. /.WORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONTN/MA/W/21/Add.1
15 July 2003
(03-3831)
Negotiating Group on Market Access Original:  English
MARKET ACCESS FOR NON-AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS
Communication from Mauritius
Addendum
The following communication, dated 8 July 2003, has been received from the Permanent
Mission of Mauritius.
_______________
1. This paper is submitted in the light of the request made by the Chairman of the Negotiating
Group on Market Access for Member States to come up with proposals on the vital issue of
preference erosion, which is of serious concern to some of the most vulnerable Members of the WTO.
2. The question of preference erosion has been emphasised in a number of submissions, as
indicated in the Chairman's Overview Paper1.
3. It is, therefore, imperative that appropriate modalities be developed to address this issue with
a view to achieving balanced outcomes in these negotiations.  While it is believed that average tariff
reduction could be an appropriate means to address the question of preference erosion, our delegation
remains nonetheless open to the possibility of considering other modalities.
4. When examining the problem of preference erosi on, it is essential to keep in view that, from
the perspective of the exporting country, preference erosion would be particularly serious where
exports are concentrated in a limited number of products on very few export markets.  As a matter of
fact, this is the most important feature characterising exports under preferences.  While preference
schemes, in principle, could cover most, if not all the chapters and tariff lines of the HS code, in
practice, however, exports are limited to very few products and a limited number of tariff lines.
5. Consequently, addressing preference erosion would effectively mean maintaining tariffs over
a certain level for a very narrow range of products, especially since the export basket of the preference
beneficiary countries is almost the same.  By so doing the following would be achieved:
(i) Paragraph 16 of the Doha Declaration would be met which refers to the "special needs of
developing and least developed country participants" and "special and differential treatment
for developing and least developed countries".  It is known that such special needs of
developing and least developed countries are met through various trade preference schemes.
Moreover, the concept of special and differential treatment in the present circumstancesshould not be limited only to the question of less than full reciprocity in tariff liberalisation.
It should also be construed to mean maintaining meaningful access on the export markets by
traditional suppliers in the developing countries;
                                                     
1 TN/MA/6 and TN/MA/6 Rev.1TN/MA/W/21/Add.1
Page 2
(ii) the momentum of tariff liberalisation would not be disturbed since only a very narrow range
of products would be excluded from the process;
(iii) the concerns and interests of many developing countries and the LDC's benefiting from
preferences will be taken on board.  The outcome of the negotiations would therefore be morebalanced.
6. It is a fact that the sectoral approach proposed in the draft elements of modalities affects, in
essence, those very products which are of specific interest to the preference beneficiary countries, in
particular textiles and clothing, leather products, footwear and fish and fish products.  However, as
already indicated above, only a limited number of specific tariff lines within these broad product
categories are of direct concern to these countries.  It is proposed that these tariff lines be identified bythe countries concerned and a list compiled by the WTO Secretariat.  It is further proposed that such
tariff lines be either excluded from tariff reduction or that a maximum tariff reduction of 10% on each
tariff line so identified be staggered over 10 annual instalments on developed country markets.
7. With regard to the application of any agreed harmonisation formula, it is suggested that the
exclusion principle of certain identified tariff lines should equally apply.  Alternatively, consideration
could be given to the proposed formula provided that a much higher "B" coefficient be applied to the
identified tariff lines and the staging period should span over a longer time frame.
8. Necessary technical assistance should urgently be provided, particularly in regard to the
identification of the tariff lines referred to in paragraphs 6 and 7 above.
9. We are further reiterating our proposal
2 for the setting up of a competitiveness fund in the
context of global coherence policy making by international financial institutions in order to assist the
industrial restructuring and adjustment of countries most affected by the reductions/phasing out oftariffs.
__________
                                                     
2 TN/MA/W/21