU and OECD levels in the last years. This paper, so as to contribute to the literature, examines the agricultural support policies and levels in Turkey and in the European Union for better understanding the differences between them. In this regard, the aim of the paper is to develop an approach to comment on the differences in agricultural policies by comparing them and on the protection levels between Turkey and European Union by using Producer Support Estimate of OECD.

Food security is an important issue in the current international agenda, for the 2007-2008 economic crisis contributed to the rise in food prices, increasing their volatility. As a complex topic, the efforts to assuring food security cannot be restricted to national initiatives, demanding rather a comprehensive global policy, involving all the interested actors. In this regard, WTO has a shared responsibility in the fight against hunger and in the promotion of the right to food. Trade is one of the many elements related to food security, and it may be a relevant tool in fostering sustainable practices to achieve such goal. Agriculture negotiations in the WTO are aimed at guaranteeing stable and rule-oriented markets, with the liberalization of the agricultural sector and the elimination of distortive practices. Food security is a non-trade concern that must be taken into consideration in the reform talks of the Agreement on Agriculture. The main question on this matter is whether food security should be sought in WTO through the adoption of trade policies, which requires strengthening the discipline on the use of restrictive measures, or through the enhancement of liberalization and cooperation in multiple levels.