wto Agriculture negotiations: implications for the Global South

Abstract

The Doha ‘Development’ Round of trade negotiations at the wto has featured agricultural trade liberalisation as one of its key aims. But developing countries were frustrated with both the process and the content of the agricultural agreement negotiations early on in the round. This prompted these countries, through a number of developing country groupings such as the G-20 and others, to call for changes in the talks to ensure that developing country voices and concerns were heard. Although developing countries were in many ways successful in registering their concerns in the latter half of the negotiations, and have maintained a fairly high degree of cohesion across the Global South, it remains unclear whether this cohesion will last as the uneven impacts of agricultural trade liberalisation become apparent.

Notes

I would like to thank the Social Science and Humanities Research Council of Canada for financial support for this research, the Centre for International Governance Innovation for research support, and Jason May for research assistance. I would also like to thank Gerry Helleiner, John Whalley, Rorden Wilkinson, Robert Wolfe and anonymous reviewers for helpful comments on an earlier draft of this paper. This paper was originally prepared for the workshop ‘Endgame at the wto’, held in Birmingham, UK in November 2005 the edited book that will result from this workshop, The WTO After Hong Kong, will be published by Routledge.

1 Early on in the Doha negotiations, World Bank estimates of the economic gains for developing countries from the Doha Round were around US$500 billion, with about two-thirds of that gain coming from agricultural trade liberalisation. See Frank Ackerman, The Shrinking Gains from Trade: A Critical Assessment of Doha Round Projections, Global Development and Environment Institute Working Paper No 05-01, October 2005.

2 wto, Doha Declaration, 2001, at www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/minist_e?minol_e/mincecl_e.htm.

3 David Balaam, ‘Agricultural trade policy, in B Hocking & S McGuire (eds), Trade Politics, London: Routledge, 2004.

4 Mark Ritchie, ‘Control of trade by multinationals: impact of the Uruguay Round of gatt on sustainable food security’, Development, 4, 1996, pp 40 – 44; and Kevin Watkins, ‘Free trade and farm fallacies: from the Uruguay Round to the World Food Summit’, The Ecologist, 26 (6), 1996, pp 244 – 255.

5 Fatoumata Jawara & Aileen Kwa , Behind the Scenes at the WTO: The Real World of International Trade Negotiations, London: Zed, 2003.

6 Dimitris Diakosawas, The Uruguay Round Agreement on Agriculture in Practice: How Open are oecd Markets?, Paris: oecd, 2001, p 10, at www.oecd.org./dataoecd/54/61/2540717.pdf.

7 oecd, The Uruguay Round Agreement on Agriculture: An Evaluation of Its Implementation in oecd Countries, Paris: oecd, 2001, at www.oecd.org/dataoecd/50/55/1912374.pdf.

8 Diakosawas, The Uruguay Round Agreement on Agriculture in Practice.

9 Sophia Murphy, Ben Lilliston & Mary Beth Lake, wto Agreement on Agriculture: A Decade of Dumping (Minneapolis, MN: iatp, 2005).

10 Oxfam, Rigged Rules and Double Standards: Trade, Globalisation and the Fight Against Poverty, Oxford: Oxfam, 2002, at http://www.maketradefair.com/en/index.php?file=26032002105549.htm.

11 oecd, Agriculture Policies in oecd Countries: Monitoring and Evaluation, Paris: oecd, 2003, p 4, at: http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/25/63/2956135.pdf.

12 M Ataman Aksoy, ‘Global agricultural trade policies’, in M Ataman Aksoy & John C Beghin (eds), Global Agricultural Trade and Developing Countries, Washington, DC: World Bank, 2005, pp 22 – 23.

13 M Ataman Aksoy, ‘The evolution of agricultural trade flows’, in Aksoy & Beghin, Global Agricultural Trade and Developing Countries, pp 47 – 49. See also Tim Josling & Dale Hathaway, ‘This far and no farther? Nudging agricultural reform forward’, International Economics Policy Briefs, No PB04-1, Washington, DC: IIE, 2004, pp 2 – 3.

14 Food and Agriculture Organisation (fao), wto Agreement on Agriculture: The Implementation Experience: Developing Country Case Studies, Rome: fao, 2003.

15 Kym Anderson & Will Martin, ‘Agricultural trade reform and the Doha agenda’, The World Economy, 28 (9), 2005, p 1303.

16 Sophia Murphy & Steve Suppan, Introduction to the Development Box, Winnipeg: International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD), 2003.

17 International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ictsd), ‘Agriculture’, Doha Round Briefing Series: Cancun Update, 2 (2), August 2003, p 2.

18 ictsd, ‘Agriculture: Harbinson circulates first modalities draft’, Bridges Weekly, 12 February 2003, at www.ictsd.org/weekly/03-02-13/story1.htm.

19 ictsd, ‘Agriculture: Harbinson's modalities draft receives mixed reactions’, Bridges Weekly, 19 February 2003, at http://www.ictsd.org/weekly/03-02-19/story2.htm.

20 ictsd, Agriculture Negotiations at the wto: Post-Cancun Outlook Report, Geneva: ictsd, 2003, p 9.

21 wto, wto Negotiations on Agriculture—Poverty Reduction: Sectoral Initiative in Favour of Cotton, Joint Proposal by Benin, Burkina Faso, Chad and Mali, TN/AG/GEN/4, 2003, at http://www.agtradepolicy.org/output/resource/CottonSubmissionWTO.pdf.

22 US – EU Joint Text, 2003, at http://www.agtradepolicy.org/output/resource/EC-US_joint_text_13_Aug_2003.pdf.

23 The original members of the G-20 were: Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, China, Columbia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, India, Mexico, Pakistan, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, South Africa, Thailand and Venezuela. The G-20 was briefly called the G-22 in September 2003 because Kenya and Egypt had joined after the initial text was put forward. As of autumn 2005 the membership of the G-20 includes Argentina, Brazil, Bolivia, Chile, China, Cuba, Egypt, Guatemala, India, Indonesia, Mexico, Nigeria, Pakistan, Paraguay, Philippines, South Africa, Thailand, Tanzania, Uruguay, Venezuela and Zimbabwe.

24 Amrita Narlikar & Rorden Wilkinson, ‘Collapse at the wto: a Cancun post-mortem’, Third World Quarterly, 25 (3), 2004, p 456.

25 Amrita Narlikar & Diana Tussie, ‘The G20 at the Cancun Ministerial: developing countries and their evolving coalitions in the wto’, The World Economy, 27 (7), 2004, pp 947 – 966.

26 Dominican Republic et al, ‘Negotiations on agriculture: Joint Text by Dominican Republic, Honduras, Kenya, Nicaragua, Panama and Sri Lanka for the Cancun Ministerial Declaration’, 19 August 2003, at www.agtradepolicy.org/output/resource/LMG%20Joint%20Text2.pdf.

27 As of August 2005 the group's members were: Antigua and Barbuda, Barbados, Belize, Benin, Botswana, China, Cote d'Ivoire, Congo, Cuba, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Grenada, Guatemala, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Jamaica, Kenya, Korea, Madagascar, Mauritius, Mongolia, Mozambique, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Pakistan, Panama, The Philippines, Peru, Saint Kitts, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Senegal, Sri Lanka, Suriname, Tanzania, Trinidad and Tobago, Turkey, Uganda, Venezuela, Zambia and Zimbabwe.

28 wto, ‘Consolidated African Union/acp/ldc Position On Agriculture’, WT/MIN(03)/W/17, September 2003.

29 International Food and Agricultural Trade Policy Council (ifatpc), Twenty Five Ways to Improve the Derbez Draft on Agriculture, Washington, DC: ifatpc, 2004, at: www.agritrade.org/Doha/Derbez/Derbez.htm.

30 ictsd, Agriculture Negotiations at the wto , p 29.

31 Walden Bello & Aileen Kwa, ‘G20 leaders succumb to divide-and-rule tactics: the story behind Washington's triumph in Geneva’, Focus on the Global South, 2004, at www.focusweb.org.

32 ictsd, Agriculture Negotiations at the wto , p 37.

33 Robert Zoellick, ‘A strategic opportunity for trade’, speech given at the French Institute of International Relations, 13 May 2004.

34 Goh Chien Yen, ‘Members still in a listening mode: report on the agriculture week of negotiations in wto, 22 – 26 March 2004’, Third World Network, 4 April 2004, at http://www.twnside.org.sg/title2/twninfo111.htm.

35 wto, Doha Work Programme: Decision Adopted by the General Council August 1, 2004, WT/L/579(2004), at http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dda_e/ddadraft_31jul04_e.pdf; and ictsd, ‘Agriculture negotiations at the wto: the July package and beyond’, Quarterly Intelligence Report, 12 April 2005.

36 Jennifer Clapp, ‘wto agricultural trade battles and food aid’, Third World Quarterly, 25 (8), 2004, pp 1439 – 1452.

37 Daniel Pruzin, ‘Former Brazilian ag official criticizes Brazil/G-20 concession on Blue Box support’, International Trade Reporter, 20 May 2004.

38 For details on all three pillars, see wto, Doha Work Programme.

39 Bello & Kwa, ‘G20 leaders succumb to divide-and-rule tactics’.

40 Gary Yerkey, ‘Brazilian minister says wto waiting for US, EU to move first in trade talks’, International Trade Reporter, 29 September 2005, p 1537; and G-20, ‘New Delhi Declaration’, March 2005, at www.agtradepolicy.org/output/resource/G20_delhi_declaration.pdf.

41 Daniel Pruzin, ‘EU signals movement on domestic support, seeks significant cuts from United States’, International Trade Reporter, 29 September 2005; and Daniel Pruzin, ‘EU tweaks wto farm subsidy proposal, offers 70% cut in Amber Box support’, International Trade Reporter, 13 October 2005.

42 Daniel Pruzin, ‘US unveils ag subsidy proposal for wto, would cut US Amber Box support by 60%’, International Trade Reporter, 13 October 2005.

43 Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy (iatp), ‘The US wto agriculture proposal of October 10’, 2005, at http://www.tradeobservatory.org/library.cfm?refid=77195.

44 Daniel Pruzin, ‘G-20 offers tariff, domestic support proposals for wto farm trade negotiations’, International Trade Reporter, 13 October 2005.

45 G-33, ‘G-33 Press Statement’, Geneva, 11 October 2005, at www.agtradepolicy.org/output/resource/G33StatementOct05.pdf.

46 acp, ‘acp proposal on market access in agriculture’, October 2005, at www.agtradepolicy.org/output/resource/ACP-MarketAccess_.pdf.

47 Martin Khor, ‘Reactions to EU proposal range from “disappointing” to “unacceptable”’, South-North Monitor (suns) #5906, 1 November 2005.

48 ictsd, ‘Revised ministerial draft to be issued today’, Bridges Daily Update on the 6th wto Ministerial Conference, 17 December 2005.

49 wto, Doha Work Programme: Draft Ministerial Declaration, 18 December, 2005.

50 Oxfam, A Round for Free: How Rich Countries are Getting a Free Ride on Agricultural Subsidies at the wto , Oxfam Briefing Paper 76, June 2005, p 36, at http://www.oxfam.org.uk/what_we_do/issues/trade/bp76_modalities_and_dumping.htm.

51 See Timothy Wise, ‘The wto's development crumbs’, Foreign Policy in Focus, 23 January 2006.