Archives
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010

December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009

December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008

December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007

December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006

December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005

December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004

December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003

December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002

December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001

December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
June 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000

December 1999
November 1999
October 1999
September 1999
August 1999
June 1999
May 1999
April 1999

April 1998

A Constructive Approach Towards Agriculture, Food and Water in Cancun

IATP
August 31, 2003

Email this page

IATP | August 22, 2003

There are literally dozens of major issues being debated in the run up to the WTO Ministerial in Cancun. Some relate to specific matters of trade policy in a wide range of economic sectors - from agriculture and pharmaceuticals to public services and private investments. Other debates center on the role and operation of the World Trade Organization itself - especially decision-making procedures.

This article addresses one of these many concerns - the content of the agriculture talks, which include key elements relating to food security and safety, water, and biodiversity. It should be read, however, in light of the many other topics of debate currently under discussion inside and outside the WTO.

Agriculture-Related Trade Rules - What Should Be Our Objectives

There are a few specific trade policy objectives that have broad support among producer groups and civil society organizations in both the North and South. Many developing country governments also support these as well.

1) Ending export dumping - WTO rules already call for a total ban on dumping, the selling of goods into the global market at prices below the cost of production. While these rules are strictly enforced for most industrial goods they are generally ignored for agricultural commodities. We must ensure that these rules be followed for all goods and services, including agricultural commodities.

2) Supporting Fair Trade -- There is broad support for the general concepts of certified Fair Trade - the independent (non-governmental) system of agreements between producers and buyers that ensure the prices paid to farmers and charged to consumers are fair and reflect the full costs of production including environmental protection and social justice. Some recent proposals for changes in WTO rules, like limits on the flexibility of government procurement rules, threaten the Fair Trade system and must therefore be rejected.

3) Promoting Commodity Agreements -- There is a newly energized debate over how to adjust WTO rules to enable the effective operation of global agreements for the major agricultural crops. Record low prices in coffee, cotton and other commodities have sparked a renewed interest in and debate over the best way to structure the balancing of supply and demand at the global level. We need international agreements designed to ensure food security for consumers and fair prices for producers.

4) Prevent Monopoly Control - Current agricultural trade rules have resulted in a few companies taking near complete control over critical sections of our food supply to a handful of corporations. There has been near universal rejection of new proposals that would further increase this monopoly control over seeds, animals, germplasm, water and water infrastructure and other vital inputs needed by farmers - including strong oppositions to "patenting of life" requirement proposals being made by the United States government and the European Commission.

5) No Privatization of Water - There is strong support for keeping water rights in the public control. There are growing efforts to oppose WTO proposals that would encourage the privatization of water systems. Since many farmers rely on water for their livelihoods there is a great concern about any moves to create private water monopolies.

These five major concerns - ending dumping, defending Fair Trade, balancing supply with demand, preventing monopolies, and maintaining public control over water-should form the basis of citizen lobbying activities at the WTO. There are background documents on each of these objectives on the IATP web page- www.tradeobservatory.org

A Strategy for Winning Good Agriculture Trade Rules

No single item of debate at the WTO has generated more written proposals and heated debate than agriculture. It is not possible to summarize all of the specific items within this debate, but it is possible to outline the framework for evaluating various proposals and for developing a broadly supported civil society position. The objectives outlined above should be considered within this framework:

1) We need rules of trade in agricultural products and for trade in the products that farmers need to survive. At present these rules are being set and enforced in a variety of places by national governments and international agencies. We need to democratize this system so that stakeholder associations, including producers and consumers, have access to the trade-rulemaking process.

2) The WTO is one of the most powerful forces setting agricultural trade policy and therefore must be held to the highest standards for honesty, transparency, and accountability to the public and governments.

3) Given current WTO rules of operation, it is very difficult to achieve effective democratic stakeholder participation in the setting of agriculture policy making. This has led a number of important stakeholders to call for taking all agricultural trade policymaking out of the WTO and putting it into a separate treaty all together (US National Farmers Union) or to find some new procedures outside of the WTO (Via Campesina).

4) Within the current WTO agriculture debates there are four broad groupings of countries that share similar perspectives. The first is the coalition of the US and the EU and spelled out in their joint paper submitted on August 8, 2003. They call for some minor changes in WTO agricultural trade rules but essentially endorse the status quo.

5) The second broad coalition, the Cairns Group led by Australia, has been demanding more or less total deregulation of agricultural trade. For over a decade they have been arguing that no country should be able to restrict imports of any agricultural products and no country should have the right to support their farmers through minimum price or income supplementing programs.

6) The third grouping is the poor countries (mostly in Africa) that are heavily dependent on the exporting of one or two dominant commodity crops (like cotton or rice) and that suffer tremendously when world prices are low. The global commodity price crisis of the last decade has made many of these countries desperate for any kind of solution, including the hope that enforcement of WTO rules can help to raise prices and market access.d

7) The fourth group includes countries that are heavily dependent on food imports and are therefore concerned about the danger of volatile global agricultural markets. They are proposing new WTO agriculture trade rules to enhance food security through food sovereignty including rules to prevent the monopoly ownership of the genetic resources (plants, animals, germplasm) needed to farm.

Civil society groups have been remarkably united in their approach to these issues. Most have strongly rejected the US/EU and Cairns approaches and have given strong support to proposals coming out of the third and fourth groups. These proposed new trade rules would help stabilize world prices for the major commodities at remunerative levels. The proposed rules also would enable nations heavily dependent on food imports to maintain and enhance their level of food security and sovereignty without fear of trade sanctions for taking actions to encourage local food production

Within this framework, the most effective way to meet the five objectives towards more constructive agricultural trade rules is a partnership between civil society and supportive governments. The major victories that have been achieved in recent WTO history were grounded in such a partnership. At the Seattle meeting, protests from outside of the WTO Ministerial emboldened developing country members to block potentially devastating new agriculture trade rules from coming into effect. At the Doha meeting, it was a Civil Society/developing country partnership that pushed through the TRIPs Declaration on Access to Essential Medicines in the face of major opposition from the U.S. and EU.

To change the current system of agriculture trade, it will take an even stronger, more focused, partnership between civil society and developing country governments. The upcoming Cancun Ministerial is the next major opportunity for civil society and governments to find new ways to work together for a more constructive approach to global agricultural trade. There are small signals that this is beginning to happen.

NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for research and educational purposes.