ICTSD » Special products / Special Safeguard Mechanism

G-33 Proposal on the Treatment of SSM provided to the SVEs

Ammad Bahalim — Fri, 06 Feb 2009 13:49:26 +0000

These 2 (two) documents have been sent to the COA-SS Chair as well as to the WTO Secretariat - both (the covering letter attached together with the proposal) to be circulated to the WTO Membership as an official WTO Document (G-33 Communication)

—

The G-33 takes note of documents TN/AG/W/4/Rev.4 and TN/AG/W/7 prepared by Chairman Falconer. The G-33 acknowledges the efforts of the Chairman to find balanced solutions in the agriculture negotiations and would like to express concern, particularly with regard to the issues raised in Paragraph 5(b) of the document TN/AG/W/7 on SSM.

The G-33 reiterates that the SSM must be a mechanism which is suitable for the particular circumstances of their Members and each Members and that limiting the SSM, a priori, as is the intent of some of the proposed modalities, is disadvantageous for its small vulnerable economies (SVEs) Members and incompatible with our level of development.

The G-33 recalls that since July 2008, there have not been any discussions regarding the specific treatment for SVEs on SSM. It was the understanding of the G-33 and its SVEs Members that emphasis would first be on finding a solution for developing countries before proceeding to look at the specific treatment for the SVEs. The G-33 presents this document to emphasize the position of its SVEs Members on various elements of the SSM. This submission is made in pursuance of the mandate in Paragraph 35 of the Doha Ministerial Declaration to frame responses to the trade related issues identified for the fuller integration of the SVEs into the multilateral trading system and in order to address Paragraph 5 (b) and (c) of document TN/AG/W/7 and is without prejudice to its positions on the general solution for other developing countries.

How the current proposals on the SSM in the Doha Impasse Matter for Developing Country Exporters

Ammad Bahalim — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 15:10:27 +0000

Prepared by:

Harry de Gorter, Cornell University

Erika Kliauga, Cornell University

Andre Nassar, ICONE

Breaking the Deadlock on the Special Safeguard Mechanism

Ammad Bahalim — Fri, 28 Nov 2008 10:54:12 +0000

To the surprise of many, the July 2008 mini-Ministerial meeting foundered on the issue of the Special Safeguard Mechanism (SSM), rather than leading to an agreement on modalities for agriculture and for non-agricultural market access. Talks since September have so far failed to find a formula that will allow both importers and exporters to resolve their differences on this controversial issue. ICTSD and the World Bank Institute hope that, by bringing to the table some fresh perspectives and new analysis, negotiators may eventually be able to break the deadlock on this important issue which many have argued is central to the ‘development agenda’ of the Doha Round. The dialogue should therefore be an opportunity to cast fresh light on some of the technical issues surrounding the triggers and remedies for the safeguard, and the implications these may have for trade flows in importing and exporting countries.

Please click here for a full list of ICTSD publications on special products and the special safeguard mechanism.

The Treatment of Special Products: An Analysis of the Empirical Basis for Exempting Products from Tariff Cuts

Ammad Bahalim — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 10:20:24 +0000

Debate over special products has until quite recently focused primarily on the question of how these products will be selected. However, in the last few months, negotiators and policy-makers have increasingly debated the ‘treatment’ of special products: the extent to which these products will be accorded gentler tariff cuts, and in particular the proportion of such products that could be exempted from tariff cuts entirely. In an attempt to establish an empirical basis for the modalities on the treatment of special products, ICTSD asked Riza Bernabe to explore the issues at stake, and to examine the implications of the special product proposals in the chair’s draft text for the achievement of food security, livelihood security and rural development objectives.

Special Products and the Special Safeguard Mechanism

Andrew Aziz — Tue, 18 Mar 2008 09:11:49 +0000

On 1 August 2004, WTO Members agreed on a framework in agriculture which will constitute the basis for the negotiations of full modalities in the next phase of the negotiations (WTO, 2004).

Paragraph 41 of the framework states that: “Developing countries will have the flexibility to designate an appropriate number of products as Special Products, based on criteria of food security, livelihood security and rural development needs.” The text also indicates that the criteria and treatment of special products will be further specified.

In addition, paragraph 42 states that a Special Safeguard Mechanism (SSM) will be established for use by developing countries, the details of which will be developed in the next phase of the negotiations.

No guidance is provided in the framework paper on the criteria for selecting SPs or products to be subject to the SSM. However, in the course of future negotiations, it is inevitable that parameters will be set within which developing countries can select products that will be subject to the Special Product (SP) and SSM modalities.

The purpose of this discussion paper is to provide inputs and raise ideas on a set of criteria within which developing countries might select SPs, building on the criteria of food and livelihood security and rural development identified in Annex A of the July package agreed in the WTO. In addition, the paper is also intended to contribute to discussions on identifying criteria for the selection of products to be covered by the SSM.

For a full list of ICTSD publications on special products and the special safeguard mechanism, please click here.

The need for Special Products and Special Safeguard Mechanisms for agriculture in the WTO:

Andrew Aziz — Tue, 18 Mar 2008 09:09:31 +0000

The 1 August Decision introduced two new ‘pegs’ on which to hang Special and Differential Treatment (SDT) for developing countries in agriculture. They are ‘Special Products’ (SP) and a ‘Special Safeguard Mechanism’ (SSM). But the Decision provides no detail on their scope and use – other than that they appear to be limited to market access commitments. This is left for further negotiations.

If they are to avoid being out manoeuvred as they were in the Uruguay Round (where they largely failed, for example, to take advantage of the possibilities to register possible AMS & SSGs), developing countries need to work out how SP and SSM might support their food security and rural livelihood policies. This is harder than it sounds. Thinking (and policy) on food security has developed a great deal in the past decade; the WTO debates have been left behind. For WTO rules to be framed in a way that is relevant to current concepts of food security, countries need to undertake baseline situation analysis and also scenario analysis to identify how trade rule changes might impact on household food security.

For a full list of ICTSD publications on special products and the special safeguard mechanism, please click here.

Only then will they be in a position either to add detail in further Doha negotiations to the bare concepts set out in the 1 August Decision or to ensure that their own Doha schedules are appropriately framed to be hung on the SDT pegs. It requires trade negotiators and food security specialists to communicate! Analysis is required in three main areas to show how food security and household vulnerability might be affected by the direct and indirect effects of WTO rule change. They are: surges in subsidised food imports, increased competition for products that are especially important for the rural economy, and the effects of tariff cuts on government expenditure in support of household food security.

Implications of the Chair’s Modalities Text for the SSM

Andrew Aziz — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 08:59:35 +0000

The 8 February revision of the chair’s draft ‘modalities’ paper (TN/AG/W/4/Rev.1) contains for the first time an attempt to set out, in legal language, a structure for a ‘special safeguard mechanism’ that developing countries will be able to use to raise tariffs temporarily in the event of import surges or price depressions. The draft text still contains a number of alternative options that have yet to be agreed, however. In order to enable negotiators and policy-makers to better understand the implications of various possible restrictions or flexibilities in the text, ICTSD invited Raul Montemayor of the Free Farmers Federation of the Philippines to present the results of simulations he had conducted on the basis of historical data from six country studies.

Workshop on WTO Negotiations and Nigeria: Negotiation Options in Agriculture, Non-Agricultural Products, Special Products and Special Safeguard Mechanism

Andrew Aziz — Tue, 09 Oct 2007 10:32:11 +0000

The Doha Development Round of negotiations which were launched in 2001 is advancing towards the critical stage of reaching consensus on many of the issues in the agenda. In particular, proposals have been submitted and debated by various negotiating groups in the different areas such as agriculture and non-agricultural products and services. In agriculture and non-agricultural market access (NAMA) negotiations in particular, issues which relate to tariff and non-tariff barriers are in their various stages of finalisation. Before the suspension of negotiations in June 2006, the negotiations in agriculture and NAMA moved towards agreement on tariff reduction modalities, including the coefficients to be applied by developing and developed countries in the adopted simple Swiss formula while the ways to treat countries based on their level of development have been agreed, such as special products and special safeguard mechanisms, sensitive products, among others.

Implication of Proposed Modalities on the Accessibility and Effectiveness of the Special Safeguard Mechanism (SSM)

Andrew Aziz — Fri, 05 Oct 2007 12:07:26 +0000

This dialogue will provide an opportunity for trade negotiators to learn about the findings of a simulation exercise on the special safeguard mechanism, conducted for ICTSD by Mr. Raul Montemayor (Federation of Free Farmers, the Philippines). The simulation was based on data from six country studies, and sought to clarify the extent the proposed special safeguard mechanism (SSM) would be accessible and effective under different negotiating scenarios. The findings of the country studies are also being published in full by ICTSD in a detailed report, as well as summarised in a shorter ‘information note’ which will be available shortly.

Participants

Jonathan Hepburn ICTSD
Frank Valderrama - Mission of Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela
Myrna Huggins - Mission of Trinidad y Tobago
Anne Kamau - Mission of Kenya
Luisa Rodriguez - South Centre
Dayaratna Silva - Mission of Sri Lanka
Chulabhaya Magedaragamage - Mission of Sri Lanka
Jayant Dasgupta - Department of Commerce, India
Agarwal Shailendra Mission of India
Elcinedis Mission of Turkey to the WTO
Kime Jong - Mission of Korea
XUE Jianmin - Mission of China
N. I. Derry Aman - Indonesian Mission
Anu P Mathai - Department of Commerce, GOI, Dehli
Giancarlo Leon - Mission of Peru