WTO members review farm policies, discuss food security, transfer of technology

The Chair of the Committee, Mr. Kjetil Tysdal of Norway, facilitated the discussions.

Updates on agriculture market developments, food security

Members heard updates from the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), the World Bank, the World Food Programme, and the International Grains Council (IGC) regarding recent market developments and food insecurity. International organizations were invited to the Committee to share experiences in a follow-up to the MC12 declaration on the response to the COVID-19 pandemic and the MC12 declaration on food insecurity.

The FAO highlighted persistent severe food insecurity, particularly exacerbated by the conflict in the Gaza region. In 2023, 9.2% of the world population, totalling 281.6 million people in 59 countries, suffered from chronic hunger, an increase of 24 million since 2022. The FAO introduced its activities on different fronts to alleviate the situation.

The World Bank briefed on its new Global Challenges Program on Food and Nutrition Security, with one of its main objectives being to deliver a greater impact in addressing food insecurity through a focus on prevention and preparedness and changing the way food is produced. To achieve that goal, it will not only mobilize a dedicated fund but also encourage governments to repurpose the annual spending of USD 600 billion on farm support to better respond to food insecurity.

The IGC highlighted changes in agricultural commodity markets, noting price declines in main crops such as soybeans, maize and wheat, while rice prices remain high. It also noted the resilience and agility of the global logistics sector, which ensured the supply of crops despite disruptions in the Suez and Panama Canals.

The Chair reported on positive developments in the Committee’s work on food security and commended members for the successful adoption of recommendations for least developed countries (LDCs) and net food-importing developing countries (NFIDCs) at a special meeting on 17 April (G/AG/38). He said the Committee had exchanged initial ideas in the informal meeting this week on how best to follow up on the agreed recommendations. The Chair informed the Committee that he has written a letter to the Chair of the Working Group on Trade, Debt and Finance regarding the Committee’s request for the Working Group to examine the specific concerns raised by LDCs and NFIDCs in the food security discussions about the financing of food imports.

The Chair also reported on the latest discussions regarding the regular review of the list of NFIDCs within the framework of the follow-up to the 1994 Marrakesh Decision. He noted the lack of a common understanding on what the CoA’s review of the NFIDCs list should encompass and indicated his readiness to hold further meetings to facilitate discussions.

Review of agricultural policies

A total of 225 questions were raised regarding individual notifications and specific implementation matters. This peer review process provides an opportunity for members to address any specific issues related to the implementation of commitments as set out in the Agreement on Agriculture. Twenty-six of these specific implementation matters were raised for the first time in the Committee, while 13 were recurring issues from previous Committee meetings.

The 26 new items concerned: Angola’s tax on beverages; Argentina’s export license policy; China’s various farm subsidies; low-carbon measures in Costa Rica; export suspension in Côte d’Ivoire; a new tax on transfers in the Dominican Republic; the European Union’s environmental provisions and measures on Russian exports; India’s new agricultural trading enterprise; Jordan’s export policy; export bans in Malawi and Morocco; beverage measures in Mozambique; Namibia’s import restrictions; export restrictions in Pakistan; Panama’s import restrictions; multiple farm policies in the United States; and a climate adaptation policy in Uruguay.

As many as 182 individual notifications have been submitted to the Committee since the previous meeting in November 2023 relating to market access, domestic support, export competition and export restrictions as well as notifications in the context of the NFIDC Decision

All questions submitted for the meeting are available in G/AG/W/246. All questions and replies received are available in the WTO’s Agriculture Information Management System (AG IMS).

Counter notification

The United States and Australia presented a joint counter notification (G/AG/W/245) regarding India’s sugarcane subsidies. Their study shows that over the four-year period from 2018-19 to 2021-22, India provided market price support (government-subsidized prices) on sugarcane totalling between 92 and 101 per cent of its value of production for sugarcane, vastly in excess of the limits set out in the Agreement on Agriculture (10 per cent of the total value of production of a supported product).

They claimed that India failed to report any of these subsidies in its past notifications since 1995. Given India’s significance in global sugar production and trade, this trend is highly concerning and consequential. They said the counter notification was based on a dispute against India in 2018, which was ruled on in 2021 but remained unresolved after India appealed the case to the paralyzed Appellate Body.

The counter notification gained support from several members. They urged India to submit timely notifications on the subsidies and expressed continued interest in following up on the case. There was also a strong call to reinstate the Appellate Body function by the end of 2024 to resolve such cases.

India refuted the claims in the counter notification, stating that its system of “Fair and Remunerative Prices” or “State-Advised Prices” for sugarcane did not constitute market price support. India explained that the Indian federal and state governments neither paid for nor procured sugarcane from farmers, as all purchases were made by private sugar mills — hence, this information was not included in its notifications of domestic support. India also refused to consider the methodology used in the 2018 dispute as the basis for discussion, given that India has appealed the case to the Appellate Body.

 India also urged Australia and the US to prioritize the timely submission of their delayed domestic support notifications rather than file counter notifications for other members. 

Third Triennial Review of the Nairobi Decision on Export Competition

Regarding the mandated third triennial review of the Nairobi Decision on Export Competition in 2024, the Chair said that members have conducted preliminary discussions about potential topics and possible outcomes of the review. Members supported the idea of a more streamlined and consolidated approach to export subsidy notification and transparency requirements as a possible deliverable of the review, building upon ongoing discussions within the Committee.

The discussions focussed on  a revised draft decision (RD/AG/118/Rev.1), which proposes updating and streamlining the export competition notification and transparency requirements taking into account the obligations stemming from the Nairobi Decision on Export Competition., Members also emphasized the need to take into account the relevant recommendations adopted by the CoA under the food security work programme (G/AG/38).

The Secretariat made a presentation providing an overview of  the implementation of the Nairobi Decision on Export Competition, which notably requires all members to respond to the export competition questionnaires (ECQs) since the beginning of 2021, following the expiration of the grace period for developing members. The Secretariat also expressed its readiness to meet members’ further requests for training and assistance in implementing the Nairobi Decision.

The Chair noted that members made some concrete suggestions on the review and indicated his intention to advance work on the draft decision through additional informal meetings or consultations before the summer break.

Transparency, functioning of the Committee on Agriculture

The Chair said members discussed, in an informal gathering on 21 May, how to make progress on a recommendation agreed under the first triennial review of the operation of the Bali Decision on Tariff Rate Quota (TRQ) administration. The recommendation relates to members’ reporting of administration requirements under paragraphs 2-5 of the Decision (G/AG/36). The Chair noted members’ readiness to engage in a text-based discussion to review the relevant TRQ notification format and expressed his willingness to circulate a draft to facilitate further discussions through additional informal meetings or consultations.

At the same informal meeting, members reviewed the ongoing work aimed at improving the functioning of the Committee, commending the exemplary work done by the Committee. They noted the WTO Secretariat’s revised compilation in RD/AG/111/Rev.1, which contains members’ specific suggestions for improvements in the work of the Committee and the follow-up actions taken. They also drew attention to the practices of other bodies, including the Council for Trade in Goods

Other matters

Members welcomed the rich discussion at the 21 May thematic session on technology transfer. At the meeting, experts from international organizations and agencies, and member governments shared their ongoing work and experiences.  Participants looked at the technology needs of smallholders and discussed concrete suggestions for capacity building. The Secretariat asked members to contribute ideas for the next session, which is tentatively scheduled for September in the margins of the next Committee meeting.

Members also brainstormed on the proposed alteration of the product definitions in RD/AG/129 for the Secretariat Annual Background Note in the G/AG/W/32 series.

Next meeting

The next meeting of the Committee on Agriculture is scheduled for 25-26 September 2024.

Share

Reach us to explore global export and import deals