JOB/AG/210/Rev.1  
 
17 March 2022  
(22-2342) Page: 1/20 
Committee on Agriculture  
Special Session  Original: English  
 
 
OBSERVATIONS ON PUBLIC STOCKHOLDING FOR FOOD SECURITY PURPOSES  
COMMUNICATION FROM AUSTRALIA, CANADA, CHILE, COLOMBIA,  
NEW ZEALAND, PARAGUAY, THE UNITED STATES  AND URUGUAY  
Revision  
The following communication, dated 17 March 2022 , is being circulated at the request of the 
aforementioned  Members.  
 
_______________  
 
 
1.1.  The objective of this paper is to add to the factual and analytical information under the heading 
Public Stockholding for  Food Security Purposes (PSH) by identifying programs and collecting 
available information from sources such as Members ' WTO domestic support notifications, Members ' 
written replies in AG -IMS as well as reports prepared under a Member 's Trade Policy Review , and 
papers from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and Food and 
Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). This information on the practices of Members 
with PSH programs will help provide a common basis upon which  further negotiations on the 
development of new rules can proceed.   
1.2.  As Members continue to engage in negotiations on a permanent solution for PSH, it is important 
to have a factual and analytical basis to support the development of a PSH solution that meet s the 
needs of all Members, that is designed in a manner that does not lead to distortions or uncertainty 
in international agriculture markets, and that does not adversely affect the food security of other 
Members, including developing country Members.   
BACKGROUND  
1) Current Rules on Public Stockholding for Food Security Purposes  
a. Rules in Agreement on Agriculture  
1.3.  The Agreement on Agriculture (AoA) allows Members to exclude from their AMS calculation, 
expenditures (or revenue foregone) in relation to the accumulation and holding of stocks of products 
which form an integral part of a food security program identified in national legislation. To be eligible 
under this exemption, paragraph 3, Annex 2 of the AoA requires that:  
1. The food security program is ident ified in the national legislation.  
2. The volume and accumulation of such stocks shall correspond to predetermined targets 
related solely to food security.   
3. The process of stock accumulation and disposal shall be financially transparent.   
4. Food purchases by th e government shall be made at current market prices and sales from 
food security stocks shall be made at no less than the current domestic market price for the 
product and quality in question.  
 
1.4.  In addition, developing country Members that have programs und er which public stocks of 
foodstuffs for food security purposes are acquired and released at administered prices, can still be JOB/AG/210/Rev.1  
 
- 2 - 
 
  classified as falling under Annex 2 , paragraph 3, provided that the difference between the acquisition 
price and the external ref erence price is accounted in the AMS.  
b. Bali Interim Solution and General Council Decision  
1.5.  The 2013 Bali Ministerial Decision provides an interim solution whereby Members shall refrain 
from challenging PSH programs under the Dispute Settlement Understanding,  in the event that a 
developing Member exceeds its annual domestic support commitment in relation to support provided 
to traditional staple food crops under PSH programs existing as of the date of the Decision.  
1.6.  To benefit from this "peace clause ", a devel oping Member must be consistent with the criteria 
of footnote 5, and footnote 5&6, paragraph 3 of Annex 2 to the AoA, and meet specific notification, 
transparency and anti -circumvention/safeguard requirements specified in the Bali Decision. In 2014, 
the Ge neral Council clarified that the Bali interim arrangement shall continue to be in place until a 
permanent solution is agreed and adopted. The interim solution has so far been used by one Member 
(India) and reported in two domestic support notifications (20 18 and 2019).  
2) Analytical Overview  
1.7.  The most recent information collected on PSH were responses submitted by Members to a 
questionnaire in 2013 prior to the negotiation of the Bali interim solution. Since then, no or very 
little information has been provide d by Members on their PSH programs. Furthermore, since 1995 a 
total of three  developing Members submitted a total of t hree Table DS:2 notifications on their 
programs ( Brazil, Republic of Korea and India) and one Member (India) provided information on its 
programs in the two Table DS:1 notifications in which it used the interim solution.  
1.8.  This analysis combines available data from domestic support notifications and external sources 
to find basic information on (i) which Members operated PSH programs using app lied administered 
prices, (ii) which products were involved, and (iii) whether these programs were still in operation in 
the last notification submitted by each of these Members. The objective of this analysis is to obtain 
more clarity on PSH programs curr ently implemented by developing country Members.  
1.9.  Section 4 of this analysis cross -references domestic support data provided by developing 
Members under Annex 2 , paragraph 3 of the AoA in Supporting Table DS:1 (expenditures on PSH) 
and reported in Supportin g Table DS:5 (market price support) to create a base set (Table 2) of 
Members who potentially have PSH programs for which products were acquired at an applied 
administered price. In theory, this base set could indicate the current scope of PSH programs usi ng 
applied administered prices because, in principle, a Member that has a program for PSH for which 
quantities were acquired at an applied administered price is required to account for this in ST DS:5 
and may also exempt the expenditure in ST DS:1. However , in practice, many factors make this 
base set of Members imperfect. First, there is no obligation to exempt expenditures under Annex 2, 
paragraph 3. Moreover, there is no requirement to clearly and transparently indicate whether 
expenditures exempted unde r Annex 2 , paragraph 3 are directly related to support reported in 
Supporting Table DS:5. Furthermore, many Members do not provide clear information in the 
notification to identify the products to which the expenditures under Annex 2 , paragraph 3 refer. 
This combination of factors makes this base set too broad in its application and requires further 
qualitative investigation to refine the data.  
1.10.   Section 5 explores the refinement of the base set using qualitative information. In this section, 
we make use of a variety of sources (including the WTO Secretariat Trade Policy Review reports, 
OECD, FAO publications and Members ' written replies in AG -IMS) to exclude from the base set those 
Members that notified support under Supporting Table DS:1 and DS:5 for unrela ted reasons. 
Reasons that would require the exclusion of a Member from the base set include support reported 
under Supporting Tables DS:1 and DS:5 that is not related to the same product, or not related to 
the same measure.  
1.11.   Section 6 of the paper explores limitations and transparency issues of using a base set based 
on Members ' notifications, as well as potential programs that would be excluded from this base set 
methodology, notably due to different ways the AoA allows Members to exclude support related to  
the accumulation and holding of stocks.  JOB/AG/210/Rev.1  
 
- 3 - 
 
  3) Methodology  
1.12.   Domestic support data was sourced from Canada 's analytical tool (JOB/AG/190), and from 
Members ' WTO notifications. This analysis includes all domestic support notifications of self -identified 
developing country Members1 for notification years 2001 to 20 20 submitted as of 20 February 2022 . 
Exchange rates to convert Members ' data into USD were sourced from the International Financial 
Statistics (IFS) database.  
1.13.   The notifications of the base set of Members only conveyed Members ' own information and 
data, and is not necessarily proof or verification that Members that are not in the base set are 
acquiring their stocks at market prices. Furthermore, the analysis makes no claims or judgment as 
to whether expenditures exempted under A nnex 2 , paragraph 3 meet the classification criteria.  
1.14.   If for a particular reason the information for the base set Members was missing elements to 
adequately reflect the policies of a Member, we invite this Member to contact the authors of this 
paper direct ly so that we can make the necessary adjustments.  
4) Building the Base Set of Members: Expenditures Reported Under Annex 2, 
 Paragraph  3 and Market Price Support (STDS:5)  
1.15.   Since 2001, twenty (20) developing Members notified expenditures under Annex 2 , 
paragrap h 3 at least once. A total of thirteen (13)  Members have reported expenditures under 
Annex  2, paragraph 3 following the Bali Ministerial Decision (after year 2013), four (4) Members 
have reported no expenditures in all their notifications notified after 20 13, and three (3) Members 
did not submit a notification after 2013.  
 
1 Without prejudice to WTO Members and authors positions on eligibility of Members identified to use 
special and differential treatment in regard to PSH.   
  JOB/AG/210/Rev.1  
 
- 4 - Table  1: List of Developing Members Reporting Expenditures under Annex 2 , Paragraph 3 , 2001 -2020  
Member  2001  2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009  2010  2011  2012  2013  2014  2015  2016  2017  2018  2019  2020  
Albania   X X X X X X X   N N  N N N  N N N 
Armenia  ** **   X          N N N N N N 
Botswana  X X X X X X X X X         N N N 
Brazil  X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 
China  X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X N N N N 
India X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X N 
Indonesia      X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 
Israel  X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 
Korea, 
Republic of  X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X N N 
Kyrgyz 
Republic  N N N N N N N N N N N X  X      N 
Moldova, 
Republic of  X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X  N N N N 
Namibia        X X X N N N N N N N N N N N 
Nepal  ** ** ** ** X N X N X X X X N X N N N X N N 
Pakistan  X      X X X X X     N N N N N 
Philippines  X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 
Saudi Arabia, 
Kingdom of  ** ** ** ** ** X X X X X X X X X X X X N N N 
North 
Macedonia  ** **  X X X X N N N N N N N N N N N N N 
Ukraine  ** ** ** ** ** ** ** N X X X X N N N N N N N N 
Viet Nam  ** ** ** ** ** ** X X X X X X X X X X X N N N 
Zambia  N N N  N X N X N X N X N X N N N N N N 
X = Have reported expenditures under Annex 2 paragraph 3 for that year . 
N  = Notification not submitted . 
**  = Not a Member of the WTO at the time . 
Blank = No expenditure reported under Annex 2 paragraph 3.  
1.16.   Of the twenty (20) developing Members who reported expenditures under Annex 2, paragraph 3, twelve (12) Member s reported at least one time 
market price support in the same year that they reported expenditures under Annex 2, paragraph 3.    
  JOB/AG/210/Rev.1  
 
- 5 - Table  2: The Base Set  - List of Developing Members Reporting Expenditures under Annex 2, Paragraph 3 and Market Price Support in  the 
Same Year, 2001 -2020 
Member  2001  2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009  2010  2011  2012  2013  2014  2015  2016  2017  2018  2019  2020  
Albania                      N N   N N N   N N N 
Armenia  ** **                         N N N N N N 
Botswana                                    N N N 
Brazil  X X X X X X X X X X X X   X X          
China  X X X   X X X X X X X X X X X X N N N N 
India X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X N 
Indonesia                        X X X X X X X X X 
Israel  X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 
Korea, 
Republic of  X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X N N 
Kyrgyz 
Republic  N N N N N N N N N N N                 N 
Moldova, 
Republic of                                  N N N N 
Namibia                    N N N N N N N N N N N 
Nepal  ** ** ** **   N   N       N   N   N N N N N  
Pakistan  X           X X X X X         N N N N N 
Philippines  X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 
Saudi Arabia, 
Kingdom of  ** ** ** ** ** X X X X X X X X X X     N N N 
North 
Macedonia  ** **   X       N N N N N N N N N N N N N 
Ukraine  ** ** ** ** ** ** ** N X X X X N N N N N N N N 
Viet Nam  ** ** ** ** ** **               X X     N N N 
Zambia  N N N   N   N   N   N   N   N N N N N N 
X  = Have reported expenditures under Annex 2 paragraph 3 and Market price support for that year . 
N  = Notification not submitted . 
**  = Not a Member of the WTO at the time . 
Blank = No expenditure reported under Annex 2 paragraph 3 and market price support (STDS:5).  
1.17.  Information in Table 2, this is to say all developing Members that reported expenditures under Annex 2 , paragraph 3 and market price support for 
the same year, represents the base set that will be referred and improved via qualitative information throughout the paper.    
  JOB/AG/210/Rev.1  
 
- 6 - 5) Qualitative Refinement of the Proxy 
a. Product Coverage  
1.18.   As demonstrated in Table 3, of the t welve (12) Members that reported market price support and expenditures under Annex 2 , paragraph 3, 
concurrently for the same year at least one time, eleven (11) Members reported Annex 2 , paragraph 3 expenditures for the product(s) that received 
market pric e support. Only four (4) out of the twelve (12) Members have included a description of which products were covered by the exp enditures 
reported under Annex 2 , paragraph 3 in all their DS:1 notifications. For eight (8) Members, other sources were used to id entify at least some of the 
products to which the expenditures referred.  
Table 3 : List of Developing Members that Reported Market Price Support (STDS:5) and Expenditures under Annex 2 , Paragraph 3 - 
Products Covered under Both Types of Support  
Member  Produ ct list - Market price 
support notified since 2001  
(see Annex 5 for years)  Products listed in descriptions 
of expenditures notified under 
Annex 2 , para. 3 Additional details on products related 
to expenditures notified under 
Annex  2, para. 3 (other sources ) Same product(s)?  
(comparing 
columns  2 with 3 & 4)  Source for additional 
precision on products  
Brazil  Beans, Coffee, Cotton, 
Maize, Sisal, Soybean, 
Wheat , Orange  No specific product  
(2001 -2020) More than 500 types of products 
between 2003 and 2015 under PAA 
(including beans, maize and wheat)  Yes 1. Sumário Executivo 
- Execução do PAA - 
2015 – CONAB  
China  Cotton, Maize, Rapeseed, 
Rice, Soybean, Sugar, 
Wheat  Maize, Rice, Sugar, Vegetable 
oil and Wheat (2001 -2016)   - Yes  - 
India Coarse Cereals, Cotton, 
Groundnut, Jute, Mustard 
seed, Pulses, Rice, Soybean, 
Sunflower, Wheat  Food grain  
(2001 -2013)  
 
No specific product  
(2014 -2019)  At least rice, wheat, coarse grains 
and pulses  
(2001 -2019)  Yes Bali Annex in 
G/AG/N/IND/18, 
G/AG/N/IND/25  
Indonesia  Rice No expenditures  
(2001 -2004)  
 
No specific product  
(2005 -2020) Rice  
(2005 -2020) Yes TPR - Secretariat 
report 2020 - 
(WT/TPR/S/401)  
Israel  Cucumbers, Eggs, Milk, 
Potato, Tomato  Cereals  
(2001 -2020) Mostly Wheat  
(2001 -2018)  No OECD review of 
agricultural policies 
Israel 2010  
Korea , 
Republic of  Barley, Maize, Rapeseed, 
Rice, Soybean  Rice and Barley  
(2001 -2004 & 2016 -2018)2 
 
Rice, Barley, Soybean  
(2005 -2015)  - Yes - 
 
2 For the 2016 -2018 period, barley was listed under the description of the measure(s) reported under Ann ex 2, paragraph 3 in the Republic of Korea 's 
notifications, however it was revealed by the Republic of Korea that barley was not included in the stockholding program for the purpose of food security (see Republic of 
Korea 's reply to AGIMS ID 98161).   
  JOB/AG/210/Rev.1  
 
- 7 - Member  Produ ct list - Market price 
support notified since 2001  
(see Annex 5 for years)  Products listed in descriptions 
of expenditures notified under 
Annex 2 , para. 3 Additional details on products related 
to expenditures notified under 
Annex  2, para. 3 (other sources ) Same product(s)?  
(comparing 
columns  2 with 3 & 4)  Source for additional 
precision on products  
North 
Macedonia  Wheat  No product specified  
(2003 -2007)  Wheat and Barley  Yes TPR - Secretariat 
report 2019 -
(WT/TPR/S/390)  
Pakistan  Wheat  Wheat  
(2001 -2015)  - Yes - 
Philippines  Rice and Corn  Rice and Corn  
(2001 -2004)  
 
No specific product  
(2005 -2020) Rice and Corn  
(2005 -2019)  Yes TPR - Secretariat 
report 2018 -
(WT/TPR/S/368)  
Saudi Arabia , 
Kingdom of  Wheat  Grains  
(2006 -2017)  Wheat  
(2006 -2017)  Yes TPR - Secretariat 
report 2021 - 
(WT/TPR/S/407)  
Ukraine  Sugar  Seeds  
(2009 & 2012)  
 
No product specified  
(2010 & 2011)  Sugar  
(2009 -2012)  Yes TPR – Secretariat 
report 2016 - 
WT/TPR/S/334  
Viet Nam  Rice Rice  
(2007 & 2008)  
 
Rice and Maize  
(2009 -2017)  - Yes - 
1.19.   Based on details reported in Table 3, Table 4 adjusts the Table 2 base set of Members for product coverage for each year. Tab le 4 provides 
further information on products that were simultaneously covered by a public stockholding measure and eligible to rec eive the applied administrative 
price in a given year.    
 
 JOB/AG/210/Rev.1  
 
- 8 - 
 
  Table 4 : Set of  Developing  Members Adjusted for Product Coverage Base d on Table 3 
Analysis, 2001 -2020  
 2001  2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009  2010  
Brazil*  T,M,R,
L T,M,R,
L M,H,W  M,W e,M,R,
W T,e,M,
R,W T,e,M,
R,L T,e,M,
R,L,W  e,M,R,
L,W f,e,M,
R,L,W  
China  W,R,M  W,R,M  W,R,M  - R W,R W,R W,R W,R W 
India R,W,P  R,W,P  R,W,P  R,W,C , 
P R,W,C,  
P R,W R,W,C  R,W,C  R,W,C  R,W,C  
Indonesia            
Korea , 
Republic of  R,B R,B R,B R,B B,Y B,Y B,Y B,Y B,Y B 
North 
Macedonia  ** ** W W    N N N 
Pakistan  W      W W W W 
Philippines  R R R R R R R,M R,M R,M R,M 
Saudi Arabia , 
Kingdom of  ** ** ** ** ** W W W W W 
Ukraine  ** ** ** ** ** ** ** N S S 
Viet Nam ** ** ** ** ** **     
 
  2011  2012  2013  2014  2015  2016  2017  2018  2019  2020  
Brazil*  e,M,R,
W e,R,W   f,e,M,
W e,M      
China  W,R, 
M,S W,R, 
M,S W,R,M  W,R,M  W,R,M  W,R,M  N N N N 
India R,W,C  R,W, 
C,P R,W, 
C,P R,W, 
C,P R,W, 
C R,W, 
C,P R,W, 
C,P R,W, 
C,P R,W, 
C,P N 
Indonesia   R R R R R R R R R 
Korea, 
Republic of  B  Y Y Y    N N 
North 
Macedonia  N N N N N N N N N N 
Pakistan  W     N N N N N 
Philippines  R,M R,M R,M R,M R,M    R R 
Saudi Arabia, 
Kingdom of  W W W W W   N N N 
Ukraine  S S N N N N N N N N 
Viet Nam     R R   N N N 
Legend  
W = Wheat  C = Coarse Cereals  U = Cucumbers  e = Edible beans  
R = Rice  G = Groundnut  E = Eggs  f = Coffee  
M = Maize  J = Jute  I = Milk    
T = Cotton  P = Pulse  L = Sisal  N = Notification not submitted  
A = Rapeseed  F = Sunflower  H = Sorghum  ** =Not a Member of the WTO at the time  
Y = Soybean  D = Mustard seed  O = Potato  Blank = No expenditures reported under 
Annex  2, paragraph 3 and market price 
support (STDS:5)  S = Sugar  B = Barley  t = Tomato  
* Included all products of Brazil because a comprehensive list of the 500 products could not be found  
b. Are Expenditures Reported under Annex 2 , Paragraph 3 for Stock Acquired at an 
Applied Administered Price?  
1.20.   Of the eleven (11) Members identified in Table 3, nine (9) Members reported expenditures 
under Annex 2 , paragraph 3 at least once since 2001, for stocks acquired at applied administrative 
prices, based on information gathered from other sources. Of these nine (9) Members, five (5) 
reported expenditures under Annex 2 , paragraph 3 for stocks acquired at applied administrative 
prices after the Bali decision in 2013. One (1) Member stopped report ing expenditures under 
Annex  2, paragraph 3 for notifications available after 2013, one (1) Member started using market 
prices to procure its stocks and two (2) Members did not submit any notification after 2013.   
  JOB/AG/210/Rev.1  
 
- 9 - Table 5 : List of Developing Members Reporting Expenditures under Annex 2, Paragraph 3  and Market Price Support (STDS:5) for the 
Same Product(s) – Clarification if Expenditures under PSH are for Stock Acqui red at an Applied Administered Price  
Member  Annex 2 , para. 3 
expenditures 
reported for stock 
acquired at applied 
administered price 
since 20 01? Annex 2 , para. 3 
expenditures 
reported for stock 
acquired at applied 
administered price 
since 2014?  Related information  Source of 
reference  
Brazil  No No Under its program reported under Annex 2 , paragraph 3 (PAA) Brazil makes direct 
acquisitions from family farms at market prices. Support prices are used to form 
strategic stocks, but the expenses are not reported under Annex 2 , paragraph 3. 
The Policy of Guaranteed Minimum Prices (PGPM) stocks ar e usually sold whereas 
those held under PAA are mostly donated to vulnerable people.   
On 3 December 2021, Brazil introduced the "Feed Brazil " program which replaces 
"program of acquisition of agricultural products from family farming ". The 
program promotes food security, nutrition and food security.  Based on 
information from 
TPR - Secretariat 
report 2017 -
(WT/TPR/S/358)  
G/AG/N/BRA/68  
China  Yes Yes The minimum procurement price scheme for grains is linked to the volume of 
China's grain reserves; the minimum -price system is in place to ensure a stable 
supply of grains. Grain reserves of maize, rice, soya beans and wheat are 
maintained by central and local authorities to ensure food security.  TPR – Secretariat 
report 2016 - 
(WT/TPR/S/342 – 
p. 123) 
India Yes Yes The Government policy of procurement of foodgrains has the objectives of 
ensuring Minimum Support Price (MSP) to the farmers and the availability of 
foodgrains to the marginalized and vulnerable sections at affordable prices. It also 
ensures effective market intervention thereby keeping the prices under check and 
also adding to overall food security of the country. Traditional sta ple food crops 
covered are: Rice, Wheat, Coarse Grains and Pulses.  India 2019 
domestic support 
notification 
(G/AG/N/IND/25 
pp. 10-11) 
Indonesia  Yes Yes BULOG continues to manage the Government's rice policy. It, inter alia , manages 
the Government rice reserve, maintaining a buffer stock of between one to one -
and-a-half million metric tonnes per year, through purchases of domestically 
produced rice as well as imports. This reserve is used for: rice distribution to low 
income groups; market operations to maintain price stability at the producer and 
consumer levels; and emergency p urposes, ASEAN reserves, and international 
cooperation and assistance (p.  156) // As at the time of the previous Review, the 
Government remained involved in stabilizing the price of rice through the state -
owned Perum BULOG's guaranteed purchase of rice fro m domestic producers at a 
set procurement price, and through its import activities (p.  127). TPR – Secretariat 
report 2020 -
(WT/TPR/S/401)  
Korea , 
Republic of  Yes No Publicly funded purchase and stockholding schemes support agriculture by 
stabilizing prices at higher levels. Such schemes have been operated either 
directly by the Government, such as by MAF on rice and AFMC mainly on red 
peppers, garlic, onions and anchovies, or by several cooperatives, especially on 
crops such as maize, barl ey and soybeans, run by the NACF  (p. 86) // Th e notified 
expenditures on PSH  relate to operating storage, processing and transporting the 
rice and barley purchased for such purposes. (Answer concerning year 2002) // A 
public stockholding scheme for rice, a lso known as the "Public Storage System for TPR – Secretariat 
report 2004 - 
(WT/TPR/S/ 137) 
 
Korea reply to 
AGIMS ID 48065  
  
  JOB/AG/210/Rev.1  
 
- 10 - Member  Annex 2 , para. 3 
expenditures 
reported for stock 
acquired at applied 
administered price 
since 20 01? Annex 2 , para. 3 
expenditures 
reported for stock 
acquired at applied 
administered price 
since 2014?  Related information  Source of 
reference  
Emergencies ", was established in 2005. One of the main objectives for this 
scheme is to guarantee food security in times of natural disasters or a temporary 
shortage due to a mismatch between supply and demand. U nder this scheme, the 
government purchases rice from farmers at the market price during the harvest 
season and releases the stocks at the market prices when necessary. // On 
22 March 2013 the requirement to buy and sale stockpiles at the market price in 
the place of purchase and sale, was extended from Rice to Grains (Law 
Amendment: Grain Management Act ( 22 March  2013) – Article 10). // Soybean 
can be a s ubject of PSH  according to the domestic law (Grain Management Act). 
Soybean is not included in Korea 's PSH. Soybean procurement program is notified 
to WTO as market price support (MPS). (Answer concerning period 2005 to 2015).  OECD - Agricultural 
Policy Monitoring 
and Evaluation 
2020 
 
Grain Management 
ACT 
(http://extwprlegs1  
.fao.org/docs/pdf/  
kor51825.pdf ) 
 
Korea reply to 
AGIMS  ID 98161  
North 
Macedonia  Yes N/A  
(most recent 
notification 2007)  The Agency for stock reserves operates on the market but its competence is 
limited to the management of food security reserves. It manages only two 
primary agricultural products: wheat and barley. It applies competitive and 
transparent procurement procedures in accordance with the general procurement 
law. After accession to the WTO, the market price support operations competence 
was discontinued. When market prices are lower than a verage production costs, 
the Government, based on a proposal by the Ministry of Agriculture, can decide to 
establish a compensation for farmers for defined quantities of wheat purchased by 
the Agency for stock reserves ( p. 86). WT/TPR/S/390  
Pakistan  Yes No Government intervention in wheat procurement is justified for food security 
reasons. (FAO)// The Government's wheat policy aims to balance support to farm 
incomes with price stability and affordable flour and bread prices for consumers. 
It maintains a guaranteed wheat price, which is PRs 1,300 per 40 kg in 2014/15. 
The Government procures around one -third of domestic wheat production. Wheat 
stocks are held by the Pakistan Agricultural Storage and Services Corporation 
(PASSCO), a public compa ny, and food departments of provincial governments  
(pp. 66-67). FAO - Pakistan 
Review of the 
wheat sector and 
grain storage 
issues (2013)  
 
TPR - Secretariat 
report 2015 -
(WT/TPR/S/311)  
Philippines  Yes Yes The Philippines maintains a complex system of price and consumer support for 
rice. The support is provided through a combination of trade policy instruments: 
restricted imports via a rice quota, a producer support price scheme, where the 
administered price is considerably higher than the duty -paid imp ort price, and 
which is underpinned by targeted NFA purchases (procurement) and buffer stocks 
of rice; which is then sold for local consumption at subsidized prices ( p. 64) // As 
part of its mandate to ensure food security and the stabilization of the supp ly and 
price of rice and corn, the NFA intervenes as buyer of last resort in the markets 
for palay rice and (to a limited extent) corn ( p. 64). TPR - Secretariat 
report 2018 - 
WT/TPR/S/368   
  JOB/AG/210/Rev.1  
 
- 11 - Member  Annex 2 , para. 3 
expenditures 
reported for stock 
acquired at applied 
administered price 
since 20 01? Annex 2 , para. 3 
expenditures 
reported for stock 
acquired at applied 
administered price 
since 2014?  Related information  Source of 
reference  
Saudi Arabia , 
Kingdom of  Yes Yes The Agricultural Development Fund (ADF) (formerly the Saudi Arabia Agricultural 
Bank (SAAB)) provides low interest loans and loan repayment subsidies, and the 
Saudi Grain Organization (SAGO) (which replaced the Grain Silos and Flourmills 
Organization (GSFM O) in November 2015) purchases and stores wheat, mills 
wheat for human consumption, and is responsible for the strategic stockpile of six 
months' consumption. It also produces wheat -based  animal feeds. // Until 
November 2015, the GSFMO was responsible for importing and purchasing 
domestically produced wheat, and milling wheat in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. 
Under the Government Decree No. 335 of 2008, the GSFMO began reducing 
purchases of domestically produced wheat by 12.5% per year and replacing them 
with imports. The final purchases of domestic wheat were to have taken place in 
2015. The SAGO buys domestically produced wheat at SAR 1,000 per tonne.  TPR - Secretariat 
report 2016 -
WT/TPR/S/333 
pp. 66-67 
Ukraine  Yes N/A ( most recent 
notification 2012)  The basic structure of Ukraine's sugar regime remains unchanged since its 
accession, with a domestic production quota, price support and public intervention 
(footnote 40: The Agrarian Fund has in the past carried out intervention 
purchas es of sugar into the state food reserve, and a tariff quota) (p.  93 – 2016 
TPR). 
 
The state agency Agrarian Fund can implement domestic price interventions 
through the operation of the State Intervention Fund. Initially dealing only with 
grain, the Agrarian Fund has become progressively involved in other activities, 
such as sugar sales from public stocks; state purchases and sales of a broad 
range of agricultural and food products; forward -contracting; flour processing and 
wholesaling.  
 
In 2018 Ukrai ne abolished the market price support (minimum prices) for sugar.  TPR - Secretariat 
report 2016 -
WT/TPR/S/334  
 
OECD - 
Agricultural 
Policy Monitoring 
and Evaluation 
2020  
 
Ukraine reply to  
AGIMS ID 90074  
Viet Nam No No The rice -related data in Supporting Table DS:5 is interest rate support to 
enterprises to purchase 1 million tonnes of rice at market prices for a maximum 
period of six months for temporary storage; and the Government is not 
responsible for the business ef ficiency of enterprises. Due to a translation error, 
the correct content in the "Measure Types " column of the Supporting Table DS:5 
is "Interest rate support to purchase rice for temporary storage for business 
purpose " instead of "National temporary storage program for rice – Interest rates 
support ". 
 
Meanwhile, purchasing rice to store temporarily in Supporting Table DS:1 is the 
Government's annual program of purchasing food to add to the national stockpile 
for food security and relief purp oses if natural disasters, epidemics and hunger 
relief happen.   Viet Nam reply to 
AGIMS ID 97148  JOB/AG/210/Rev.1  
 
- 12 - 
 
  1.21.   Based on justifications provided in Table 5, Table 6 adjusts the Table 4 set of Members to 
clarify if stocks under the PSH programs of Members were acquired at the applied administered 
price. Table 6 lists all products that were procured each year at applied administered prices as part  
of a PSH program.  
Table 6 : Set of  Developing  Members Adjusted for Products and Stock Acquired at Applied 
Administered Price based on  Table 3 & 5 Analysis, 2001 -2020  
  2001  2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009  2010  
China  W,R,M  W,R,M  W,R,M  - R W,R W,R W,R W,R W 
India R,W,P  R,W,P  R,W,P  R,W, 
C,P R,W, 
C,P R,W R,W,C  R,W,C  R,W,C  R,W,C  
Indonesia            
Korea, 
Republic of  R,B R,B R,B R,B B B B B B B 
North 
Macedonia  ** ** W W    N N N 
Pakistan  W      W W W W 
Philippines  R R R R R R R,M R,M R,M R,M 
Saudi Arabia, 
Kingdom of  ** ** ** ** ** W W W W W 
Ukraine  ** ** ** ** ** ** ** N S S 
 
  2011  2012  2013  2014  2015  2016  2017  2018  2019  2020  
China  W,R,M
,S W,R,M
,S W,R,M  W,R,M  W,R,M  W,R,M  N N N N 
India R,W,C  R,W, 
C,P R,W, 
C,P R,W, 
C,P R,W,C  R,W, 
C,P R,W, 
C,P R,W, 
C,P R,W, 
C,P N 
Indonesia   R R R R R R R R R 
Korea, 
Republic of  B        N N 
North 
Macedonia  N N N N N N N N N N 
Pakistan  W     N N N N N 
Philippines  R,M R,M R,M R,M R,M    R R 
Saudi Arabia, 
Kingdom of  W W W W W   N N N 
Ukraine  S S N N N N N N N N 
Legend  
W = Wheat  C = Coarse Cereals  U = Cucumbers  e = Edible beans  
R = Rice  G = Groundnut  E = Eggs  f = Coffee  
M = Maize  J = Jute  I = Milk    
T = Cotton  P = Pulse  L = Sisal  N = Notification not submitted  
A = Rapeseed  F = Sunflower  H = Sorghum  ** =Not a Member of the WTO at the time  
Y = Soybean  D = Mustard seed  O = Potato  Blank = No expenditures reported under 
Annex  2, paragraph 3 and market price 
support (STDS:5)  S = Sugar  B = Barley  t = Tomato  
* Included all products of Brazil because a comprehensive list of the 500 products could not be found  
 
c. Findings  
1.22.   Based on the adjusted set of Members (Table 6), Table 7 summarizes information on products 
and years for which five (5) Members reported expenditures under Annex 2 , paragraph 3 for stocks 
that were acquired at the applied administered prices since the Bali Decision.  
1.23.   Four (4) of the Five (5) Members reported expenditures under Annex 2 , paragraph 3 for stocks 
that were acquired at applied administered prices in their last domestic support notification.  
  JOB/AG/210/Rev.1  
 
- 13 - 
 
  Table 7 : Developing Members, Products and Years, for which Expenditures under 
Annex  2, Paragraph 3 were Notified for Stocks that were Acquired at Applied 
Administered Price Since the Bali Decision (after 2013)  
Members  Products  Years  Reported in last 
notification  
China  Rice, Wheat, Corn  2014; 2015; 2016  Yes (2016)  
India Rice, Wheat, Coarse 
Grains and Pulses  2014;  2015;  2016;  2017;  2018;  2019 Yes (2019)  
Indonesia  Rice 2014;  2015;  2016;  2017;  2018, 2019, 2020 Yes (2020 ) 
Philippines  Rice, Corn  2014;  2015;  2019, 2020  Yes (2020 ) 
Saudi Arabia, 
Kingdom of  Wheat  2014;  2015 No (2017)  
 
6) Limitation of the Approach and Further Investigations  
1.24.   While the paper uses a robust approach to identify Members and products, further 
investigation may be needed on programs and products from those Members that may have been 
excluded due to the limitations of the methodology of the based set. Below are limitations of the 
base set that may prevent this analysis from capt uring additional programs.  
a. Expenditures under Annex 2 , Paragraph 3 or Market Price Support Not Reported 
Every Year  
1.25.   Further analysis reveals that the base set could have been affected in some years by Members 
not having reported expenditures under Annex 2 p aragraph 3 or Supporting Table DS:5 in a 
consistent manner. For example, one Member reported expenditures under Annex 2 , paragraph 3 
related to wheat in some years and market price support for wheat in all years. A review of the latest 
Secretariat Trade Po licy Review of that Member revealed that this Member acquired wheat using 
applied administered prices for its public stocks in all years. This additional information raised the 
need for further clarification to better understand if this Member, and possibl y others, were excluded 
in this analysis due to inconsistencies in reporting programs.  
b. Questions Regarding Expenditures Not Reported under Annex 2 , Paragraph 3  
1.26.   Some questions and further analysis are required to determine if some PSH programs could 
be rep orted by some Members directly as market price support without expenditures being reported 
under Annex 2 , paragraph 3. As PSH programs are often justified by Members as serving a dual 
purpose of stabilizing domestic prices and food security3, questions re main as to whether such 
programs could have been reported by some Members as market price support while excluding the 
related cost of the PSH programs via the Annex 3 , paragraph  8 exemption of "budgetary payments 
made to maintain the gap, such as buying -in or storage costs ". Some confusion exists in regard to  
understanding the overlapping of expenditures in relation to the accumulation and holding of stocks 
of products under Annex 2 , paragraph 3 and the expenditures made to maintain the price gap, such 
as buying -in or storage costs as noted in Annex 3 , paragraph  8.   
1.27.   In addition to the developing Members identified in the list in Table 6, a total of seven (7) 
developing country Members4 (see Annex 1 of this paper) notified market price support at least one 
time between 2001 and 2019 without reporting expenditures under Annex 2 , paragraph 3. Of these 
seven (7) Members, two Members did not appear to use market price support for food security 
purposes5, one Member stated in its accession document that his gove rnment would not claim any 
right granted under WTO Agreements to developing country Members6 and it was not possible to 
conclude that the four (4) remaining Members7 did not use market price support for food security 
purposes. As the methodology used in this analysis required that expenditure be reported under 
Annex 2 , paragraph 3 for a Member to be included in the base set of Members, further investigation 
would be r equired to determine if these four (4) Members could be missing from the set of Members 
 
3 As demonstrated for many Members in the justification column of Table 3 of this paper.  
4 Bangladesh ; Costa Rica; Jordan; Lao  PDR; the Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen 
and Matsu ; Tunisia  and Turkey . 
5 Costa Rica  and Turkey . 
6 The Separate Cu stoms Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu (WT/ACC/TPKM/18 - p. 9). 
7 Bangladesh , Jordan , Lao PDR and  Tunisia . JOB/AG/210/Rev.1  
 
- 14 - 
 
  identified in this paper. Basic information from external sources on procurement policies of the 
remaining four (4) Members can be found in Annex 2 of this paper.  
c. Difficulty to Corroborate that Procurement was Made at a Market Price  
1.28.   Further attempts to corroborate that purchases made by some Members, excluded from the 
final list, were made at a market price and not via a form of price support or administered prices 
were not successful. It was noticed that for some Members excluded from the list, that the prices at 
which stocks were acquired were fixed for a period of time and defined by parameters other than 
market forces. Without prejudice to what Members consider to be an applied administered price or 
not, the base set used in this analysis is not able to capture any of the excluded Members if the 
difference between the acquisition price and the external reference price is not accounted for in 
Supporting Table DS:5 when stocks are acquired at applied administered prices.  
d. Observations from the Committee on Agriculture  
1.29.   In the WTO Committee on Agriculture, 100 questions8 have been raised to developing countr y 
Members  regarding their expenditures related to PSH , however, as  most question raise more than 
one issue  or contain sub -questions  the total number is much higher. The interest of Members to 
better understand the operation of PSH programs can be traced back to the first question at the 7th 
meeting of the CoA in 1997.     
1.30.   The questions  and sub -questions  can be grouped into the following themes:  
a. Describe how the measure meets the criteria  for Public Stockholding Programs for Food 
Security Purposes  in Annex 2  of the Agreement on Agriculture . 
b. What are the predetermined targ ets for stocks ? 
c. What are the products that are covered by the program ? 
d. Describe how the expenditures meet the requirements in the Bali Decision . 
e. Elaborate on  use of market price support or an applied adminis tered price . 
f. How are stocks stored and the conditions for their disposal ? 
g. Export of products in public stocks . 
h. Additional information on the operation of the program . 
1.31.   Members have raised questions to  13 developing Members that have submitted notifications  
which hav e included expendit ures related to PSH . Four Members account for 81% of the questions 
raised .     
Table 8: Questions to Developing C ountry Members on PSH  at the WTO Committee on 
Agriculture  
 
 
 
8 The results of a search of the AG -IMS as of 23 February 2022.  Member  Number of Questions  
India 34 
Brazil  19 
China  17 
Indonesia  11 
Korea, Republic of  7 
Viet Nam  4 
Philippines  2 
Israel  1 
North Macedonia  1 
Pakistan  1 
Saudi Arabia, Kingdom of  1 
Sri Lanka  1 
Ukraine  1 JOB/AG/210/Rev.1  
 
- 15 - 
 
  7) Conclusion  
1.32.   This analysis found that only a small number of developing country Members are notifying 
market price support policies for stocks procured for PSH. Only five (5) Members notified 
expenditures under Annex 2 , paragraph 3 for stocks acquired at an applied administrative price at 
least once after the Bali Decision in 2013, and only four (4) of these Members reported both types 
of support in their most recent DS:1 notification. Extending the approach for all repo rting years since 
2001 identified a total of only nine (9) Members.  
1.33.   This paper also identified some limitations in using a methodology that relies only on data 
notified by Members. Such limitations include inconsistent reporting of expenditures under Annex  2, 
paragraph 3 and/or support under Supporting table DS:5, market price support measures used for 
food security reasons without expenditures notified under Annex 2 , paragraph 3, and difficulties in 
attesting that Members that only reported expenditures un der Annex 2 , paragraph  3 did not use 
administrative prices to acquire the stocks.  
1.34.   The amount of detail, variety of sources, and the approach taken in order to write this paper 
attests to inconsistencies and information gaps in the way Members notify expenditures for PSH. 
Most Members have provided very little information over the years in their annual DS:1 notification 
to help the WTO Membership better understand their programs. Basic information, such as the 
products covered by a program and on the types of expenditures reported under Annex 2 , 
paragraph  3, was not included in most DS:1 notifications. Furthermore, since 1995 only two 
developing Members9 submitted a combined total of two (2) DS:2 notifications where information 
was provided on their respective PHS measures.  
1.35.   This paper underscores the need for more transparency to help inf orm negotiations related to 
PSH. Basic requirements for the way Members notify expenditures under Annex 2 , paragraph 3 could 
be implemented without increasing the administrative burden for developing Members and Least 
Developed Countries. These new require ments could be limited to clearly indicating in the description 
box which product(s) are covered by this measure, and a simple yes/no box in Supporting Table 
DS:1 to indicate whether support under Supporting Table DS:5 was reported to account for the 
difference between the acquisition price and the external reference price. These new requirements 
would come at no additional burden as this information is already required in order to notify 
expenditures under Annex 2 , paragraph 3.  
1.36.   In addition, discussions may  be warranted to clarify whether a developing country Member 
that does not report its PSH as a measure under Annex 2 , paragraph 3, could benefit from the 
current Bali decision or a permanent solution on PSH.  
1.37.   Finally, the questionnaire on  the PSH exercise t hat was undertaken in preparation for the Bali 
Ministerial Conference should also be re -administered periodically to ensure that the basic 
information that we have on these programs is still relevant for informing the negotiations.  
_______________  
 
 
9 India and the Republic of Korea.   
  JOB/AG/210/Rev.1  
 
- 16 - ANNEX 1  
Additional list of Developing Member s that Notified Market Price Support under Supporting Table DS:5, 2001 -2020  
Member  2001  2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009  2010  2011  2012  2013  2014  2015  2016  2017  2018  2019  2020  
Bangladesh  N X N X N X N N N N N N N N N N N N N N 
Costa Rica  X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X      
Jordan  X X X X X X X X X X X X X X N N N N N N 
Lao PDR  N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N X N N N N 
Chinese 
Taipei  N X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X x N 
Tunisia  X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X N 
Turkey  X                N N N N 
X  = Reported market price support under Supporting Table DS:5 for that year . 
N  = Notification not submitted . 
**  = Not a Member of the WTO at the time . 
Blank = No support reported in Supporting Table DS:5 .  
  JOB/AG/210/Rev.1  
 
- 17 - ANNEX 2  
Info on Other  Developing  Members that Have Market Price Support Measures Related to Stocks for Food Security  
Member  Product list - 
Market price 
support  Basic information  External source 
reference  
Bangladesh  Wheat, Rice  Bangladesh maintains a security stockpile of food grains to meet the demand for emergency and normal food distribution 
through different channels. This stockpile is built -up through local procurement, food -aid and occasional import by the 
Government  (Secretariat TPR 2006 (Secretariat TPR 2006, p p. 93-94)) // The Government procures rice and wheat 
from the farmers and millers. The procurement price is fixed before harvesting taking into consideration the cost of 
production, the local market price, international market price, and farmers' profit margin (Secr etariat TPR 2006, p.  96). 
State -trading operations were undertaken by the Bangladesh Agriculture Development Corporation (BADC) for the 
public storage of food grains, such as rice and wheat. Poor farm incomes were also supported, through domestic 
procureme nt of rice and wheat from poor farmers. In 2018, rice and flour were sold to poor families led by women 
under the Open Market Sale (OMS) policy. Under this policy, the authorities purchased rice and wheat flour, and sold it 
to poor families, at a per kilog ram price of USD 0.36 for rice and USD 0.2 for wheat (Secretariat TPR 2019 p. 93). TPR - 2006 
Secretariat report - 
WT/TPR/S/168  
 
TPR - 2019 
Secretariat report - 
WT/TPR/S/385  
Jordan  Wheat, Barley  MITS is responsible for importing wheat and barley, which account for almost all (99%) domestic consumption needs. 
The Ministry also purchases wheat and barley from local farmers, at cost price which is set according to the average 
world price. The Government distributes wheat and barley to mills at cost pr ice to produce various kinds of flour. The 
flour is then sold at market price to bakeries. Flour suitable for making bread is sold to bakeries at controlled prices 
and the bread sold to consumers at JD 0.16 per kilogram (p.  61). // An active strategic whea t reserve is in place and, 
in the aftermath of rising international prices in 2007/2008, the Government increased the reserves from three to 
10 months consumption ( p. 73). // Production of wheat and barley are also supported through minimum prices which 
vary from one year to another ( p. 7). TPR - 2015 
Secretariat Report 
- WT/TPR/S/325  
Lao PDR Rice To support farmers' incomes, a minimum (floor) price for glutinous rice continues to be determined, and is 
recommended annually by the Government to serve as an optional reference for sale and purchase between farmers 
and mill houses ( p. 95). // A rice reserve policy remains in place since 2008. It consists of three components , namely: 
the National Rice Reserve (NRR), under the responsibility of the MoIC's Domestic Trade Department (DTD); seed 
reserves, under the responsibility of the MAF; and emergency rice distribution programs, under the MLSW. In 2009, 
the NRR started operat ing as a public -private partnership (PPP), whereby the MoIC provides subsidized credit (Section 
4.1.4) to millers through state banks and the millers keep a specified minimum rice stock. More specifically, under the 
2008 Prime Minister Decision on National  Stock Holding, the Government provided rice mill owners with credit at an 
interest rate of 5% for a two year -period, for them to collect rice and stock it. The money is used by millers to contract 
farmers to deliver a certain quantity of rice at the price  negotiated by private operators, so as to ensure inputs. The 
millers commit to retaining 40% of their purchase as an emergency reserve. The Government does not intervene in 
these transactions except for requesting the sale of the stock in times of scarcit y but this has not occurred since 2010. 
For FY 2010/11, the total value of budget transfers to rice producers was estimated (p p. 95-96). TPR - 2019 
Secretariat Report 
- WT/TPR/S/394  
Tunisia  Wheat, Barley, 
Milk, Olive Oil, 
Sugar beet  Tunisia's Grain Board is responsible for purchasing durum and common wheat on the domestic market at prices fixed 
by the State. It also acts as the intervention agency for barley. The Board sells cereals (domestic and imported) to the 
processing plants (mills and semolina facto ries) at a fixed price and recoups the difference between that fixed price and 
the cost price from the General Compensation Fund (CGC) ( p. 107 - 2016 TPR) . // The General Compensation Fund 
(CGC) was set up in 1970 to moderate the effects of fluctuations in  the price of staples (especially imports) and to help 
preserve the purchasing power of low -income groups and has several objectives (p.  85 - 2016 TPR). The main forms 
of intervention are guaranteed prices for producers and buffer stocks (cereals) (p. 73 - 2005 TPR).  TPR - 2016 
Secretariat Report 
- WT/TPR/S/341  
 
TPR - 2005 
Secretariat Report 
- WT/TPR/S/152   
  JOB/AG/210/Rev.1  
 
- 18 - ANNEX 3  
Market Price Support Amount Notified by Developing Members in Supporting Table DS:5, 2001 -2020  (USD Million)  
Member  2001  2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009  2010  2011  2012  2013  2014  2015  2016  2017  2018  2019  2020  
Bangladesh  N -4 N -19 N -7 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N 
Brazil  269 115 70 55 19 24 69 152 177 433 108 226 0 105 4 0 0 0 0 0 
China  -9407 -4840 -3473 0 -1804 -2901 -1169 -1553 -995 212 4592 11130  21015  20217  23505  15714  N N N N 
Costa Rica  7 5 7 2 4 8 16 62 92 110 104 82 86 76 4 0 0 0 0 0 
India -5115 -4333 -4084 -4150 -3934 -2417 237 591 901 2117 2764 2368 1213 1919 1171 2104 4919 8529 6413 N 
Indonesia  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 133 27 48 71 158 30 265 302 558 
Israel  247 235 263 308 321 324 390 578 512 516 612 564 672 643 527 485 595 615 454 647 
Jordan  0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 3 5 1 1 5 4 N N N N N N 
Korea, 
Republic of  1311 1289 1295 1309 108 105 91 67 48 24 9 0 30 34 36 6 29 8 N N 
Lao PDR  ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** N N N 3 N N N N 
North 
Macedonia  ** ** 4 7 0 0 0 N N N N N N N N N N N N  
Pakistan  -966 -902 -449 -141 -43 0 264 660 574 609 647 689 592 644 662 N N N N N 
Philippines  61 39 37 25 10 10 5 193 153 159 51 69 73 6 41 0 0 0 204 129 
Saudi Arabia, 
Kingdom of  ** ** ** ** ** 212 217 158 86 117 99 71 55 65 66 0 0 N N N 
Chinese Taipei  ** 289 180 106 91 99 85 98 88 94 218 243 264 230 188 198 239 262 271 N 
Tunisia  1 11 13 16 3 -13 28 41 40 43 45 25 45 32 -4 -43 -82 -141 -189 N 
Turkey  -4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N N N 
Ukraine  ** ** ** ** ** ** ** N 53 233 278 596 N N N N N N N N 
Viet Nam  ** ** ** ** ** ** 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 7 0 0 N N N  
  JOB/AG/210/Rev.1  
 
- 19 - ANNEX 4  
Expenditures Notified by Developing Members under Annex 2 , Paragraph 3 of the AoA , 2001 -2020  (USD Million)  
Member  2001  2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009  2010  2011  2012  2013  2014  2015  2016  2017  2018  2019  2020  
Albania  0 0.4 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0 0 N N 0 N N N 0 N N N 
Armenia  ** ** 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N N N N N 
Botswana  0.1 3 0.4 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N N 
Brazil  72 45 6 65 148 157 181 234 237 653 749 205 317 372 124 173 90 78 63 29 
China  7211 6421 6588 5082 5380 6318 7125 8337 10179  11380  5541 6650 9186 12709  24333  17295  N N N N 
India 3668 4996 5476 5730 5211 5640 7768 9495 12282  13812  14336  14809  14792  17175  15645  16271  18041  17212  18676  N 
Indonesia  0 0 0 0 87 118 134 72 142 266 246 9 13 8 6 6 6 65 27 85 
Israel  16 13 15 15 15 10 9 12 13 13 13 15 15 16 13 12 12 11 9 12 
Korea, 
Republic of  89 147 153 141 166 150 176 124 133 167 167 136 118 154 154 187 198 324 N N 
Kyrgyz 
Republic  N N N N N N N N N N N 18 0 0.1 0 0 0 0 0 N 
Moldova, 
Republic of  3 2 1 4 4 3 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 10 7 0 N N N N 
Namibia  0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 N N N N N N N N N N N 
Nepal  ** ** ** ** 4 N 4 N 5 1 2 1 N 1 N N N 1 N N 
Pakistan  0 0 0 0 0 0 111 69 109 69 112 0 0 0 0 N N N N N 
Philippines  24 17 9 8 16 18 24 45 84 177 58 95 100 96 99 89 101 133 135 141 
Saudi 
Arabia, 
Kingdom of  ** ** ** ** ** 9 10 6 3 4 11 10 11 13 14 15 13 N N N 
North 
Macedonia  ** ** 0 3 2 1 1 N N N N N N N N N N N N N 
Ukraine  ** ** ** ** ** ** ** N 14 25 30 32 N N N N N N N N 
Viet Nam  ** ** ** ** ** ** 26 103 72 74 51 70 64 93 104 72 97 N N N 
Zambia  N N N 0 N 39 N 21 N 251 N 58 N 165 N N N N N N 
  
  JOB/AG/210/Rev.1  
 
- 20 - ANNEX 5  
Product that Received Market Price Support for Members Listed in Table 3, 2001 -2020 
 2001  2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009  2010  
Brazil  T,M,R,L  T,M,R,L  M,H,W  M,W e,M,R,W  T,e,M,R,W  T,e,M,R,L  T,e,M,R,L,W  e,M,R,L,W  f,e,M,R,L,W  
China  W,R,M  W,R,M  W,R,M  - R W,R W,R W,R W,R W 
India R,W,P,T,D,J  R,W,P,T,D,J  R,W,P,T,J  R,W,C,P,T,D  R,W,C,P,T,D  R,W,T,D  R,W,C,T,D  R,W,F,C,T  R,W,C,T  R,W,C  
Indonesia            
Israel  t,U,O,E,I  t,U,E,I  t,U,E,I  E,I E,I E,I E,I E,I E,I E,I 
Korea , Republic of  R,B,M,A,Y  R,B,M,A,Y  R,B,M,A,Y  R,B,M,A,Y  B,M,Y  B,M,Y  B,M,Y  B,M,Y  B,Y B 
North Macedonia  ** ** W W    N N N 
Pakistan  W W W W W W W W W W 
Philippines  R R R R R R R,M R,M R,M R,M 
Saudi Arabia , 
Kingdom of  ** ** ** ** ** W W W W W 
Ukraine  ** ** ** ** ** ** ** N S S 
Viet Nam ** ** ** ** ** **     
 
  2011  2012  2013  2014  2015  2016  2017  2018  2019  2020  
Brazil  e,M,R,W  e,R,W   f,e,M,W  e,M      
China  W,R,M,S,T,
A,Y W,R,M,S,T,
A,Y W,R,M,T,A,Y  W,R,M,T,A,Y  W,R,M,T,A  W,R,M  N N N N 
India R,W,C,T  R,W,C,P,T,F  R,W,C,P,T,  
G,F R,W,C,P,T,  
G,F,D  R,W,C,T,F  R,W,C,P,G,F  C,T,G,P,D,  
R,Y,F,W  C,T,G,P,D,  
R,Y,F,W  C,T,G,P,D,  
R,Y,F,W  N 
Indonesia   R R R R R R R R R 
Israel  E,I E,I E,I E,I E,I E,I E,I E,I E,I E,I 
Korea, Republic of  B  Y Y Y Y Y Y N N 
North Macedonia  N N N N N N N N N N 
Pakistan  W W W W W N N N N N 
Philippines  R,M R,M R,M R,M R,M    R R 
Saudi Arabia, 
Kingdom of  W W W W W   N N N 
Ukraine  S S N N N N N N N N 
Viet Nam     R R   N N N 
Legend  
W = Wheat  C = Coarse Cereals  U = Cucumbers  e = Edible beans  
R = Rice  G = Groundnut  E = Eggs  f = Coffee  
M = Maize  J = Jute  I = Milk    
T = Cotton  P = Pulse L = Sisal  N = Notification not submitted  
A = Rapeseed  F = Sunflower  H = Sorghum  ** =Not a Member of the WTO at the time  
Y = Soybean  D = Mustard seed  O = Potato  Blank = No expenditures reported under Annex 2, paragraph 3 and market price support 
(STDS:5)  S = Sugar  B = Barley  t = Tomato  
* Included all products of Brazil because a comprehensive list of the 500 products could not be found  
 
__________