Logo only.gif (2468 bytes)

map.jpg (12413 bytes)

                                                     


The International Food and Agricultural Trade Policy Council (IPC) presents:

helvdoha.jpg (10488 bytes)

Achieving the Doha Development Agenda


Seminar Two

10 September, 2002
9:30 - 13:30

Domestic Supports:
Political Environment for Reform in OECD Countries,
Addressing the Concerns of Developing Countries and Options for the WTO Negotiations


Seminar One

Seminar Three

Seminar Series Proceedings

 

Agenda                   
 

9:30 - 10:45 

SESSION ONE:
HOW WILL THE DOMESTIC POLITICAL ENVIRONMENT IN THE UNITED STATES, THE EUROPEAN UNION AND JAPAN AFFECT THEIR POSITIONS IN THE WTO?

Robbin Johnson, Piet Bukman and Hiroshi Shiraiwa

The Uruguay Round Agreement on Agriculture brought domestic subsidies under international trade rules. However, while the URAA encouraged some OECD countries to shift their support from Amber to Green Box policies, the total level of support to OECD farmers remains significant. Many voices are calling for further reductions in domestic support under the Doha Negotiations. In recent months, the United States has enacted a new farm bill, announced its negotiating proposal and passed Trade Promotion Authority. The European Commission has announced plans to shift support from Amber to Green Box payments, a proposal that has met with resistance in some member states. The Japanese government is considering further reforms in Japan’s agricultural policy regime. What is the political environment for further domestic policy reform in key OECD countries? How will the domestic political environment affect them in the WTO negotiations on domestic supports?

11:00 - 12:15

SESSION TWO:
HOW SHOULD DEVELOPING COUNTRY CONCERNS BE ADDRESSED?

Luisa Bernal, Robert Thompson, and Panos Konandreas

What are the pros and con’s of creating another box? What are the possible contents of a Development Box? Is a Development Box necessary or could the Green Box be revised to address developing country concerns? Should a "Development Box" be available to any country eligible for S & D, or should it be limited to "Least Developed Countries"? Should developing countries be allowed a longer time frame to implement domestic policy commitments? Should developing countries be allowed a higher de minimis level for non-commodity specific support? How should macroeconomic issues, such as hyperinflation and exchange rate depreciation, be addressed? What types of disciplines on OECD countries would best address developing country concerns?

12:15 - 1:30

SESSION THREE:
HOW SHOULD DOMESTIC SUPPORTS BE DISCIPLINED IN THE DOHA ROUND?

Mike Gifford, Rolf Moehler, and Magdi Farahat

Should limits be placed on Green Box policy expenditures? Should the definition of Green Box policies be expanded, or narrowed? Should countries be allowed to address "non-trade concerns" through Green Box measures only, or through Amber Box Measures? How should Amber Box policies be disciplined? Should Amber Box limits be made commodity specific? What should be done with the Blue Box? Should the Peace Clause be renewed, to avoid politically sensitive challenges to domestic policies, which could undermine support for the WTO? 0r should the Peace Clause be applied only to Green box policies, and allowed to expire for Amber Box policies to exert discipline on domestic spending? How will countries that exceed their Amber Box limits be disciplined? How does the recent US proposal address these issues? How does the EU’s CAP reform address them?

This seminar is funded by the Department of International Development, United Kingdom and the Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Department of International Cooperation