JOB/AG/193  
 
7 April 2021 
(21-2874) Page: 1/3 
Committee on Agriculture  
Special Session  Original: English  
 
 
SCOPE FOR POSSIBLE DISCUSSIONS ON EXPORT PROHIBITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS  
COMMUNICATION FROM JAPAN,  ISRAEL,  REPUBLIC OF KOREA,  LIECHTENSTEIN,  SWITZERLAND 
AND THE SEPARATE CUSTOMS TERRITORY OF TAIWAN, PENGHU, KINMEN AND MATSU  
The following communication, dated 6 April 2021, is being circulated at the request of the 
aforementioned Members.  
 
_______________  
 
 
1  BACKGROUND  
1.1.  Net-food importing Members rely on continuous supplies from the international market for their 
food security. With increasing concentration of agricultural commodity exports and trade in value 
chains, dependence on access to supply has become much more imp ortant. In this context, export 
restrictive measures instituted by exporting Members  have long been of great concern to net -food 
importing Members.  
1.2.  Consequently, increased transparency a nd more clarity of disci plines on export restrictive 
measures are fund amental in order to increase the food security of net -food importing Members, 
especially developing country Members and least -developed country Members (LDCs).  
1.3.  In addition, the analysis contained in JOB/AG/188  outlines that some Members have instituted 
export restrictive measures during the COVID -19 pandemic without submitting the necessary 
notification, which has reaffirmed the concerns of net -food im porting Members.  
1.4.  In the meantime, many Members have already expressed support for the proposal for not 
imposing export restrictive measures on foodstuffs purchased for non -commercial humanitarian 
purposes by the World Food Progra mme (WFP) (hereinafter "WFP exemption "). A total of 55 
cosponsors representing 81 Members have supported the Joint Statement on Agriculture Export 
Prohibitions or Restrictions Relating to the World Food Programme (WT/L/1109) in this regard.  
1.5.  Members also broadly shared the need to continue general discussions on export prohibitions 
and restrictions. Such discussions should address, for example, price hikes, which may be caused 
by cascading export prohibitions and restrictions, as reported by the FAO1 and World Bank .2 
1.6.  This paper, which complements the important and substantial proposal on WFP exemption, 
aims at providing Members with guidance for future discussions towards MC12  in the Co mmittee on 
 
1 FAO reported in "Agri-food markets and trade policy in the time of COVID -19" (April 2020) as follows: 
"[…] cascading export restrictions by major food commodity exporters […] has demonstrated that this policy 
response can destabilize international markets.  As countries followed the first movers, upward price 
movements were amplified […]. This proved particularly damaging to poor import -dependent countries, and to 
the efforts of humanitarian agencies to procure supplies ". 
2 World Bank Group reported in 
"Covid19andFoodProtectionismTheImpactofthePandemicandExportRestrictionsonWorldFoodMarkets " 
(May 2020) as follows: "Escalating export restrictions would multiply the initial shock by a factor of 3, with 
world food prices rising by up to 18 % on average. Import fo od dependent countries, which are in large 
majority developing and least developed countries, would be most affected. " JOB/AG/193  
 
- 2 - 
 
  Agriculture in Special Session  (CoA-SS) by clarifying the scope of issues on e xport prohibitions and 
restrictions, in order to address the need for greater transparency and more clarity of disciplines.  
2  SCOPE FOR POSSIBLE DISCUSSIONS ON EXPORT RESTRICTIONS  
2.1.  Shown below is a non -exhaustive list of issues that could fall within the scop e of possible 
discussions.  
2.2.  The bullet points put forward in this section rely on previous work. This work includes the 
proposals from June 2015 ( JOB/AG /41) and October 2017 ( JOB/AG/115 ) as well as several analytical 
papers ( JOB/AG/149 , JOB/AG/156 , JOB/AG/175  and JOB/AG/188 ) that were submitted  by Israel, 
Japan, the Republic of Korea, Switzerland and the Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, 
Kinmen and Matsu.  
2.3.  It is particularly noted that the ER:1 notification is a mandatory requirement for Members as 
set out in Article 12.1(b) of the Ag reement on Agriculture  (AoA) . Nevertheless, as the findings based 
on the previous work mentioned above and on the responses by Members at the special meeting of 
the C ommittee on Agriculture (CoA)  held on 18 June 2020 have demonstrated, (1) many Members 
do not comply with the current rules partly because they are not equipped with effective supporting 
systems for compliance, and (2) the current rules are not sufficient to secure satisfactory 
transparency. For these reasons, Members are encouraged to address the need for greater 
transparency and clarity of disciplines on export restrictive measures.  
2.4.  In addition, it might be necessary to give due consideration to the needs of developing country 
Members, in particular LDC and net -food importing developing countr y (NFIDC) Members.  
ENCOURAGING COMPLIANCE:  
 
2.5.  The A oA foresees certain mechanisms and instruments to help ensure compliance with current 
rules. These mechanisms/instruments and their potential for improvement will be brought up for 
discussion in the CoA. As  compliance with existing obligations under the A oA is fundamental in 
limiting  the negative impact of export restrictive measures on international markets, the following 
three mechanisms/instruments are recalled for the sake of completeness : 
• Reminder on outstanding notifications:  The Secretariat may remind Members about 
outstanding notifications of export prohibitions and restrictions based on relevant 
information sources including the Agricultural Market Information System (AMIS) Initiative 
policy database;  
 
• Actions based on Article 18 of the  AoA: Members are encouraged to take actions such 
as counter notifications in case of lacking necessary notifications (Article 18.7) and raise 
matters related to export restrictive measures to the CoA (Article 18.6); and  
 
• Technical assistance by the Secretariat for developing Members: The Secretariat may 
provide technical assistance and capacity building to aid  developing country Members that 
are not covered by the exemption under Article 12.2 of the AoA in submitting their 
notifications.  
 
PURSUING SOLUTIONS FOR MORE PREDICTABLE TRADE:  
 
2.6.  The analysis of notifications, as well as of the responses from Members at the CoA meetings 
regarding their ER:1 notifications or the lack thereof ( JOB/AG/188 ), demonstrated that there 
remains significant uncertainty with regard to the current rules. This uncertainty may partly explain 
the lack of t ransparency in export restrictive measures. Moreover, in order to effectively address the 
negative impact that export prohibitions and restrictions may have on international markets, further 
disciplines have to be developed. Consequently, Members could ref lect on the following elements:  
 JOB/AG/193  
 
- 3 - 
 
  • Further guidelines for ER:1 notification s: Further guidelines to specify the items to be 
included3 in ER:1 notifications as well as the manner of description (e.g. possible revision of 
the relevant section of G/AG/2 : the items to be includ ed in the form at could be quantitative 
descriptions or detailed information on essentiality , critical state, due consideration for 
importing Members , expected duration,  etc.); 
 
• Exemption for net -food importing developing countries: To assist Members in 
acquiring more clarity on the existing exemption for developing country Members that are 
net-food importers of the specific foodstuff concerned, the Secretariat may provide yearly 
information on volumes of exports and imports of agricu lture products on an individual 
Member basis (e.g. by means of a matrix). For this purpose, a list of relevant products or 
product groups could be defined and be included in G/AG/2 . This information could also 
indicate whether a specific product was subject to an export -restrictive measure. This will 
not only assist Members in monitoring compliance with notification requirements but more 
importantly help Mem bers in assessing whether they have to submit a notification;  
 
• Reports to the CoA:  A possible obligation to report to the CoA regarding the progress made 
in the consultations provided for under Article 12.1(b) of the AoA between Members 
instituting or int ending to institute export prohibitions or restrictions and Members having a 
substantial interest as an importer;   
 
• Timeline for advance notification:  A specific advance notice period (e.g. "xx days prior 
to the date it takes effect ") with flexibilities in cases of "force majeure " or other specific 
situations Members may identify in the negotiation process;  
 
• Notification obligations for measures of long duration:  In light of the temporary nature 
of measures provided for under Article XI.2(a) of the GATT 1994, a possible obligation to 
resubmit notifications for measures of a particularly long duration, indicating the reasons for 
the ongoing need of the measure; and  
 
• Duration of export prohibitions or restrictions:  A maximum impl ementation period for 
export prohibitions or restrictions, beyond which the continuation of the measure is only 
possible with the agreement of the affected importing Members.  
 
3  NEXT STEPS  
3.1.  Members are invited to discuss the above -mentioned issues concerning export prohibitions and 
restrictions in the CoA -SS and the  "topic-by-topic Facilitator process " supervised by the Chair of the 
CoA-SS in order to seek pertinent outcomes for MC12. The elements for encouraging compliance 
will furthermore be submitted to the CoA for a technical discussion.  
 
__________  
 
3 JOB/AG/188 illustrates in Section 4 such items as (1) the reason why the products concerned are 
essential to the country, (2) the way in which there is a critical shortage of the products concerned, and (3) 
relevant information on due consideration taken by exporting Members for importing Members.