In the 1980s, public payments to agricultural producers in industrialized countries generated large crop surpluses, which were unloaded by export subsidies on the world market, causing food prices to fall. Tax pressure on safeguards has increased, due to both lower import duty revenues and increased domestic spending. Meanwhile, the global economy has entered a cycle of recession and the perception that market opening could improve economic conditions has led to calls for a new round of multilateral trade negotiations. [2] The cycle would open up markets for high-tech services and goods and ultimately generate much-needed efficiency gains. To engage developing countries, many of which were new international disciplines, agriculture, textiles and clothing were added to the big deal. [1] 96 European Commission, COM (2011) 627, preamble (37) and art. 5. You will find another political agreement on these reforms in the European Commission, MEMO/13/621, “CAP Reform – A Statement of the Main Elements,” Brussels, 26 June 2013. The agreement has been criticized by civil society groups for reducing customs protection for small farmers, an important source of income in developing countries, while allowing rich countries to continue subsidizing agriculture in their own countries. the obligation to meet specific binding commitments in each of the following areas: market access; Domestic assistance Export competition and reach agreement on health and plant health issues; At the 2005 WTO meeting in Hong Kong, countries agreed to eliminate export subsidies and equivalent payments by 2013. However, Oxfam argued that EU export subsidies accounted for only 3.5% of its total aid to agriculture. The United States has eliminated cotton export subsidies, which cover only 10% of total spending.
62 European Communities – Customs classification of certain computer equipment (5 June 1998) WT/DS62/AB/R WT/DS67/AB and WT/DS68/AB/R, para. 84 (repeatedly in the context of agricultural trade in Canada- Dairy import and export measures (October 13, 1999) WT/DS103/AB/R and WT/DS113/AB/R, point 131). On the other hand, the terms of the GATT cannot be used as a basis for dispute resolution procedures, but can be used for interpretive purposes: see p.B. European Communities-Export Subsidies on Sugar (15 October 2004) WT/DS265/R, paragraph 7.350 (where the panel states that “[GATT`s terms] are not a covered agreement and therefore cannot provide WTO rights and obligations to members. Nevertheless, they could be important for the interpretation of the Agreement on Agriculture, including the schedules of members. Before the Uruguay Round negotiations, it became increasingly clear that the causes of confusion in global agriculture went beyond the import access issues, which had been the traditional centre of gravity of the GATT negotiations. To reach the root causes of the problems, disciplines were considered essential for all agricultural trade measures, including national agricultural policy and agricultural export subsidies. In addition, clearer rules on health and plant health measures were deemed necessary, both in their own legislation and in avoiding the circumvention of stricter rules on access to imports through unjustified and protectionist application of food security, as well as animal and plant health measures.
Domestic support regimes for agriculture are governed by the agriculture agreement, which came into force in 1995 and was negotiated during the Uruguay Round (1986-1994).