RESTRICTED  
  
G/AG/R/ 101 
 
12 April 2022 
(22-2983) Page: 1/21 
Committee on Agriculture    
 
SUMMARY REPORT OF THE MEETING HELD ON 15-16 MARCH 2022  
NOTE BY THE SECRETARIAT1 
1  ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA  
1.1.  The Committee on Agriculture (CoA) held its one-hundredth  (100th) regular meeting 
on 15-16 March 2022  under the Chairpersonship of M r. Marcos da Rosa Uranga  of Uruguay . 
1.2.  The agenda contained in the convening airgram WTO/AIR/AG/5 7 circulated on 4 March 2022 
was adopted  with the following change s to reflect the reorganization2 of certain questions in the 
original compilation document in G/AG/W/217 :  
- Paragraph 1 of questions from India to Canada in AG-IMS ID 100056 was reclassified as 
a question on "overdue notifications " (transferred from agenda item 1 .B(i) to 1.B(ii) ); 
- Paragraphs 2 to 5 of questions from India to Canada in AG -IMS ID 100056 were 
reclassified as new Specific Implementation Matters (SIM s) (transferred from agenda 
item 1.B(i) to 1.A );  
- Entry  "b" of questions from India to the Russian Federation in AG -IMS ID 100122 was 
reclassifi ed as a separate new SIM under  the same agenda item 1 .A; 
- Paragraph  2 of questions from India to the European Union  in AG -IMS ID 100041 was 
reclassified as a question on "overdue notifications " (transferred from agenda item 1.A to 
1.B(ii) )  
1.3.  Additionally, the Chairperson acknowledged the written submissions by the United Nations Food 
and Agriculture Organization (FAO)  in G/AG/GEN/19 8 (and Corr.1) and G/AG/GEN/199/Rev.1 and 
by the International Gra ins Council (IGC)  in G/AG/GEN/19 7, which were circulated after the issuance 
of the convening airgram , for consideration under Part II of the agenda ( item 2. A – "Annual 
monitoring exercise on the follow -up to the Marrakesh NFIDC Decision " and item 2.C – "COVID-19 
and agriculture ").  
1.4.  Prior to the start of discussions under the first agenda item on the "review process ", Ukraine  
made a statement on the ongoing war  in Ukraine. It noted that the blatant act of aggression launched 
on 24 February 2022 by the Russian Federation was a brutal attack on the sovereignty and territorial 
integrity of Ukraine against all norms and principles of international law and the UN Cha rter as well 
as the principles of the WTO. Ukraine noted that the war had already inflicted severe human and 
economic loss and called on all WTO Members not to remain indifferent, and rather to mobilize all 
possible efforts to stop the unprecedent and ille gal act of aggression by the Russian Federation.  
1.5.  The d elegations of Australia, Canada, the European Union, Iceland, Japan, Korea, New Zealand, 
Norway, Switzerland, Chinese Taipei, the United Kingdom, and the United States  of America  strongly 
condemned the Russian Federation's attack on Ukraine as being fundamentally in breach of 
international law and incompatible with the values and principles of the multilateral trading system 
of the WTO. Th ose Members also asked the Russian Federation to immediately cease  its military 
actions and respect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine. Several of th ose Members 
also expressed their resolve to mobilize the international community  to ensure that the Russian 
Federation was held accountable for its actions  which were causing catastrophic loss of life and 
 
1 This document has been prepared under the Secretariat's own responsibility and is without prejudice 
to the positions of Members or to their rights and obligations under the WTO.  
2 G/AG/W/217/Corr.1 refers.  G/AG/R/ 101 
 
- 2 - 
 
  human hardship  in Ukraine.  It was also noted that as a permanent member of the U N Security 
Council , the Russian Federation had a particular responsibility to uphold international peace and 
security rather t han violating the borders of another sovereign country. The Russian Federation 
underlined that th e matter was beyond the scope of the WTO and invited Members to focus rather 
on the agenda of the Committee which they had just adopted.  
1.6.  Ukraine also referred to the severe disruption caused by the war to agricultural activities in 
Ukraine and the resulting negative repercussions on global food security considering Ukraine's 
prominent role in global trade of several agricultural  commodities. Ukraine , joined by some other 
Members , referred to the statements by the UN Secretary General, Director Generals of the FAO and 
the WTO and the G -7 Agriculture Ministers on the effect s of the war on international food and 
fertilizer prices and a potential exacerbation of food insecurity in sev eral parts of the world  which 
had already been reeling under the impact of the COVID -19 pandemic . A call was also made to keep 
food supply chains open and to avoid recourse to unjustified agricultural export restrictions . The 
Russian Federation referred to  unilateral economic measures by some Members against the Russian 
Federation and their possible negative effect on the global food security and food supply chains. The 
potential food security implications of the war in Ukraine w ere also addressed  under age nda 2 A on 
the follow -up to the Marrakesh NFIDC Decision  
2  THE REVIEW PROCESS  
2.1.  The Chairperson urged Members to provide timely and complete responses to questions raised 
under the Committee's review process and to submit them through the Agriculture Informati on 
Management System (AG -IMS)3 for interested Members to consult.  
2.2.  The Chairperson noted that for th e meeting, as of the morning of 15 March 2022 , 20 out of the 
145 questions raised had responses available on  the AG -IMS. The Chairperson welcomed Members ' 
practice  of submit ting responses  in advance of CoA meetings  allowing for  deepen ed exchanges 
during meetings.   
2.3.  The Secretariat continued its practice of ascertaining the attendance of Members subject to 
advance questions  prior to Committee meetings . Morocco had informed  the Secretariat about its 
inability to attend the meeting  noting that they were working on a response to the questions received 
for the meeting , which , once available, would be submitted via the AG -IMS.  
2.1  Matters relevant to the implementation of commitments under the reform programme 
- Article 18.6  
2.4.  A total of 44 specific implementation matters (SIMs) were raised at the 100th CoA meeting 
under Article 18.6.4 Out of the 44 SIMs, 23 were raised for the first time. Members' response s and 
follow -up comments may be consulted in the AG -IMS using the relevant question ID numbers as 
provided in Table 1 of Annex 1 to this report . This information can also be accessed directly by 
clicking on the relevant hyperlinks in column  3 of the table.  
2.2  Review of Notifications  
2.5.  The Chairperson reported that since the previous Committee meeting held on  
23-24 September  2021, 145 notifications had been received. Out of those  notifications , 43 related 
to market access, 39 concerned domestic support, 53 related to export competition,  two concerned 
export prohibitions or restrictions , and eight were net food -importing developing country ( NFIDC ) 
notifications . Those notifications had been distributed electronically to all delegations and were 
available for consultation through the  AG-IMS.  
 
3 http://agims.wto.org/ . 
4 WTO/AIR/AG/ 57, Section A of Attachment  1. The full version of the questions raised can be found 
under Section 1 of the compilation document G/AG/W/2 17 (and Corr.1 ). G/AG/R/ 101 
 
- 3 - 
 
  2.2.1   Notifications in respect of which questions have been raised in advance of the 
issuance of the convening airgram  
2.6.  Table 2 of Annex 1  to this report includes the list of questions relating to individual notifications 
raised in advance of the issuance of the convening airgram .5 Members' responses and follow -up 
comments can be accessed  directly by clicking on the hyperlinks contained in the table or through 
the AG -IMS using the relevant question ID numbers.   
2.2.2   Overdue notifications  
2.7.  The Committee took note of the Secretariat document summarizing the status of Members' 
compliance with notification obligations .6 
2.8.  The Chairperson acknowledged M embers' efforts to bring their notifications up to date , noting 
that several Members had submitted agriculture notifications covering multiple years since the 
September  2021 meeting, including:  
• Iceland : Table DS:1 covering 2017-2020, Table ES:1 covering the period 2018 -2020 and 
Table MA:2 covering 2017 -2021; and 
• Kazakhstan : Table ES:1 covering the period 2017-2021. 
2.9.  The Chairperson also drew Members' attention to the overall situation with respect to 
outstanding domestic support and export subsidy  notifications for the period 1995 to 20 20: 
• 973 Table DS:1 domestic support notifications  remained outstanding; and  
• 1,002 export subsidy notifications in the Table ES:1 series remained outstanding.  
2.10.  Five questions were raised under this agenda item.7 Members' responses and follow -up 
comments can be accessed through the hyperlinks contained in Table 3 of Annex 1  to this report  or 
through the AG -IMS using the  relevant question ID numbers.  
2.11.  The Chairperson e mphasized the importance of transparency and timely notifications and 
encouraged Members to fulfil their notification obligations.  
2.2.3   Notifications subject to review in respect of which no questions have been raised 
in advance of the issuance of the convening  airgram  
2.12.  The Committee took note of the 112 notifications circulated before the issuance of the 
convening airgram on 4 March 2022 , including notifications carried over from the September  2021 
meeting, but in respect of which no questions had been raised by that date , under paragraph  9 of 
the Committee's working procedures.8 
2.2.4   Notifications circulated after the issuance of the convening airgram  
2.13.  The Committee took note of the 14 notifications cir culated after the issuance of the convening 
airgram on 4 March 2022 :  
• Australia's Table NF:1 for the year 20 19 (G/AG/N/AUS/1 43) and Table MA:2 for the financial 
year 2020/2021 (G/AG/N/AUS/144) ;  
• Costa Rica 's Table ES:1 and ES: 2 for the year 2021 (G/AG/N/C RI/86 and G/AG/N/CRI/87 );  
• El Salvador 's Table MA:2 for the year 2021 (G/AG/N/ SLV/82);  
• The European Union's Table MA:2 for the year 2021 (G/AG/N/EU/76) and a corrigendum to 
Table MA:1 for the year 2020 (G/AG/N/EU/72/Corr.1)  
 
5 WTO/AIR/AG/ 57, Section B of Attachment  1. The full version of the questions raised can be found 
under Section 2 of the compilation document G/AG/W/2 17 plus G/AG/W/2 17/Corr.1 . 
6 G/AG/GEN/86/Rev.4 4. 
7 The full version of the questions raised can be found under Section 4 of the compilation document  
G/AG/W/2 17 (and Corr.1 ). 
8 WTO/AIR/AG/ 57, Section C of Attachment  1. G/AG/R/ 101 
 
- 4 - 
 
  • Guatemala's corrigendum to Table ES:1 for the year 2021 (G/AG/N/GTM/79/Corr.1)  
• Republic of Kore a's corrigendum to Table MA:2 for the year 2020 (G/AG/N/ KOR/81/Corr.1 );  
• Myanmar's  Table ES:1 for the year 2021 (G/AG/N/MMR/3) ;  
• New Zealand's Table  MA:2 for the year 2021  and Table  DS:1 for the year 2020  
(G/AG/N/NZL/13 1 and G/AG/N/NZL/ 132);  
• Chinese Taipei's Table MA:3 (G/AG/N/TPKM/212); and  
• The United Kingdom's Table NF:1  for the year 2021  (G/AG/N/GBR/10) . 
2.14.  These notifications would be reverted to for su bstantive review during the next regular 
meeting, in accordance with paragraph 9 of the working procedures.  
2.2.5   Points concerning notifications raised at previous meetings which have been 
pursued bilaterally: information regarding outcome where the issue invol ved is one of 
general interest  
2.15.  There were no requests for the floor under this agenda item.  
2.2.6   Counter -notifications under Article 18.7 of the Agreement on Agriculture  
2.16.  No counter -notifications under Article 18.7 were made for this Committee meeting.  
2.3  Deferred replies to questions raised under the review process  
2.17.  Five questions were raised under this agenda item9 as listed in Table 4 of Annex 1  to this 
report. The responses and follow -up comments can be accessed directly by clicking on the hyperlinks 
contained in the table or through the AG -IMS using the relevant question ID numbers.  
2.18.  The Secretariat document G/AG/W/204/Rev. 5 presents  a list of questions raised under the 
CoA review process from 2013 to 202 1 where responses remain outstanding.  As of 4 March 2022, a 
total of 146 questions still had outstanding responses  from 36 Members  for the period 2013 -2020. 
For the questions posed in 202 1, 54 responses from 17 Members were pending as of  4 March 2022 .  
2.19.  The Chairperson urged Members to make dedicated efforts to shorten, and eventually close, 
the list of pending responses. To assist Members in this endeavour, the Secretariat ha s introduced 
a feature  in the AG -IMS to generate automatic reminders to Members with outstanding responses.  
3  OTHER MATTERS WITHIN THE PURVIEW OF THE COMMITTEE  
3.1  Annual monitoring exercise on the follow up to the Marrakesh NFIDC Decision under 
Article 16.2 of the Agreement on Agri culture (G/AG/W/42/Rev.22)  
3.1.1   Contributions by Members, including table NF:1 notifications  which have been 
circulated since the 30 November – 1 December 2020 monitoring exercise  
3.1.  Article 16.2 of the Agreement on Agriculture mandates the Committee on Agriculture to 
monitor, as appropriate, the follow -up to the Marrakesh Ministerial Decision on Me asures Concerning 
the Possible Negative Effects of the Reform Programme on Least developed and net food -importing 
developing countries (the NFIDC Decision). This exercise normally take s place at the November CoA 
meetings. In view of the 12th Ministerial Co nference originally scheduled for November -December  
2021, the 2021 annual NF monitoring had been deferred to  the March 2022 meeting.  
The Chairperson recalled that pursuant to paragraph  18 of its working procedures (G/AG/1), the 
Committee undertakes the ann ual monitoring exercise based principally on actions taken by donor 
Members within the framework of the NFIDC Decision as reported in their Table NF:1 notifications.  
 
9 WTO/AIR/AG/ 57, Section D of Attachment  1. The full version of the questions raised can be found 
under Section 3 of the compilation document  G/AG/W/2 17 (and Corr.1 ). G/AG/R/ 101 
 
- 5 - 
 
  3.2.  The Committee took note of the following Table NF:1 notifications circulated since the 
December 2020  monitoring exercise:  
• Australia: G/AG/N/AUS/143;  
• European Union: G/AG/N/EU/67, G/AG/N/EU/73 ; 
• Korea, Republic of: G/AG/N/KOR/86, G/AG/N/KOR/87 ; 
• New Zealand: G/AG/N/NZL/128 ; 
• Norway: G/AG/N/NOR/118 ; 
• Russian Federation: G/AG/N/RUS/33 ; 
• South Africa: G/AG/N/ZAF/102, G/AG/N/ZAF/103, G/AG/N/ZAF/104 ; 
• Switzerland: G/AG/N/CHE/105, G/AG/N/CHE/112 ; 
• United Kingdom: G/AG/N/GBR/10 ; and  
• United States of America: G/AG/N/USA/145, G/AG/N/USA/146, G/AG/N/USA/160 . 
3.3.  The Committee also took note of a revised background note circulated by the Secretariat on 
the implementation of the NFIDC Decision, to facilitate Members' consideration of this agenda item.10 
The note sets o ut the substantive provisions of the NFIDC Decision and provides information 
regarding their implementation. The Secretariat briefly introduced the document and highlighted the 
main updates in the revised background note.  
3.1.2   Contributions by Observer Internat ional Organizations  
3.4.  The FAO and the IGC presented their written contributions  under this agenda item . The FAO 
report11 provided a detailed overview of the current global market situation and international price 
trends for major food commodities. The repor t also included information on the evolution of domestic 
food prices and food import bill s in net food -importing developing countries, and shared 
recommendations to, inter alia , mitigate the exacerbated vulnerabilities of food systems  in NFIDCs . 
The submission12 by the IGC provided an overview of global grain trade volumes and prospects for 
2022-23 for wheat, rice, maize, and soybean .  
3.5.  Egypt noted that as the largest importer of agriculture and food commodities among the 
NFIDCs , it attached significan t importance to the implementation of the Marrakesh  NFIDC Decision . 
Egypt underlined that its position13 on the Decision and its follow -up had remained consistent since 
the launch of the Doha Round . Egypt further recalled that t he African Union had proposed the 
establishment of a revolving fund to safeguard vulnerabl e importing countries ' access to food 
through commercial imports ; this would ensure that the agricultural reform programme did not 
adversely affect access to  basic food supplies by import ing countries. However, as the 2006 report14 
by the Committee to the General Council had acknowledged, no concrete action had been  taken. 
Egypt also re called  a pre-MC-8 submission15 by NFIDCs  and the African and the Arab Groups seeking 
to establish  a food security work programme to mitigate the negative impact o f food market price s 
volatility on LDCs and NFIDCs. Egypt called for t echnical work to investigate the implications of 
export competition policies on imports of basic food stuffs by vulnerable deve loping countries . Egypt 
further asked donor Members to specifically identify the recipients of technical assistance in their 
NF:1 notificatio ns. 
3.6.  Ukraine  thanked the FAO for its presentation and analysi s of the effects of the Russia n war on 
global food markets and the associated implications for food security  worldwide . Ukraine recalled 
that similar conclusion s on the devastating effect of the war on collective hunger, food price  spikes , 
and agricultural trade and supply chains disrup tions had been drawn  by the WFP , Agricultural Market 
 
10 G/AG/W/42/Rev.2 2. 
11 G/AG/GEN /198 and corrigendum refer.  
12 G/AG/GEN/1 97. Based on request by Members at the 15 -16 March Committee meeting , the IGC 
submitted a supplementary report in  G/AG/GEN/1 97/Add.1 focusing on the impact of the Russia -Ukraine 
conflict o n the global grains and oilseeds market, including production, consumption and trade forecasts.  
13 G/AG/W/49 (and Add. 1 & Corr.1) refers.  
14 Paragraph 12 of G/AG/16/Add.1  refers.  
15 G/AG/W/90 . G/AG/R/ 101 
 
- 6 - 
 
  Information System  (AMIS), the IGC, and other rel evant international organizations . Ukraine  
believed that  the negative repercussions of the war , combined with the impact of the COVID -19 
pandemic , were likely to adversely affect food security of low- and middle -income countries  and 
hampering thereby the operations of the WFP and the achievement of the UN S ustain able 
Development Goals  (SDGs). Ukraine noted that t wo significant p orts handling 77% of Ukraine's 
grains exports were shut down ; this coupled with damage d agricultur al machinery  and ports, 
landmines in several areas, i ncluding in a gricultural fields , could severely destabilize global maize 
and wheat markets .   
3.7.  The European Union  (EU) referred  to studies  highlighting the impact of the COVID -19 pandemic  
and of governmental measures to deal with the pandemic causing major disruptions to global  food 
supply chains and the associated negative impact on food and nutritional security. The EU underlined 
the importance of transparency of international food aid  to assess the impact of adverse market 
conditions on NFIDC s' access to food  while pointing out the need for reviewing  and streamlining  the 
NF notification requirements . The EU called on the signat ories of the Food Assistance  Convention to 
notify their food aid programmes to the WTO . The EU also underlined that the  Russia n invasion in 
Ukraine could  severely  impact ag ricultur e and food suppl ies around the world as suppl y chains 
hitherto relying on the availability of grains , oilseed and its by -products from Ukraine and the Russia n 
Federation would need to dramatically adjust to the new situation.  
3.8.  The United States expressed alarm at the Russia n Federation's  targeting of agricultural 
infrastructure, including transportation and storage systems, in Ukraine  which was  likely to affect 
wheat and sunflower oil trade . Russia 's invasion of Ukraine combined with persistent negative effects 
of the COVID -19 pandemic, climate change , and biodiversity losses had led to sharp rise in prices of 
several agricultural commodities and inputs such as fertilizers thereby affecting  food security , 
especially in poor countries  and NFIDCs.  The United States  called on WTO Members to keep food 
supply chains open and to resist adopting restrictive measures on agricultural exports. 
3.9.  Canada  also expressed concerns on the looming global hunger and malnutrition  risks due to 
the COVID -19 pandemic  followed now by the R ussian invasion . Canada called on WTO Members to 
keep their food and ag ricultural  market s open, tr ansparent, and predictable.  
3.10.  The United Kingdom warned that the Russian invasion of Ukraine had d estabiliz ed global food 
market s and had led  to an increase in international wheat and maize prices compromising poor and 
vulnerable people's access to food.  
3.11.  Japan  echoed the stated  concern s on the impact of the situation in Ukraine on global food 
security. Japan c alled on WTO Members to keep marke ts open and to resist from adopting  unjustified 
measures  restricting export s of agriculture products . 
3.12.  Switzerland  expressed concerns on export restriction s on foodstuffs and considered it 
pertinent and timely to accord priority to strengthen ing WTO discipline s on exp ort restrictions and 
prohibitions in the agriculture negotiations .  
3.13.  New Zealand  also expressed concerns regarding  the vulnerability of global food suppl y chain s 
due to the COVID -19 pandemic and Russia 's invasion  of Ukraine . New Zealand added that Ukraine 
was not able to supply  food, causing rise in international wheat and oilseed prices to the  detriment 
of the food security of vulnerable people in the Middle East and Africa . New Zealand also called on 
Members not to lose sight of the fundamental objective  of trade agreements to facilitat e access to 
affordable  food by ensuring that those who can produce food efficiently were able to  supply to those 
who need ed it the most.  
3.14.  Brazil thanked IGC for its written report in G/AG/GEN/197 and wondered whether the IGC 
could  supplement  its writt en report  with latest data  on the grains market  developments  due to the 
current geopolitical situation .16 
3.15.  The Russian Federation stated that political  interventions on Ukraine did not fall under the 
competence of the WTO nor of the CoA.  
 
16 The IGC  later submitted a supplementary report contained in G/AG/GEN/197/Add.1.  G/AG/R/ 101 
 
- 7 - 
 
  3.1.3   Review of the international food aid provisions of the Nairobi Ministerial Decision 
on Export Competition  
3.16.  In paragraph 32 of the Nairobi Decision on Export Competition, Members agreed to review 
the provisions on international food aid forming part of the Decision during the regular Committee 
on Agriculture monitoring of the implementation of the NFIDC Decision.  
3.17.  The Chairperson referred to past discussions where the issue of transparency of Members' 
food aid programmes and existing data gaps concerning food aid had been emphasized.  
3.18.  There were no requests for the floor under this agenda item.  
3.2  Annual consultation under Article 18.5 – Members' participation in the normal grow th 
of world trade in agriculture products within the framework of the commitments on export 
subsidies (G/AG/W/32/Rev.20)  
3.19.  The Chairperson recalled that Article 18.5 of the Agreement on Agriculture provided for 
Members to consult annually with respect of the ir participation in the normal growth of world trade 
in agricultural products within the framework of the commitments on export subsidies. This exercise 
normally t ook place at the November meetings of the Committee . In view of the 12th Ministerial 
Conferen ce originally scheduled for November -December  2021, the 2021 annual consultation was 
deferred to  the March  2022 CoA meeting.  The Chairperson noted  that Members' compliance with 
their export subsidies notification obligations was crucial to enable the Committee to undertake the 
consultation s. The revised Secretariat compliance document reflected the state -of-play of Members' 
compliance with their not ification obligations including in the export subsidy area.17 The document 
showed that for the implementation period  1995-2020, 1,002  Table ES:1  notifications and 44 Table 
ES:2 notifications remained outstanding.  
3.20.  The Committee took note of the Secretariat 's revised background document for this 
exercise .18 The Secretariat introduced the document which provided data on export volumes19 and 
shares in world exports, for selected agricultural products/product groups covering the period from 
2010 to 2020. In ter ms of product coverage, the document covered all 22 products or group of 
products listed in G/AG/2 for the Committee's monitoring of Members' implementation of export 
subsidy commitments.  
3.21.  The European Union  (EU) and New Zealand welcome d the Secretariat 's background 
document. The EU noted that , despite the COVID-19 pandemic, world trade in ag ricultural  produc ts 
had increase d by 4% in USD terms , showing the resilience of agri -food trade. The EU also welcomed 
the increasing participati on of developing countries in world agricultural expor ts, both in  absolute 
and percentage  terms . The EU also  suggested that the future editions of the background document 
could include data on agricultural  imports as well.  
3.3  COVID -19 and Agriculture  
3.22.  The Committee acknowledged the written submissions  by the Organization for Econo mic Co -
operation and Development  (OECD)20, the World Food Programme (WFP)21, and the FAO22.  
3.23.  The FA O underscored that according to "The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the 
World  (SOFI)  2021", global hunger  had already worsened in 2020 under the COVID -19 pandemic, 
with estimates ranging from 70 to 161 million more people facing hunger. The COVID -19 pandemic 
had resulted in a dual shock affecting both food sup ply and demand, including production, 
processing, logistics, and retail. However, the efforts of governments and other agricultural 
stakeholders worldwide to keep agricultural markets open and agri -food trade flowing smoothly ha d 
contri buted to remarkably resilient agricultural commodity markets.  The FAO recommended that 
governments needed to continue implementing food safety -net and social protection programmes, 
 
17 G/AG/GEN/86/Rev.4 4. 
18 G/AG/W/32/Rev. 20. 
19 Except for fruits & vegetables and live animals for which export data was provided in value terms.  
20 G/AG/GEN/194.  
21 G/AG/GEN/195.  
22 G/AG/G EN/199/Rev.1.  G/AG/R/ 101 
 
- 8 - 
 
  domestic food aid and cash transfers  to support vulnerable population group s which  could help 
support consumption during times of high food prices, reduced incomes,  and higher inequality.  
3.24.  Brazil welcomed the WFP report on the  status of food insecurity  and underlined that the  WFP 
was indispensable for tackling f ood insecurity  globally . Brazil called on WTO Members  to refrain from 
adopti ng practices which might lead to food security  instability and to rather enable that food move 
from regions with surpluses to food deficit regions . Brazil  expressed  concern s over announcements 
of export re strictions and prohibitions o n agricultur al products and inputs , recalling how such policies 
instilled severe food price volatility during  the 2007 -2008 global food crisis  
3.25.  Egypt noted that Members ' reporting of COVID -19 agricultural  measures facilitated  
transparency and co operation  during the pandemic . Egypt recalled the Secretariat compilation23 of 
ad hoc reports on Members' COVID -19 agricultural  measures  and suggested that the Committee 
prepare a list o f best practices on how to deal with the pandemic and ensure that food restrictions 
do not harm livelihoods in LDCs and NFIDCs.  Egypt further appreciated WFP's report on the effects 
of the COVID -19 pandemic on food security , which by causing  food supply bottlenecks  and rising  
trade costs had resulted in high commodity prices  and pressing f ood impo t bills. Egypt noted the  
importan ce of regular updates by  the IGC and other international agencies  to the Committee to 
better assess  and tackle  the food security ch allenges faced by LDCs and  NFIDCs  
3.26.  New Zealand welcomed WFP and OECD reports which were useful to inform discussion s both 
in the regular and special sessions of the CoA. New Zealand a lso stressed  WFP's significan t role to 
address food security and called on Members n ot to impose restriction s on food aid , especially those 
delivered by the WFP. 
3.27.  The European Union welcomed all submissions  and noted that after two  years  of the COVID -
19 pandemic , food production had not been reduced ; however, transport a nd log istical costs posed 
difficult ies, including through higher freight  rates. The European Union further note d that WTO 
Members' common challenge was to ensure  that international trade increase s food availability , 
especially for NFIDCs.  
3.28.  The Chairperson encouraged all Members to be transparent about their COVID -19 agricultural 
measures and to present information on those measures for the Committee's collective assessment.  
3.4  Implementation of Ministerial outcomes  
3.4.1   Review of the Bali Ministerial De cision on TRQ administration (WT/MIN(13)/39 and 
G/AG/29), including Chair report of the informal meeting  
3.29.  The issue was discussed at the informal meeting of the Committee on 15 March 2022 . At the 
formal meeting, the Chairperson provided an oral report on t he discussions at the informal meeting . 
His oral report is  contained in Annex 2  to this report.  
3.30.  On the issue of the future operation of paragraph 4 of the underfill mechanism, the 
Chairperson acknowledged that important progress  had been achieved in 2022 and Members were 
on the verge of reaching an agreement. At the same time, it was apparent that Members were not 
in a position to reach a consensus at the meeting as one Member continue d to have lingering 
concerns on the draft decision currently captured  in G/AG/32 . In the absence of consensus on the 
matter , the Chairperson suspended the consideration of the agenda item  and proposed to reconvene 
when Members would be in a position to reach  consensus . The Chairperson also reminded Members 
about the deadline of 31 March 2022  agreed  by the General Council24 in December 2021  to finalize 
an agreement as mandated under the Bali TRQ Decision.  
3.31.  At the reconvened 100th regular meeting on 29 March 2022, the Committee took up the 
suspended agenda item  on the future operation of paragraph 4 of the underfill mechanism . The 
Chairperson asked  if the Committee would be in a position to a dopt by consensus a n agreement on 
this issue based on the draft decision contained in the Annex to G/AG/32 . India noted that the 
proposed draft decision in G/AG/32 d id not , in its view , adequately address special and differential 
 
23 G/AG/W/209/Rev. 1 . 
24 WT/GC/M/195 refers.  G/AG/R/ 101 
 
- 9 - 
 
  treatment ( S&DT ) for developing Members  in the fin al stage of the underfill mechanism. India 
suggested that developing importing Member s who chose to alter their current TRQ administration 
to an alternative method in the final stage should be able to "close" the underfill concern along the 
approach propos ed in paragraph 4 (a) of the draft decision in G/AG/32.  
3.32.  The d elegations of Australia, Argentina, Brazil, Canada, Colombia, Cos ta Rica, Chile, the 
European Union, Guatemala, Japan, Mexico, New Zealand, Paraguay , Switzerland,  Thailand, Ukraine, 
and the United Sates acknowledged the suggestions by India .25 These delegations addressed  the 
following three broad points: i) the current draft decision , developed through a long and inclusive 
process , maintains S&DT under the Bali TRQ Decision , and developing im porting Members continue 
to have the right to adopt an alternative TRQ administration method in the final stage of the underfill 
mechanism; ii) the draft decision  maintains the delicate balance of the Bali TRQ Decision and  merely 
addresses a potential loop hole in the final stage of the mechanism , and the proposed suggestion by 
India would significantly alter th at delicate balance; and iii) the draft decision , if agreed, would make 
an important systemic contribution to render the underfill mechanism universa lly applicable to all 
Members by making Annex B of the Bali Decision in -operational . These Members maintained that it 
might not be feasible for the rest of the Membership to finalize substantial changes to the current 
draft at this late stage by the deadli ne and urged India to reconsider its position to join consensus 
on the draft in G/AG/32.   
3.33.  India took note of Members' s tatements  underlin ing specifically how S&DT for developing 
countries is preserved in the draft text contained in G/AG/32 . Based on this understanding, India 
agreed to join the consensus on the draft decision on the future operation of paragraph 4 of the 
underfill mechanism.  The Committee accordingly approved by consensus  the draft decision based 
on the text contained in Annex  to G/AG/32 and agreed to transmit the draft26 to the General Council 
for its consideration and approval pursuant  to paragraphs  13-15 of the Bali TRQ Decision 
(WT/MIN(13)/39). 27    
3.4.2   Follow -up on the Nairobi Decision on export competition  
3.34.  Four questions were raised under this agenda item28 as listed in Table 5 of Annex 1  to this 
report. The responses and follow -up comments can be accessed directly by clicking on the hyperlinks 
contained in the table or through the AG -IMS using the relevant question ID numbers.  
3.35.  Concerning the modification of Schedules pursuant to the Nairo bi Ministerial Decision , Brazil 's 
revised export subsidy Schedule was certified as of  28 January 2022 .29 With this  certification , 13 out 
of the 16 Members with export subsidy reduction commitments at the time of adoption of the Nairobi 
Decision, ha d their revised schedule s certified30; two Members, namely Canada and the European 
Union , had circulated their draft schedule in 2017 and certification had been ongoing ; and the 
remaining Member, namely the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, ha d yet to circulate its draft 
schedule.  
3.4.2.1   Second Triennial Review of the Nairobi Decision on Export Competition, including 
Chair report on the informal meeting  
3.36.  With regards to the second triennial review of the Nairobi Decision on Export Competition  
pursuant to  paragraph 5 of the Decision , the Chairperson provided an oral report on the discussions 
that took place during the informal meeting of the Committee  on 15 March. The oral report can be 
found  in Annex  3 to this report .  
 
25 India had elaborated the proposal during the informal meeting of the Committee the on 28 March.  
26 Attachment to G/AG/32/Add.1 refers.  
27 The General Council at its special meeting on 31 March 2022 adopted the decision  on the future 
operation of p aragraph  4 of the underfill mechanism  based on the recommendations approved by the Committee 
on Agriculture . WT/L/1132  refers.  
28 WTO/AIR/AG/ 57, Section E of Attachment  1. The full version of the questio ns raised can be found 
under Section 5 of the compilation document  G/AG/W/2 17. 
29 WT/LET/1560 refers.  
30 Australia, Brazil, Colombia, Iceland, Indonesia, Israel, Mexico, Norway, South Africa, Switzerland, 
Turkey, United States of America , and Uruguay.  G/AG/R/ 101 
 
- 10 - 
 
  3.37.  At its formal meeting, t he Committee  concluded the Second Triennial Review of the Nairobi 
Decision on export competition and adopted the report31 of the review.  
3.4.2.2   2022 dedicated  discussion on Export Competition  
3.38.  The Nairobi Ministerial Decision on Export Competition of 19 December 2015, states in its 
paragraph 4, that the "Committee on Agriculture shall monitor the implementation of the Decision 
by Members in accordance with existing notification requirements under the Agreement on 
Agriculture  (AoA) , as complemented by the provisions set out in the Annex to this Decision".  The 
Chairperson recalled that the s eventh export competition dedicated discussion  exercise was 
launched on 3 December 2021 when delegations were invited to reply to the export competition 
questionnaire  (ECQ)  before 31 March 202 2.  
3.39.  The Chairperson recalled that , as for the 2021 ECQ exercise,  all Members were expected to 
reply to the questionnaire  for the 2022 dedicated discussion , following the expiry of the grace period 
foreseen in footnote 17 of the Nairobi Decision.  The Chairperson reported that the Secretariat had 
thus far  received five replies to the questionnaire . The Chairperson also noted that the next dedicated 
discussion on export competition would take place during the June 2022 CoA meeting.  
3.40.   In response to a specific question from Korea, t he Chairperson reported that good progress 
had been made  by the Secretariat in the development of the Online AG -IMS extension project on 
Export Competition Questionnaire (ECQ). A prototype of the first module of the project enabling 
on-line replies to the ECQ was expected to be ready for testing by Members in the coming weeks.  
3.4.3   Implementation of other Ministerial outcomes  
3.41.  There were no requests for the floor under this agenda item.  
3.5  Chair report on the informal meeting of 15 Mar ch – Other issues  
3.42.  During the informal meeting of 15 March 2022 , the Committee continued its deliberations on 
enhancing transparency and the Committee's review process. At the formal meeting, 
the Chairperson provided an oral report on the discussions . The oral report can be found  in Annex  4 
to this report .  
3.6  WTO List of Net Food -importing Developing Countries (G/AG/3 and G/AG/5/R ev.11) 
3.43.  The Chairperson noted that n o new request for inclusion in the list of NFIDCs had been 
received from Member s. Therefore, the list contained in document G/AG/5/Rev.11 remain ed 
unchanged.  
3.7  Implementation -related issues (G/AG/16, G/AG/16/ADD.1, G/AG/22)32 
3.44.  There were no requests for the floor under this agenda item.  
3.8   Election of the Chairperson  
3.45.  The Chairperson informed Members that the consultations on the slate of Chairs for the 
Council for Trade in Goods (CTG)  subsidiary bodies for 202 2 were ongoing  and propose d that th e 
agenda item be taken up at the beginning of the next CoA meeting in June  2022. 
 
31 G/AG /33 refers.  
32 See the Ministerial Decision of 14 November 2001 as contained in WT/MIN(01)/17.  G/AG/R/ 101 
 
- 11 - 
 
  3.9  Other Business  
3.9.1   Date of next regular meetings  
3.46.  The next (101st) regular meeting of the Committee on Agriculture will be held on 
27-28 June 2022.33 On that basis, the reminder airgram w ill be issued on  25 May 2022 and  the 
convening airgram w ill be distributed to Members on Friday 17 June  2022.  
  
 
33 G/AG/GEN/1 92/Rev.1  contains the tentative dates of the  Committee meetings in 202 2. A written e -
mail communication was sent to Members on 29 Ma rch 2022  with the new dates for the June 2022 Committee 
meeting.  G/AG/R/ 101 
 
- 12 - 
 
  ANNEX 1  
Annex 1 includes the full list of questions raised under the various agenda items of the Committee. 
Members' responses and follow -up exchanges (if applicable) can be accessed through the AG -IMS 
(http://agims.wto.org/ ) by selecting the function "Search Q&A Submitted Since 1995" and inputting 
the ID number of the question concerned. This information can also be accessed directly by clicking 
on the relevant hyperlin ks in the last column  ("ID number") of  tables 1-5 below . Question IDs where 
replies were yet to be submitted into the AG -IMS as of 12 April 2022 have been identified with the 
symbol "*".  Members are invited to submit outstanding replies through the AG -IMS at the earliest 
opportunity.  
Table 1 - Specific Implementation Matters (Article 18.6)  
Specific Implementation Matter  Question by  ID 
Number  
Angola's import policies  European Union  100058 * 
Argentina's export restrictions on beef  European Union  100001  
Argentina's export restrictions on beef  Japan  100063  
Argentina's export restrictions of wheat  Japan  100062  
Australia's ethanol tax  United States of America  100002  
Canada's support to Prince Edward Island potato producers  India 100140  
Canada's support to the pork industry  India 100141  
Canada's Herd Management and Drought Assistance 
program  India 100142  
Canada's support for the Next Gen Agriculture Mentorship 
programme  India 100143  
Canada's Dairy Policies   New Zealand  100107  
Canada's Special Milk Class Scheme  New Zealand  100064  
Canada's compensation to dairy farmers after trade 
concessions  European Union  100040  
Canada's review of the TRQ system  Australia  100059  
Canada's Review of the TRQ System  European Union  100039  
Canada 's Review of the TRQ System  United Kingdom  100065  
EU's Product Environment Footprint (PEF)  New Zealand  100073  
EU's deforestation and forest degradation strategy  Argentina , Brazil, Paraguay  100071  
EU's deforestation and forest degradation strategy  Indonesia  100103  
EU's deforestation and forest degradation strategy  Thailand  100130  
EU's Environmental Policies  India 100041  
EU's Environmental policies  Brazil  100070  
EU's agricultural policies funded by national resources  Brazil  100072  
Guyana's Prohibition of rice exports  European Union  100110 * 
India's rice exports  Canada  100086  
India's pulses policies  Canada  100087  
India's pulses policies  Russian Federation  100135  
India's pulses policies   Canada, European Union , United 
States of America  100008  
India's public stockpiling   Australia , Brazil, Canada, 
European Union , Japan,  
Paraguay,  Thailand , United 
States of America , Uruguay  100006 * 
India's public stockpiling  Australia , Brazil, Canada, Japan,  
Paraguay,  Thailand , United 
States of America , Uruguay  100005  
India's  Scheme for Remission of Duties and Taxes on 
Exported Products   United States of America  100003  
India's Export subsidies for skim milk p owder  European Union  100115  
India's oilseeds policies  United States of America, 
Paraguay  100004  
India- support to sugar and  biofuels   United States of America  100009  
India's cotton support   Australia  100085  
India's mung beans import restrictions  Australia  100100  
India's mung beans import restrictions  Brazil  100111  G/AG/R/ 101 
 
- 13 - 
 
  Specific Implementation Matter  Question by  ID 
Number  
India's Dairy Sahakar scheme  European Union  100112  
India's increased budget for subsidy support farmers use of 
fertiliser  European Union  100113  
Indonesia's palm oil export restrictions  Japan  100118  
Kazakhstan's  quantitative export restrictions on agricultural 
products  United States of America  100010  
Malaysia's rice import system  United States of America  100011  
Mongolia's quota regime for importation  Russian Federation  100131 * 
Oman's Vision 2020 plan  United States of America  100013 * 
Philippines' SSG application on instant coffee  Indonesia  100120  
Russian Federation's compensation to farmers  India 100144 * 
Russian Federation's  grain export duties  India 100122 * 
South Africa's review of tariff structure for poultry meat 
imports  European Union  100124  
Turkey's export restrictions on agricultural products  Japan  100126  
Turkey's freight support  United States of America  100014  
UK's forest risk commodities provisions  Indonesia  100127  
U.S. Domestic Support Policies and Notifications  New Zealand  100134  
U.S. Market Facilitation Programme (MFP)  Australia  100129  
U.S. Partnership to Ease Port Congestion and Restore 
Disrupted Shipping Services to U.S. Grown Agricultural 
Commodities  Brazil  100132  
U.S. USD 800  million subsidies for biofuels from agricultural 
products  Europ ean Union  100133   
  G/AG/R/10 1 
 
- 14 - Table 2 - Questions raised in connection with individual notifications  
Document Symbol  Question by  Answer by  Notification Format  Keywords  ID Number  
G/AG/N/AUS/137  European Union  Australia  ES:1 - Export subsidies  Export subsidies subject 
to reduction commitments 
(Article 9.1)  100123  
G/AG/N/AUS/141  Brazil  Australia  DS:2 - New or modified DS  Direct payments: 
payments under 
environmental 
programmes  100050  
G/AG/N/AUS/142  India Australia  DS:1 - Exempt and non -exempt 
support - Current total AMS  Other product -specific 
AMS/EMS  100054  
G/AG/N/BRA/68  European Union  Brazil  DS:2 - New or modified DS  Public stockholding for 
food security purposes  100034  
G/AG/N/BRA/68  European Union  Brazil  DS:2 - New or modified DS  Public stockholding for 
food security purposes  100035  
G/AG/N/BRA/68  Canada  Brazil  DS:2 - New or modified DS  Public stockholding for 
food security purposes  100117  
G/AG/N/BRA/68  United Kingdom  Brazil  DS:2 - New or modified DS  Public stockholding for 
food security purposes  100119  
G/AG/N/CAN/142  United States of America  Canada  DS:1 - Exempt and non -exempt 
support - Current total AMS  Market pri ce support: 
Eligible production  100015  
G/AG/N/CAN/142  United States of America  Canada  DS:1 - Exempt and non -exempt 
support - Current total AMS  Market price support: 
Eligible production  100016  
G/AG/N/SLV/72  Paraguay  El Salvador  MA:1 - TQ administration  Transparency issues  100075 * 
G/AG/N/EU/71  United States of America  European Union  DS:2 - New or modified DS  Annex 2 (Green Box)  100022  
G/AG/N/EU/72  Paraguay  European Union  MA:1 - TQ administration  Other administration 
arrangements  100066  
G/AG/N/ISL/51  European Union  Iceland  MA:2 - Imports under TQs  Tariff quota fill  100053  
G/AG/N/ISL/54  Brazil  Iceland  DS:1 - Exempt and non -exempt 
support - Current total AMS  Classification of measures  100045  
G/AG/N/ISL/54  Brazil  Icelan d DS:1 - Exempt and non -exempt 
support - Current total AMS  Other  100046  
G/AG/N/ISL/54  Paraguay  Iceland  DS:1 - Exempt and non -exempt 
support - Current total AMS  Other  100068  
G/AG/N/IND/18  Paraguay  India DS:1 - Exempt and non -exempt 
support - Current total AMS  Domestic support  100079  
G/AG/N/IND/18  Japan  India DS:1 - Exempt and non -exempt 
support - Current total AMS  Public stockholding for 
food security purposes  100094  
G/AG/N/IND/25  Japan  India DS:1 - Exempt and non -exempt 
support - Current total AMS  Public stockholding for 
food security purposes  100092  
G/AG/N/IND /25 Russian Federation  India DS:1 - Exempt and non -exempt 
support - Current total AMS  Public stockholding for 
food security purposes  100093  
G/AG/N/IND/26  Australia  India MA:2 - Imports under TQs  Tariff quota fill  100060   
  G/AG/R/10 1 
 
- 15 - Document Symbol  Question by  Answer by  Notification Format  Keywords  ID Number  
G/AG/N/IDN/67  Paraguay  Indonesia  DS:1 - Exempt and non -exempt 
suppo rt - Current total AMS  Article 6.2 (Special and 
Differential Treatment / 
Development 
Programmes)  100080  
G/AG/N/IDN/68  United States of America  Indonesia  DS:1 - Exempt and non -exempt 
support - Current total AMS  Market price support  100017  
G/AG/N/IDN/68  United States of America  Indonesia  DS:1 - Exempt and non -exempt 
support - Current total AMS  Market price support  100018  
G/AG/N/IDN/68  Paraguay  Indonesia  DS:1 - Exempt and non -exempt 
support - Current total AMS  Domestic support  100081  
G/AG/N/IDN/68  Australia  Indonesia  DS:1 - Exempt and non -exempt 
support - Current total AMS  Annex 2 (Green Box)  100095  
G/AG/N/IDN/68  Canada  Indonesia  DS:1 - Exempt and non -exempt 
support - Current total AMS  Public stockholding for 
food security purposes  100096  
G/AG/N/ISR/81  United States of America  Israel  DS:1 - Exempt and non -exempt 
support - Current total AMS  Other product -specific 
AMS/EMS  100019  
G/AG/N/ISR/81  United States of America  Israel  DS:1 - Exempt and non -exempt 
support - Current total AMS  General services: 
infrastructural services  100020  
G/AG/N/ISR/81  European Union  Israel  DS:1 - Exempt and non -exempt 
support - Current total AMS  Current Total AMS (Amber 
Box) 100038  
G/AG/N/ISR/81  Brazil  Israel  DS:1 - Exempt and non -exempt 
support - Current total AMS  Scheduled commitment 
level 100047  
G/AG/N/ISR/81  Australia  Israel  DS:1 - Exempt and non -exempt 
support - Current total AMS  Scheduled commitment 
level 100097  
G/AG/N/ISR/81  Canada  Israel  DS:1 - Exempt and non -exempt 
support - Current total AMS  Scheduled commitment 
level 100098  
G/AG/N/ISR/81  Thailand  Israel  DS:1 - Exempt and non -exempt 
support - Current total AMS  Scheduled commitment 
level 100128  
G/AG/N/KOR/85  Paraguay  Korea, Republic of  MA:2 - Imports under TQs  Tariff quota fill  100067  
G/AG/N/MEX/55  Brazil  Mexico  DS:1 - Exempt and non -exempt 
support - Current total AMS  Other product -specific 
AMS/EMS  100048  
G/AG/N/MEX/55  Canada  Mexico  DS:1 - Exempt and non -exempt 
support - Current total AMS  Domestic support  100099  
G/AG/N/NGA/19  Paraguay  Nigeria  DS:1 - Exempt and non -exempt 
support - Current total AMS  Domestic support  100082 * 
G/AG/N/NOR/119  European Union  Norway DS:1 - Exempt and non -exempt 
support - Current total AMS  Market price support: 
Eligible production  100057  
G/AG/N/NOR/119  Paraguay  Norway  DS:1 - Exempt and non -exempt 
support - Current total AMS  Domestic support  100083  
G/AG/N/OMN/26  United States of America  Oman  DS:1 - Exempt and non -exempt 
support - Current total AMS  Transparency issues 
(including Table DS:2)  100021 * 
G/AG/N/PHL/78  European Union  Philippines  DS:1 - Exempt and non -exempt 
support - Current total AMS  Market price support  100037 *  
  G/AG/R/10 1 
 
- 16 - Document Symbol  Question by  Answer by  Notification Format  Keywords  ID Number  
G/AG/N/PHL/80  Brazil  Philippines  MA:5 - Annual summary of SSG action  SSG 100044 * 
G/AG/N/PHL/80  Indonesia  Philippines  MA:5 - Annual summary of SSG action  Transparency issues  100088  
G/AG/N/SAU/23  Brazil  Saudi Arabia, Kingdom of  DS:1 - Exempt and non -exempt 
support - Current total AMS  Other product -specific 
AMS/EMS  100049  
G/AG/N/ZAF/109  Brazil  South Africa  MA:2 - Imports under TQs  Tariff quota fill  100042  
G/AG/N/ZAF/109  Canada  South Africa  MA:2 - Imports under TQs  Tariff quota fill  100061  
G/AG/N/ZAF/109  Paraguay  South Africa  MA:2 - Imports under TQs  Tariff quota fill  100069  
G/AG/N/ZAF/110  Paraguay  South Africa  MA:2 - Imports under TQs  Tariff quota fill  100076  
G/AG/N/CHE/113  Paraguay  Switzerland  MA:2 - Imports under TQs  Tariff quota fill  100077  
G/AG/N/CHE/113  Australia  Switzerland  MA:2 - Imports under TQs  Tariff quota fill  100089  
G/AG/N/CHE/114  New Zealand  Switzerland  DS:1 - Exempt and non -exempt 
support - Current total AMS  Other product -specific 
AMS/EMS  100101  
G/AG/N/TPKM/206  Paraguay  Chinese Taipei  DS:1 - Exempt and non -exempt 
support - Current total AMS  Market price support  100078  
G/AG/N/THA/119  Japan  Thailand  ER:1 - Export restrictions  Provision of information 
justifying the measure  100125 * 
G/AG/N/ARE/21  Canada  United Arab Emirates  DS:1 - Exempt and non -exempt 
support - Current total AMS  Transparency issues 
(including Table DS:2)  100102 * 
G/AG/N/GBR/6  United States of America  United Kingdom  MA:2 - Imports under TQs  Tariff quota fill  100012  
G/AG/N/GBR/6  Canada  United Kingdom  MA:2 - Imports under TQs  Tariff quota fill  100091  
G/AG/N/GBR/6/REV.1  Brazil  United Kingdom  MA:2 - Imports under TQs  Tariff quota fill  100043  
G/AG/N/GBR/6/REV.1  Paraguay  United Kingdom  MA:2 - Imports under TQs  Tariff quota fill  100074  
G/AG/N/GBR/6/REV.1  Australia  United Kingdom  MA:2 - Imports under TQs  Tariff quota fill  100090  
G/AG/N/GBR/9  Brazil  United Kingdom  DS:2 - New or modified DS  Annex 2 (Green Box)  100051  
G/AG/N/GBR/9  Brazil  United Kingdom  DS:2 - New or modified DS  Direct payments: 
payments under 
environmental 
programmes  100052  
G/AG/N/GBR/9  Australia  United Kingdom  DS:2 - New or modified DS  Annex 2 (Green Box)  100121  
G/AG/N/USA/135  Canada  United States of America  DS:1 - Exempt and non -exempt 
support - Current total AMS  Constituent data and 
methodology (AGST)  100104  
G/AG/N/USA/150  Canada  United States of America  DS:1 - Exempt and non-exempt 
support - Current total AMS  Other product -specific 
AMS/EMS  100114  
G/AG/N/USA/156  European Union  United States of America  DS:2 - New or modified DS  Domestic food aid  100032  
G/AG/N/USA/156  European Union  United States of America  DS:2 - New or modified DS  Domestic food aid  100033  
G/AG/N/USA/157  European Union  United States of America  DS:1 - Exempt and non -exempt 
support - Current total AMS  Non-product -specific AMS  100036  
G/AG/N/USA/157  India United States of America  DS:1 - Exempt and non -exempt 
support - Current total AMS  Current Total AMS (Amber 
Box) 100055   
  G/AG/R/10 1 
 
- 17 - Document Symbol  Question by  Answer by  Notification Format  Keywords  ID Number  
G/AG/N/USA/157  Paraguay  United States of America  DS:1 - Exempt and non -exempt 
support - Current total AMS  Current Total AMS (Amber 
Box) 100084  
G/AG/N/USA/157  Brazil  United States of America  DS:1 - Exempt and non -exempt 
support - Current total AMS  Other product -specific 
AMS/EMS  100105  
G/AG/N/USA/157  Brazil  United States of America  DS:1 - Exempt and non -exempt 
support - Current total AMS  Other product -specific 
AMS/EMS  100106  
G/AG/N/USA/157  Brazil  United States of America  DS:1 - Exempt and non -exempt 
support - Current total AMS  General services: 
infrastructural services  100108  
G/AG/N/USA/157  New Zealand  United States of America  DS:1 - Exempt and non -exempt 
support - Current total AMS  Constituent data and 
methodology (AGST)  100109  
G/AG/N/USA/157  Canada  United  States of America  DS:1 - Exempt and non -exempt 
support - Current total AMS  Domestic food aid  100116  
G/AG/N/USA/160  European Union  United States of America  NF:1 - NFIDC Decision  Quantity and 
concessionality of food aid  100030  
G/AG/N/USA/160  European Union  United States of America  NF:1 - NFIDC Decision  Other forms of assistance  100031  G/AG/R/10 1 
 
- 18 - 
 
  Table 3  - Questions raised under agenda item "Overdue notifications"  
Question by  Answer by  ID Number  
United States of America  Canada  100023  
India Canada  100056  
India European Union  100145  
European Union  Morocco  100029 * 
United States of America  Turkey  100024  
Table 4 - Deferred replies to questions raised under the review process  
Specific Implementation Matter  Question by  ID 
Number  
Côte d'Ivoire's Tax on imported spirits  European Union  100139 * 
Nigeria's import prohibitions on certain agricultural products  Brazil  100137 * 
Nigeria's import prohibitions on certain agricultural 
products   Brazil  100138 * 
China's one -off subsidy to farmers  Australia  100136  
 
Document 
Symbol  Question by  Answer by  Notification Format  Keywords  ID 
Number  
G/AG/N/IND/18  Australia , Brazil, 
Canada, 
European Union, 
Japan,  Paraguay,  
Thailand , United 
Kingdom , United 
States of 
America , Uruguay  
 
  India DS:1 - Exempt and 
non-exempt support - 
Current total AMS  Public stockholding 
for food security 
purposes  100007 * 
Table 5 - Questions raised under agenda item " Developments in the field of Export 
Competition " 
Question by  Answer by  ID Number  
United States of America  Canada  100025  
United States of America  China  100026  
United States of America  Egypt  100027 * 
United States of America  India 100028  
 
  G/AG/R/10 1 
 
- 19 - 
 
  ANNEX 2  
CHAIR REPORT ON THE INFORMAL MEETING OF 15 MARCH  ON  
THE BALI DECISION ON TRQ ADMINISTRATION  
(AGENDA ITEM – 2.D (i)) 
The Committee considered the issue of the future operation of paragraph 4 of the Bali TRQ Decision 
underfill mechanism at its four informal meetings on 2 February, 18 February, 4 March and 15  March. 
The 15 March meeting also looked at other elements of the agreed recommendations of the review 
in annex 2 to G/AG/29.  
 
The focus of the discussions at all four informal meetings was to achieve consensus on a Decision 
on the future operation of para graph 4 based on the draft Decision in G/AG/32, which was arrived 
at after extensive deliberations among Members in 2021. Some Members had since been consulting 
their capitals on the draft. Based on the discussions at the four informal CoA meetings, includ ing on 
15 March, and my bilateral consultations with Members, an important progress has been made, 
allowing all Members but one to be in a position to join a potential consensus on the draft decision 
in G/AG/32.  
  
The remaining Member expressed concerns on the current draft, which it considered lacking 
sufficient S&DT, especially in not appropriately acknowledging or rewarding efforts by developing 
importing Members who might choose to change their current TRQ admin istration system to adopt 
an alternative method (other than first -come, first -served or automatic licensing). That Member also 
indicated that some potential formulation to address its concerns was under consideration of its 
capital authorities, and that it  would strive to share it with other Members as soon as it was finalized.  
Several other Members, however, contested this assessment of the draft in G/AG/32; they rather 
considered it to be balanced, with appropriate and sufficient S&DT. These delegations u rged the 
remaining Member to engage in a solution -finding mode towards reaching agreement by the 
31 March deadline, keeping in mind the need to exercise restraint in order to ensure the delicate 
balance of the Bali TRQ Decision was preserved. In this vein,  some Members argued that, should an 
agreement on this issue remain elusive, the possibilities of reaching outcomes in more complex 
matters being dealt with in the agriculture negotiations would be further put into question.  
 
At the informal meeting on 15 March, I recalled the intense discussions among Members in 2021 in 
developing the current draft, where they intentionally limited their efforts to clarifying one 
outstanding situation under current paragraph 4, where an importing developing Member choosing  
the S&DT option does not meet the required fill rate standard after two years in the final stage of 
the Underfill Mechanism, without altering the basic structure of the provision. I also reminded that 
there was no obligation, hence no incentive or reward,  for developing importing Members to alter 
their TRQ administration method in fulfilling the increased fill rate standard under the current 
paragraph 4 to "close" an underfill matter.  
 
I additionally cautioned that any substantive change in the current dr aft just a few days before the 
deadline expires would make it particularly challenging to reach consensus, as those changes would 
again need to be taken by Members to capitals for endorsement, including by those who had gone 
through a long an arduous proce ss to conclude internal consultations on the current draft in 
G/AG/32. I urged all Members to make sincere efforts to arrive at a consensual decision in an 
expeditious manner. I also called upon the lone Member currently holding some concerns on the 
draft in G/AG/32 to reconsider its position, having in mind the important progress made thus far 
through an open and inclusive process in 2021 and 2022.  
 
I informed Members that the matter would be taken up at the formal meeting, where I might consider 
suspendi ng the relevant agenda item if needed to utilize the remaining few days prior to the deadline 
in order to exhaust all possible avenues to reach consensus on a Decision that would allow us to 
effectively fulfil a long -standing ministerial mandate.  
 
This co ncludes my report.  
  G/AG/R/10 1 
 
- 20 - 
 
  ANNEX 3  
CHAIR REPORT ON THE INFORMAL  MEETING ON  
THE NAIROBI DECISION ON EXPORT COMPETITION – SECOND TRIENNIAL REVIEW  - ON 
15 MARCH   
(AGENDA ITEM – 2.D (ii)) 
During its informal meeting on 15 March , the Committee discussed the second Triennial Review of 
the Nairobi Decision on Export Competition being conducted pursuant to Paragraph 5 of the Nairobi 
Decision  held in all the informal meetings of the CoA since the last formal meeting of the CoA on 
23-24 September 2022, namely on 2  February, 18 February, 4 March and 15 March 2022.  
To ensure complementarity between the Triennial Review and the agricultural negotiation processes, 
and given that several transparency -related issues were considered under both tracks, the 
Committee had ag reed at its September 2021 meeting to conclude the Second Triennial Review 
after MC12, at the March 2022 Committee meeting.  
Member were then expecting to be in a position at the beginning of 2022 to decide on how to 
conclude the Review in light of the pote ntial outcome of MC12 on Export Competition.  
The postponement of MC12 and the resulting uncertainty related to its new date placed Members in 
an unexpected situation, requiring a reassessment of how to conduct and conclude this Triennial 
Review.  
During the  4 February informal meeting, several Members supported the completion of the Triennial 
Review at the upcoming March CoA meeting.  
It was noted by some Members that  not concluding the Triennial Review at the March Committee 
could result in a postponement o f its finalisation until after MC12.  
The informal meeting held on 18 February confirmed Members'  readiness to engage in a process 
aimed at concluding this Triennial Review by the March CoA meeting.  
It was generally considered that past discussions on the T riennial Review provided sufficient material 
to this end, including a good sense of what could be envisaged as potential realistic and pragmatic 
conclusions for the Review considering the tight time schedule ahead.  
Following this meeting, I circulated a first draft report of the Second  Triennial Review of the Nairobi 
Decision on Export Competition, on 24 February, in document RD/AG/91.  
The draft report was discussed at the 4 March informal CoA meeting. Members gener ally welcomed 
the draft report. Few drafting suggestions on its concluding section were made at that meeting, 
which were subsequently shared with all Members on 4 March.  
I subsequently held further consultations and circulated a revised draft report in doc ument 
RD/AG/91/Rev.1 on 11 March. This revised draft report aimed at reflecting the state of play of the 
discussions, without prejudice to Members’ positions, with draft suggested changes having raised 
concerns by some Members being included between bracke ts.   
This revised draft report was discussed at the 15 March informal CoA meeting. I was in a position 
following the meeting to circulate later in the day a revised draft report (in RD/AG/91/Rev.2) which 
I will now propose for adoption by the Committee.  
Let me take this opportunity to warmly thank the  compromise spirit and flexibility demonstrated by 
Members during this meeting as in previous occasions on this topic.  Concluding successfully the 
Second Triennial Review of the Nairobi Decision on Export Comp etition will constitute a significant  
outcome of our 100th meeting of the Committee,  and a clear demonstration of the ability of the CoA 
to effectively deliver and work effectively with a view to continuously enhancing the monitoring of 
Members' commitments. This ends my report.  G/AG/R/10 1 
 
- 21 - 
 
  ANNEX 4  
 
CHAIR REPORT ON THE INFORMAL MEETING ON "OTHER ISS UES" OF 15 MARCH  
(AGENDA ITEM 2.E) 
At the informal meeting on 15 March, the Committee continued its deliberations on enhancing 
transparency and the review process, a topic that has been taken up in a number of informal 
meetings.  
 
During the meeting, I rec alled the two main themes that have frequently figured in our 
discussions under this agenda item. First, the issue of timeliness and completeness of 
notifications, where Members have expressed concerns mainly due to the large number of 
overdue notification s. This issue is especially evident in the areas of domestic support and export 
subsidies, as reflected in the Secretariat's document G/AG/GEN/86/Rev.44, which shows that 
973 domestic support notifications and 1,002 export subsidy notifications remain outs tanding 
for the period 1995 -2020.  
 
The second theme concerns the provision of timely and complete responses by Members to 
questions raised under the Committee's review process. This is deemed essential for the CoA to 
fulfil its key mandate to review the pr ogress in the implementation of commitments negotiated 
under the Uruguay Round reform programme. Both these themes are routinely taken up in the 
formal meeting under the agenda items on "overdue notifications " and "deferred replies ", 
respectively.  
  
I also recalled the Secretariat's effort towards enhanced transparency and an efficient COA 
review process, inter alia , through the tracking of pending responses, as reflected in the 
document G/AG/W/204 series and through the launch of and continuous improvemen ts to the 
Agriculture Information Management System (AG -IMS).  
 
During yesterday's informal meeting, one Member expressed its support to enhanced 
transparency efforts and improvements in the CoA Review process and noted its readiness to 
contribute to any e ndeavour in this regard. This Member also expressed hope that transparency 
would feature a priority issue in the agriculture negotiations.  
 
I concluded the meeting by encouraging Members to continue sharing specific ideas and 
suggestions towards enhanced transparency and efficacy of the CoA's review process, and by 
noting that the Committee would continue its engagement on these important matters.  
 
This concludes my report.  
 
__________