Annex 2 Agreement on Agriculture
The 1958 Haberler Report stressed the importance of minimising the impact of agricultural subsidies on competitiveness and recommended replacing price support with additional direct payments that are not linked to production, anticipating the discussion of Green Box subsidies. It is only more recently, however, that this change has become the heart of the reform of the global agricultural system. [1] Export subsidies are the third pillar. The 1995 Agreement on Agriculture required industrialized countries to reduce export subsidies by at least 36% (by value) or 21% (by volume) within six years. For developing countries, the agreement provided for reductions of 24 per cent (in value) and 14 per cent (in volume) over a ten-year period. Special and differentiated treatment provisions also apply to developing countries that are members. This includes purchases and sales of food security stocks at administered prices, provided that the subsidy to producers is included in the calculation of the AMS. Developing countries are allowed to distribute subsidized, non-targeted food to meet the needs of the urban and rural poor. Also excluded for developing countries are investment subsidies, which are generally available for agriculture, and agricultural input subsidies, which are generally available to low-income and resource-poor farmers in these countries. (b) The impact of reduction commitments on world trade in agriculture; For domestic support policy, subject to reduction commitments, total support granted in 1986-88, as measured by the total level of support (Total AmS), should be reduced by 20% in industrialized countries (13.3% in developing countries). Reduction commitments refer to the total amount of aid and not to individual raw materials. Policies equivalent to domestic support under product-specific and non-product-specific categories, i.e.
less than 5 per cent of the value of production for industrialized countries and less than 10 per cent for developing countries, are also excluded from any reduction commitment. Policies that have little or no trade-distorting effect on production are excluded from any reduction obligation (“green box” – Annex 2 of the Agreement on Agriculture www.wto.org. The list of excluded Green Box policies includes policies that provide services or benefits to agriculture or the rural community, public stocks for food security purposes, national food aid and certain decoupled payments to producers, including direct payments to programmes limiting production, provided certain conditions are met. Policies in this category include expenditures (or loss of revenue) related to programs that provide services or benefits to agriculture or the rural community. They do not include direct payments to producers or processors. Those programmes, which include, but are not limited to, the following list, shall meet the general criteria set out in paragraph 1 and the specific conditions set out below: obligation to comply with specific binding commitments in each of the following areas: market access; domestic support; export competition; and reaching agreement on sanitary and phytosanitary issues; 2. Members undertake to work towards the development of internationally agreed disciplines for the granting of export credits, export credit guarantees or insurance programmes and, by mutual agreement of such disciplines, to provide export credits, export credit guarantees or insurance programmes only in accordance with them. In the 1980s, government payments to agricultural producers in developed countries had resulted in large crop surpluses, which were dumped on the world market through export subsidies and lowered food prices. The fiscal burden of protective measures has increased, both as a result of lower revenues from import duties and increased domestic spending. Meanwhile, the global economy has entered a cycle of recession and the perception that open markets could improve economic conditions has led to calls for a new round of multilateral trade negotiations. [2] The round would open up markets for high-tech services and goods and, ultimately, lead to much-needed efficiency gains. To include developing countries, many of which were “applicants” for new international disciplines, agriculture, textiles and clothing were added to the big deal.
[1] (d) these products are identified by the symbol ST Annex 5 of Part I, Section I-B, of a Member`s Schedule to the Marrakesh Protocol as subject to special treatment reflecting factors of non-trade concern such as food security and environmental protection; After more than 7 years of negotiations, the Uruguay Round of multilateral trade negotiations were concluded on 15 December 1993 and officially ratified in Marrakesh, Morocco, in April 1994. The WTO Agreement on Agriculture was one of many agreements negotiated during the Uruguay Round. 1. These measures include quantitative restrictions on imports, variable import levies, minimum import prices, discretionary import licences, non-tariff measures maintained by state trading enterprises, voluntary export restrictions and similar border measures other than normal customs duties, regardless of whether the measures provided for by country-specific derogations from the provisions of GATT 1947 are maintained or not, but measures maintained under balance of payments or other general provisions – non-agricultural provisions of GATT 1994 or other multilateral trade agreements listed in Annex 1A to the WTO Agreement. Products falling within the scope of this Agreement shall normally be considered as part of agriculture, with the exception of fishery and forestry products, as well as rubber, jute, sisal, abaca and coconut. The exact coverage of the product can be found in the legal text of the agreement on the website www.wto.org. In accordance with Article 20 of the Convention on Agriculture (AoA), negotiations on the continuation of the agricultural reform process will begin one year before the end of the implementation period. As the implementation period for industrialized countries reached its peak at the end of 2000, negotiations on the Agreement on Agriculture began in January 2000. The agreement has been criticized by civil society groups for reducing tariff protection for smallholder farmers, an important source of income in developing countries, while allowing rich countries to further subsidize domestic agriculture. 2. In accordance with the Agreement on the Mid-term Review, official support measures to promote the development of agriculture and rural areas shall form an integral part of the development programmes of developing countries, investment subsidies for agriculture in developing countries generally available to developing countries and subsidies for agricultural inputs shall include low-income inputs. or resource-poor producers in developing countries, with the exception of domestic support.
Reduction commitments that would otherwise apply to these measures, as well as domestic support to producers in developing country members to promote diversification through the cultivation of illicit narcotic drugs. It is not necessary to include domestic support that meets the criteria set out in this paragraph in the calculation of a Member`s CURRENT TOTAL DESME. Noting that commitments under the reform agenda should be made equitably among all Members, taking into account non-trade concerns, including food security and the need to protect the environment; Recalling that special and differential treatment of developing countries is an integral part of the negotiations, and taking into account the possible negative impact of the implementation of the Reform Agenda on least developed and net food-importing developing countries, these include tariffs, tariff reductions and access options. .
