. /.WORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONG/AG/NG/W/155
5 April 2001
(01-1703)
Committee on Agriculture
Special SessionOriginal:  English
SEVENTH SPECIAL SESSION OF THE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE
26-28 MARCH 2001
Statement by Switzerland
Our negotiations started one year ago.  Work has been very intensive and, in Switzerland's
view, fruitful in many ways.  We have noted with particular interest the variety of country situations
which will need some creativity to be successfully addressed.  As Article 20 forms the basis for these
negotiations, I will follow the structure of this article when assessing the progress made in the
different areas and suggesting the way to move forward.
After stating that the fundamental reform in agriculture is an ongoing process, the chapeau of
Article 20 mandates negotiations for continuing the process of substantial progressive reduction in
support and protection .  To date, Members and groups of Members have made 45 negotiating
proposals and other submissions, many containing very useful ideas on the way to move forward.
Therefore, the timing of this stock-taking meeting is most appropriate.  Switzerland wishes to pursue
the reform process in agriculture, inter alia through an additional reduction in the level of domestic
support and export subsidies and through the progressive opening of markets, as well as through the
strengthening of rules and disciplines in our Agreement.
These are – needless to say – the core issues, and Switzerland is ready to move on all of them:
• We are prepared to pursue substantial reduction in the level of export subsidies, as long as it
covers all forms of export competition.
• We are prepared to reduce the level of domestic support, on the condition that the "Green" and
"Blue" boxes continue to be available as legitimate instruments of agricultural policy,  inter alia
to respond to Non-Trade Concerns.
• And we are prepared to increase market access opportunities, as long as the reduction is
progressive and enough flexibility is provided to allow to take into account each Member'sspecific situation.
The next items mentioned in Article 20 are the experiences  from implementing the existing
reduction commitments and the effects of the reduction commitments on world trade in agriculture.
Both these issues have to be taken into account when negotiating the continuation of the reform
process.  Numerous detailed studies are available which assess the evolution of world agricultural
trade since the entry into force of the Uruguay Round agreements.  Firstly, these studies show the
wide-spread fact of so-called de-coupling, in other words the move away from payments linked to
production to the adoption of Green Box instruments.  De-coupling is indeed an essential part ofagricultural reform.  Secondly, the statistical analys is also underlines a general increase in agricultural
exports.  However, only some of the developing countries were able to increase their market shares.
We propose an exchange of views on this important mandate of Article 20 in the course of the second
phase.G/AG/NG/W/155
Page 2
Non-trade concerns  and Special and differential treatment  of developing country Members are the
next subjects mentioned in Article 20:
• Regarding the discussion on non-trade concerns , we are satisfied that an intensive debate has
taken place after the beginning of these negotiations.  The debate has shown that the concerns
raised under this title, like the development of rural areas, poverty alleviation, food safety or foodsecurity are concerns shared by a substantial number of WTO Members, developing and
developed alike.  We believe it is now time to deepen the concept and general understanding of
NTC's in agriculture in order to ensure that agriculture can fulfil the multiple objectives assigned
to it by our societies at large.  Based on this understanding, we can then develop the best
instruments and negotiate appropriate disciplines for their implementation.  We fully agree that in
developing the best instruments and concepts, disc iplines must be designed to ensure that those
instruments will not unduly distort trade.
• Special and differential treatment is of paramount importance in helping the developing
countries to ensure their future economic growth and their integration in world trade.  A very
positive development in the negotiations so far is that developing countries have been very active
in drawing the attention of this Committee to their specific problems and situations.  We will need
creative thinking to find the adequate instruments for each situation.  Indeed, as long as marketsare imperfect and productivity and structural differences are as considerable as they are today, any
rapid, MFN-based liberalization will inevitably erode market shares of many of the poorer
developing countries – both for their exports and when they compete with imports.  Slower
liberalization pace may offer a partial solution to some of these problems, but others will have to
be developed as well. Inter alia , the Enabling Clause may also have to be revisited in this context.
In summary, what the discussion has clearly shown is that a “one for all solution” does not
adequately respond to the different needs of developing countries.
Finally, the discussion has shown that there are subjects that are particularly important
from the agricultural point of view as well, but that are or should be dealt with in other WTO
bodies , like the protection of geographical indications, the problems related to production methods
and the internalization of all production costs.  In order to be able to address all issues and to cover the
interests of all Members, we need broad-based multilateral negotiations.  As such negotiations are the
best way to discuss all agriculture-related issues, agreement on specific questions should not be a
precondition for launching such negotiations.  Furthermore, Article 20 is in our view a broad enoughbasis to ensure the continuation of the fundamental reform in agriculture and to cover all subjects of
negotiation related thereto.  We should therefore not discuss again how to negotiate.  Rather, we
should start to really negotiate.
In concluding we would like to underline that the Work Programme must deal with all the
subjects raised during the first phase, regardless of the market share of their respective proponents.
Only in this way can we arrive at a consensus on the way to proceed, allowing all participants to seetheir interests addressed by the various options you have proposed to us.  We will continue to actively
and constructively participate in the debate and to co-operate with you and all other partners in order
to bring this process vigorously forward.
__________