1 / 15

WTO Doha round

WTO Doha round. Andres Oopkaup. Estonian Government policy at glance. Extremely liberal Total and fast privatisation Low or non existent support level Modest rural support including some for agriculture Emphases on green box type support FTA-s Little support for marketing.

jamesjacobs
Télécharger la présentation

WTO Doha round

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. WTO Doha round Andres Oopkaup

  2. Estonian Government policy at glance • Extremely liberal • Total and fast privatisation • Low or non existent support level • Modest rural support including some for agriculture • Emphases on green box type support • FTA-s • Little support for marketing

  3. Estonian trade conditions before joining EU • Competitiveness, comparative advantage • price level (farm gate, inputs) • quality and product range • structures (primary, processing, trade) • Outside conditions • tariffs (economical and political) • non tariff measures (hygiene and technical requirements)

  4. OECD-s view to global trade development. • Significant reduction of import tariffs • Abolition of export subsidies • Abolition of trade distorting domestic support (amber box) • Direct payments - fully decoupled

  5. "SCHEDULES" Fixing commitment that were agreed and surveiliance MODALITIES Precise numbers and formulas for commitments WISH to CHANGE TRADING ENVIRONMENT; URA commitment TARGETS, AMBITIONS HONG-KONG (december 2005) Partial agreement that confirms willingness to move forward 2006 July - modalitiesFAILURE CANCUN 2003 FAILURE SEATTLE MINISTERIAL 1999 FAILURE DOHA MINISTERIAL 2001 DECLARATION Time 2007 New Budget for 2007-2013 2000 BERLIN AGENDA BUDGET - enlargement DIRECT PAYMENTS vs PRICE SUPPORT 2003 LUXEMBOURG CAP reform Decoupling GENF 2004, July agreement, EC conditional willingness to abolish ES 2007 EC Proposals for “health check” MODALITIES To be agreed by 2008

  6. Topic’s to be negotiated (single undertaking) • Agriculture (MA, ES, DS); • Non-agricultural products trade (NAMA); • Trade in services; • Rules (incl fisheries); • Development agenda (package); • Trade and Environment; • Trade simplification;

  7. Relative value of trade deficit, data of 1995-1998, %

  8. AustriaBelgium     Cyprus Czech RBulgariaDenmark Estonia Finland   France Germany Greece Hungary Ireland       Italy      Latvia Lithuania        Luxembourg Malta Netherlands PolandPortugal  Romania Slovakia Slovenia   Spain Sweden  UK Armenia FY Rep Macedonia Albania Croatia Georgia Jordan Moldova Oman USG–1 G–90 LDCs Bangladesh Cambodia Maldives   Myanmar Nepal ACP ChadBurkina Faso Burundi  Togo Central African Rep Djibouti    DR Congo Mali   Gambia   Guinea   Guinea Bissau    Lesotho    Malawi  Mauritania  Niger Sierra Leone    Rwanda    Recent new Hong Kong, Ch Saudi Arabia El Salvador Macao, Ch Singapore Kyrgyz R Qatar UAE Brunei Kuwait Bahrain Ecuador EU G-27 Solomon Islands Gabon Ghana Namibia Mexico G-20 Haiti Dominica Fiji Papua New Guinea Benin Madagascar Senegal Uganda Zambia India China Venezuela Belize Barbados Antigua/Barbuda Dominican Rep Grenada    Guyana St Vincent/Grenadines Trinidad/Tobago Jamaica   Suriname St Kitts/Nevis      St Lucia Botswana Cameroon Congo Côte d’Ivoire Kenya Mozambique Tanzania Cuba Indonesia Pakistan Philippines G-33 Chile Brazil Bolivia Uruguay  Thailand  Paraguay Argentina     Honduras  Mongolia Nicaragua           Panama     Peru   Sri Lanka   Turkey Nigeria Zimbabwe Australia Canada  Colombia Costa Rica  Guatemala   Malaysia  N Zealand Mauritius R Korea Angola Swaziland Egypt Iceland  Israel  Japan    Liechtenstein  Norway Switzerland Ch Taipei Tunisia Morocco Cairns Group African Group G-10 S Africa

  9. Main subjectc for AG negociatrions • Export Subsidies – “all types of Export Subsidies scrapped by 2013” • Domestic Support • Market Access

  10. Different MA formulas

  11. Complications for EC: short termEstonian view • Substance and tactics: • EC CAP reform has been implemented, but this has been taken “as granted” in WTO • Competitors for us, are increasing support to agriculture (incl US); • Potential problems with “green box”; • Some of WTO MS’s do not agree with EC internal challenges: environment, animal welfare, etc; • Dilemma on sensitive products; EC positions have to be adjusted but balance between MS’s – politically extremely sensitive! • EC member states have offensive and defensive; • Agriculture is not the only subject for EC: balance between AG and NAMA and other negotiation subjects; • industrial products and services, • rules; • environment (incl trade in environmental goods);

  12. DDA development: possible implications in case of negative results • Globally: DDA negotiations will continue in XX years; • Multilateral trading environment in crisis (incl the whole WTO); • Increase in bilateral trade development (back in local and regional preference system); • Increase of protective attitude in trade; • Development will slow down; • New tensions in regional trade; • For EC and Estonia: internal reforms will not contribute to negotiating power; • EC farmers will have to “pay” more; • Increasing pressure through WTO DSB: sugar, bananas etc.; • CAP reform will slow down: old- vs. new MS “situation is remaining; • EC internal competitive trade environment is getting worse;

  13. DDA development: possible implications in case of positive results • Globally: • Multilateral vs. bilateral; • Global (single) rules; • Development: increase in trade and incomes; • Increase in some food products price: i.e. milk, sugar; • EC and Estonia: • EC farmer will “contribute” but other’s are in similar conditions; • Opportunities in trade to third countries markets will increase; • Pressure to develop flexible internal agricultural policy across the EC; • No need administratively regulate trade;

  14. New challenges!? • Bio- energy and trade in energyproducts • General food shortage – need for different policies

More Related