Bridges Trade BioRes • Volume 6 • Number 3 • 17th February 2006

WTO Members Table Forests, Fish Liberalisation Proposals

Discuss this articleShare your views with other visitors, and read what they have to say

At a meeting of the negotiating group on non-agricultural market access (NAMA) on 2 February, two groups of WTO Members presented their proposals for the enhanced reduction in tariffs on fish and forest products and gave updates on progress in informal meetings that have been held on the issues. Canada, Hong Kong, New Zealand, Thailand and the US tabled a proposal on forest products (TN/MA/W/64) and Canada, Iceland, New Zealand, Norway, Singapore and Thailand submitted a proposal calling for enhanced liberalisation of trade in fish and fish products (TN/MA/W/63) (see Bridges Trade BioRes, 28 October 2005). Both proposals highlighted that developing countries could benefit from enhanced market access if tariffs were dramatically reduced in the sectors, and suggested that tariff liberalization could enhance the incentives for natural resource use in a manner supportive of sustainable development. In their presentations, the proponents of the proposals pointed out that informal talks have continued to take place between the Members that had put forth the proposals and others considering joining onto the initiative for enhanced tariff reductions in the sectors. While these talks have yielded some agreement on the scope of product coverage and that a critical mass of exporters of each product group would be necessary to initiate enhanced tariff reductions in the sector, Members still have to discuss special and different treatment and other issues.

While welcoming the update, WTO Members in the NAMA committee pointed out that consideration of increased or accelerated liberalisation in particular sectors would have to be put on the backburner until negotiations on the scheme for determining overall NAMA liberalisation had seen more movement. Controversy in the NAMA Group has centred on developing countries’ need for flexibility in choosing by how much to reduce their tariffs, and in particular whether developing countries could have both a high coefficient on their tariff reduction formula (allowing for lower tariff cuts) AND be exempt or make lower tariff cuts on some sensitive products. The meeting was unable to resolve disagreement on what type of formula should be used to cut tariffs on non-agricultural products, including natural resources, but a ‘NAMA group’ was created that includes several developing countries looking to defend their policy space for national industrial development strategies (see Bridges Weekly, 8 February 2006). Ambassador Donald Stephenson of Canada will, as of 27 February, begin his new position as chair of the NAMA negotiating group by leading an open-ended session on sectoral initiatives in which Members will consider the way forward on the issue.

ICTSD Reporting.