AGRICULTURAL TRADE: TAKING INTEGRATION SERIOUSLY

NCCRInternationalTrade

Presentation by Elisabeth Bürgi, lic.iur, Attorney at Law

World Trade Institute Berne, Switzerland

Tel. +41 31 631 30 80Fax +41 31 631 36 30nccr@wti.org

Hallerstrasse 63012 Berne, Switzerlandwww.nccr-trade.orgwww.wti.org

Presentation

1. Introduction

2. Agricultural Trade: Some Features

3. WTO embedded in International Public Law

4. Relevant „Non-Trade“ Legal Benchmarks

5. AoA: Open for Integration?

6. Alternatives

Agriculture Trade: DiscourseBasic Objective Tools

Before Doha

Raise Agricultural Productivity

Worldwide

Open Market System

Doha (Development Round)

Raise Productivity

Fight Poverty

Open Market System

Trade in Agriculture: Some Features

• Percentage of population engaged in agriculture:-Developing Countries: 50 – 95 %-OECD Countries: 1- 6 %

• Only 10% is traded internationally• Highest share in global agricultural trade by high

income countries• OECD Countries: High Producer Support

Estimates • Agric. Tariffs all-over higher than those applied to

non-agricultural products

Large Scale vs Small Scale Production

Productivity Difference: 1/500

Processed Food

•Issue of Tariff Escalation

Small Scale Agriculture: Sensitivities

• 800 million people undernourished (2000)

• 75% live in rural areas

• Land Concentration / Lack of Access to Land (Gini Index)

• Population Growth

Substantial Loss of Diversity in PlantGenetic Resources ofFood and Agriculture/ New Varieties by Cultivation and Technology

Small Scale Agriculture: Sensitivities

Embedded WTO

• Sub-System of International Public Law

• No self-contained sub-system:

Other legal standards relevant, as long as not „contracted out“ (Art. 3 DSU)

• Art. 20 AoA; Doha Declaration

Embedded WTO

• Text reflects the Genesis Process

• Preamble of the WTO Agreement:

Reference to Sustainable Development

Embedded WTO

• Sustainable Development Concept:

Outcome of three development decades

-Brundtland Report 1987

-Rio Declaration 1992 etc.

• Holistic, Integrative, Future-oriented Approach

Concept of Sustainable Development

• ILA Declaration: 7 Principles

Inter alia:• Principle of Intergenerational Equity• Principle of Common but Differentiated

Responsabilities

• Core Principle: Principle of Integration (s. also Vienna Convention)

Integrated Framework: 3 Pillars

Social Objectives

Economic Objectives

Environmental Objectives

4th Pillar: Specific Development Concerns?

Legal Social Benchmarks

Human Rights:

• ICESCR Art. 11 para 2: Right of everyone to an adequate standard of living for himself and his family, including adequate food, clothing, housing.

> Part of Concept of Food Security

Discrepancies

Example: Human Rights Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, 2003:

“39. Please explain why 7 per cent of Brazilian children suffer from undernourishment, in spite of the fact that the national production of the grains would be sufficient to feed one and a half times the total population of Brazil […].”

Legal Social Benchmarks

CEDAW Art. 14: Specific Rights regarding Rural Women

Human Rights and International Cooperation?

Art. 2 para 1 ICESCR:“Each State Party to the present Covenant undertakes to take steps, individually and through international assistance and co-operation, […]

Treaty Body: International Cooperation• more than development aid• responsability to make sure that international trade

rules do not hinder, but promote the fulfillment of human rights

Cultural Objectives

Environmental Objectives

OECD:„Reduction in trade barriers can have both beneficial and harmful effects on the environment.“

World Food Summit 1996:• “We will pursue participatory and sustainable food,

agriculture, fisheries, forestry and rural development policies and practices [..], and combat pests, drought and desertification, considering the multifunctional character of agriculture.”

Legal Environmental Benchmarks

Legal benchmarks in MEAs:

• Biodiversity: CBD & FAO Seed Treaty

• Fishery

• Forest and Soil Protection (incl. water resources)

• Climate Protection

Legal Environmental Benchmarks

• Landscape Diversity: eg. Alp Convention

Legal Developmental Benchmarks

Declaration on the Right to Development (1986; soft law):

Responsabilities of countries to cooperate in order to overcome the gap

Others

National Security Concerns:

i.a. UN Charter

Legal Economic Benchmarks

Basic Principles of International Trade Agreements:-Transparency-Calculability-Non-discrimination (in conflict with ND in Human Rights regimes)-Peaceful Settlement of Disputes-Productivity, Efficiency-Policy Intervention only if necessary

Integrated Outcome

• Decision Making Process?

• Substantive Provisions?

AoA Decision Making Process

AoA: WTO Agreement on Agriculture

PracticeWTO Negotiations• Mercantilistic Approach („give and take“)• Arbitrary Negotiation Procedure, not

following balanced criteria („the louder the better rule“)

AoA Decision Making Process: Alternatives

• Structure the process according to clear, transparent criteria

• Identify all the relevant benchmarks• Comprehensive impact assessments ex ante• Look for optimal solutions in expert committees,

among members, UNagencies, civil society• Confront draft with identified benchmarks• Impact assessments ex post etc.

AoA Substantive Provisions

• Direction: Towards open world market• “One fit for all“ rules• Exemptions: Only temporary• But Green Box: no time limit; untransparent;

unclear criteria• “No way back“ principle• Like Product Concept: Product differentiation

(protection of special or sensitive products) is alien to system, etc.

• > Incentive for cheapest, but not for „most sustainable produced“ products

AoA: Alternatives?

• Open System, but allow for Complexities• Treat different situations differently • Liberalisation as an instrument, not an objective: Way

backward must be possible• Take justified non-trade concerns of all the countries

seriously (also rich countries)• Protective measures: Follow strong non-economic criteria• Tackle whole process chain: intermediary trade • Internalise external environmental costsEtc.

Agricultural Trade Regulation:Alternatives?

-Each Member has Right (and Duty?) to shape its own Rural Development Strategy (RDS)

-RDS: Has to take into account all the mentioned benchmarks

-Protective tools ok, if justified by benchmarks

Reform

Utopian?

Crisis as Chance?

AGRICULTURAL TRADE: TAKING INTEGRATION SERIOUSLY

Documents

Transcript of AGRICULTURAL TRADE: TAKING INTEGRATION SERIOUSLY

Lawvere, Taking Categories Seriously

Taking Tasers seriously

Taking cybercrime seriously

Dworkin - Taking Rights Seriously

Taking backwards compatibility seriously

Taking Compliance Seriously - Yale University

Taking Drugs Seriously

Taking Gender Equality Seriously

Taking Globalisation Seriously

Taking Jesus Seriously Course - Home - Anabaptist ... › wp-content › uploads › 2019 › 07 › Taking...Taking Jesus Seriously ‘Taking Jesus Seriously’ is one of a number

Taking Salmonella Seriously

EPSD_Report4 taking children seriously

Taking Institutions Seriously:

Taking PHP Seriously

Moravcsik - Taking Preferences Seriously

Taking Exit Row Seating Seriously

Taking Voluntariness Seriously - Boston College

Taking Politics Seriously – but Not Too Seriously Politics Seriously... · Taking Politics Seriously – but Not Too Seriously Charles Blattberg Professor of Political Philosophy

Taking Coase Seriously

TAKING GOD SERIOUSLY - Masaryk University