RESTRICTED  
  
G/AG/R/83  
 
22 December  2016 
(16-7041) Page: 1/8 
Committee on Agriculture    
 
 SUMMARY REPORT OF TH E MEETING HELD ON 9 NOVEMBER  2016 
NOTE BY THE SECRETAR IAT1 
The Committee on Agriculture held its eighty second  (82nd) regular meeting on 9 November  2016 
under the Chairmanship of Mr Garth Ehrhardt of Canada . 
 
The agenda of the meeting a s set out in WTO/AIR/AG/ 17 was adopted with the following 
modifications:  
 
 Part 1 (Review Process):  
 Article 18.6:  
 Addition of a sub -question question from the United States  with respect to  Canada's 
New Milk Ingredient Class2; 
 Addition of questions from the United States  with respect to  Brazil's domestic 
support programmes ; and 
 Co-sponsorship by New Zealand of a question posed by Australi a on Canada's  
New Milk Ingredient Class .3 
1  THE REVIEW PROCESS  
1.1  Matters relevant to the implementation of commitments under th e reform 
programme: Article 18.6  
1.1.  The 20 implementation -related issues raised as well as the responses provided and follow -up 
exchanges are compiled in section 1 of document G/AG/ W/159. These relate to:  
a. Canada's market price support for dairy products  (raised by New Zealand) ; 
b. European Union's intervention program mes (raised by Australia ); 
c. Greek coffee tax (raised by  Viet Nam); 
d. India's export subsidies for onions  (raised by the Euro pean Union ); 
e. India's minimum support price or Kharif crops  (raised by the Unit ed States ); 
f. India's export restrictions on sugar  (raised by the European Union ); 
g. Canada's new milk ingredient class  (raised by Austra lia, New  Zealand and 
the United  States ); 
h. Canada' s wine sale policy  (raised by New Zealand and the  United  States ); 
i. European Union's agriculture policies  (raised by  Australia ); 
                                                
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 obligat ions under the WTO.  
2 G/AG/W/159 , AG-IMS ID 82001 . 
3 G/AG/W/159, AG -IMS ID 82013.  G/AG/R/83  
 
- 2 - 
 
  j. India's importation of apples (raised by New Zealand ); 
k. India's crop insurance scheme  (raised by the European U nion); 
l. India's sugar export subsidies  (raised by Australia ); 
m. Sri Lanka's increase in milk powd er tariffs  (raised by New Zealand);  
n. U.S. purchase of cheese stock (raised by Australia and Canada);  
o. U.S. Price Loss Coverage and Agriculture Risk Coverage Programmes (raised by 
Australia);  
p. Argentina's tax policies (raised by Ukraine);  
q. China's regional assi stance programmes (raised by Australia);  
r. Turkey's domestic support policies (raised by Canada);  
s. Turkey's subsidies aimed at incentivising the use of domestic dairy (raised by 
New Zealand);  
t. Zambia's public stocks and exports of maize (raised by the European  Union);  and 
u. Brazil's domestic support programmes (raised by the United States) . 
1.2  Review of Notifications  
1.2.  The Chairperson informed Members that since the September  2016 meeting the Committee 
had received 34 notifications . These  had been distributed electron ically to all delegations.  
1.2.1   Notifications in respect of which questions have been raised in advance of the 
issuance of the convening airgram  
1.3.  Section 2 of document G/AG/W/ 159 reflects the questions raised, responses provided, and 
Members' follow -up comments in connection with the notifications on which questions had been 
raised in advance of the iss uance of the convening airgram.4 
1.2.2   Deferred replies to questions raised under the review process  
1.4.  The Chairperson noted that a total of 91 responses in the context of  the review process 
remained outstanding. The Chairperson strongly advised Members  to submit the ir replies to the 
Secretariat in order to enhance the efficiency of the review process. The questions and responses 
provided to these questions can be found in section 3 of document G/AG/ W/159. 
1.5.  Brazil noted that they had not received a response yet to the US questions AG -IMS 80096 
and enquired when the U nited States would provide additional information about the cotton gin 
sharing programme.  
1.2.3   Overdue notification s 
1.6.  The Committee took note of document G/AG/GEN/86/Rev.2 6 circulated on  28 October  2016, 
reflecting the current status of Members' compliance with notification obligations.  
1.7.  The Chairperson highlighted a few numbers with respect to the outstanding notificati ons. 
For the period 1995 to 201 4: 
 8% (51 ) of notifications in the MA:2 series remain outstanding;  
 8% (55 ) of notifications in the MA:5 series  remain outstanding ; 
 36% (73 3) Table DS:1 domestic support notifications  remain outstanding ; 
 33% (762 ) export subsi dy notifi cations in the ES:1 series  remain outstanding ; and  
 8% (42 ) Table ES:2 notifications  remain outstanding . 
                                                
4 WTO/AIR/AG/ 17, Attachment Section B. G/AG/R/83  
 
- 3 - 
 
  1.8.  Members had raised s ix question s under this agenda item. The question s, corresponding 
answer s and Members' follow -up comments can be found in s ection  4 of document G/AG/W/1 59. 
1.9.  The Chairperson stressed the importan t systemic benefits of transparency and called on 
all Members to fulfil their notification obligations in a timely manner  and to  increase their efforts in 
bringing  their notifications up  to date. The Chair also echoed the proposition to provide support to 
Members who face challenges in their efforts to comply with notification obligation s. The Chair 
emphasized that Members'  compliance record was  insufficient, particularly for domestic sup port 
and export subsidies notifications, and this created significant barrier s to moving forward  in other 
areas . 
1.2.4   Notifications subject to review in respect of which no questions have been raised 
in advance of the issuance of the convening airgram  
1.10.   The Commi ttee took note of the 2 4 notifications circulated before 28 October  2016, 
including notificat ions carried over from the September  2016 meeting but  in respect of which no 
questions had been raised by that date under the Committee's working procedures.5 
1.2.5   Notifications circulated or made available after the issuance of the convening 
airgram  
1.11.   Five notifications had been circulated after the issuance  of the convening airgram on 
28 October  2016: 
 Barbados Table DS:1 for financial years 2007 -2012: G/AG/N/BRB/23 ; 
 Switzerland Table MA:2 for calendar year 2015 : G/AG/N/CHE/77 ; 
 Togo Table ES:1 for 2014 -2015 and Table DS:1 for 2011 -2016: G/AG/N/TGO/7 and 
G/AG/N/TGO/8 ; and  
 European Union Table NF:1 for 2015 : G/AG/N/EU/32 . 
1.12.   These notifications would be reverted to for substant ive review during the next regular 
meeting, in accordance with paragraph 9 of the working procedures.  
1.13.   Additionally, there were four notifications pending for finalization and circulation from 
Mexico, Tunisia, the United States  and Zambia.  
1.2.6   Points concerning  notifications raised at previous meetings which have been 
pursued bilaterally: information regarding outcome where the issue involved is one of  
general interest  
1.14.   There were no requests for the floor under this agenda item.  
1.2.7   Counter -notifications (Article 18 .7 of the Agreement on Agriculture)  
1.15.   There were no requests for the floor under this agenda item.  
2  OTHER MATTERS WITHIN  THE PURVIEW OF THE C OMMITTEE  
2.1  Annual monitoring exercise on the follow -up to the Marrakesh NFIDC Decision under 
Article 16.2 of the Agreeme nt on Agriculture  
2.1.  The Secretariat noted that most of the updated content in the  Secretariat  background note6 
related to statist ics on global food aid shipments  which had typically been sourced from the  WFP's 
International Food Aid Information System (INTER FAIS). INTERFAIS included comprehensive data 
on food aid deliveries by donors under the Food Aid Conventions (now the Food Assistance 
                                                
5 WTO/AIR/AG/ 14, Attachment Section D. 
6 G/AG/W/42/Rev.18 dated 8  February 2016 . G/AG/R/83  
 
- 4 - 
 
  Convention of 2013), other donor countries as well as NGOs. In October 2016 , the WFP had 
informed the Secretariat about the discontinuation of the INTERFAIS system after a review 
exercise conducted by the WFP on its tracking and recording of global food aid transactions. In the 
future the WFP intend ed to disseminate food aid information only on WFP-delivered transactions.  
2.2.  The Secretariat recall ed that earlier versions of the  G/AG/ W/42 background document had 
also included annual volumetric food aid shipments data and minimum annual commitments for 
Food Aid Convention donors. Since the entry into force of the Food Assistance Co nvention in 2013 
minimum annual commitments of the FAC parties were expressed  in monetary terms  and the 
background document no longer include d quantitative food aid information . 
2.3.  The Secretariat noted that  FAO's  Committee on Commodity Problems (CCP) had dis cussed 
the data issue at its 71st session in October 2016 and agreed that the FAO would  consolidate 
information on food aid in the context of the monitoring and surv eillance function of the 
Consultative Sub -Committee on Surplus Disposal (CSSD) . The Secreta riat would  continue to follow 
these developments and welcomed Members' suggestions regarding the content of the next 
revision of the G/AG/ W/42 document.  
2.4.  Egypt , on behalf of the NFIDC Group, express ed their apprec iation for donor M embers and for 
the notific ations submitted, particularly those pertaining to technical assistance with the aim to 
improve the agriculture productivity and infrastructure.  However, the NFIDC Group  noted  that the 
implementation of the Marrake sh Ministerial Decision on measures to cou nter the negative impacts 
of the Agreement on Agriculture (AoA) on the Least Developed Countries (LDCs) and Net 
Food-Importing Developing Countries (NFIDCs) ha d not been satisfactory. Also, there had been  no 
assessment of the AoA impact on those countries.  The NFIDC Group  stressed that the debate 
about impl ementation of the decision needed to move bey ond Members ' notifications  or 
submissions by international institutions. In recognition of  the challenges NFIDC countries continue 
to face since the adoption o f Marrakesh Decision, the Ministers (in Paragraph 25 ) had reaffirmed 
their commitment to fully implement this decision  in Nairobi.  Therefore , the NFIDC Group called 
upon the M embers to engage in further discussions on operationalization of the Marrakesh an d the 
Nairobi mandate to improve implementation.  
2.5.  The NFIDC Group express ed its disappointment that the S ecretariat note on the 
implementation of Marrakesh Decision had not been updated . Based on the Secretariat 's note 
circulated in February 2016, the group  reiterated  its concern that food aid deliveries had decreased 
by 65% from 2005 to 2014 and that comprehensive data on technical and financial assistance  was 
unavailable . 
2.6.  The NFIDC Group presented some proposals to reinvigorate the NFIDC annual monitoring 
exercise of the Marrakesh Decision , including suggestions  to: 
i. Initiate discussion s with relevant international organization s like WFP, World Bank 
and IMF to ensure sustainabil ity of updated data related to food a id and technical  
and f inancial assistance. The NFIDC Group  also welcomed suggestions on  other 
possible sources of data.  
ii. Facilitate  interactive discussion s with the M embers and international organization s. 
In particular, the N FIDCs encouraged permanent observer organization s to 
participate in the annual exercise and to submit their statements related  to the 
implementation of NFIDC decision , ten days ahead of the meeting.  
iii. Have an updated and comprehensive view on the evolution of the status of Net Food -
Importing Develop ing Countries from 1995 to date t hat would give a diffe rent 
perspective of implementation of the Marrakesh D ecision.  The NFIDC Group asked 
the S ecretariat to prepare a factual presentation on NFIDC countries  which could 
include  number of countries, value and volume of food imports, main i mported food 
products, agriculture productivity for the products  concerned , populat ion, GDP and 
per capita income.  
iv. Engage more in the review of the Ministerial Decision within the relevant format to 
strengthen the language, besides increasing the level of technical and financial G/AG/R/83  
 
- 5 - 
 
  assistance promised under the decision, and to establish a mechanism to fully 
implement the provisions of the decision.  
2.7.  Morocco, Pakistan and Tunisia support ed the above suggestions  and echoed the concerns 
raised. 
2.1.1   Contributions by M embers  
2.8.  The Committee took note of the circulation of the following notifications in 
the Table  NF:1 series since the 201 6 monitoring exercise:7 Australia (G/AG/N/AUS/9 8); Canada 
(G/AG/N/CAN/115 ); European  Union (G/AG/N/EU/2 7 and G/AG/N/EU/32 ); New Zealand 
(G/AG/N/NZL/95 ); Norway (G/AG/N/NOR/88 ); Russian  Federation  (G/AG/N/ RUS/14); Switzerland 
(G/AG/N/CHE/76 ) and the United States  (G/AG/N/USA/ 105/Rev.1). 
2.9.  Pakistan noted that  Australia's notification highlighted  the importance of cash -based food 
assistance as t he most efficient tool to address extreme hunger. Pakistan appreciated  initiatives 
such as REACH that advocate  the importance of addressing food insecurity through globally 
coordinated programmes  and all programmes that encourage  local and regional purchas es and 
technical support in line with paragraph 3 of the Marrakesh Decision. Furthermore, Pakistan 
endorsed coordinated approaches to technical as sistance to address hunger, mal nutrition and 
agricultural productivity enhancement for NFIDCs. Pakistan stress ed the importance of agricultural 
trade reforms and liberalization for e nsuring a ccess, availability and affordability of food through  
predictable trade.  
2.1.2   Contributions by observer international organizations  
2.10.   The Committee took note of the contributions mad e by  the observer international 
organizations . The Chair referred to the document G/AG/GEN/137  that highlight ed the 
contributions of the International Grain Council  (IGC). The Inter -American Institute  for 
Cooperation on Agriculture  (IICA) reported on its technical cooperation  provided during 201 5 to 
support food security and nutrition outcomes for countries in Latin America and the Caribbean .8 
2.11.   The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) took note of the data and analysis gap s that 
had been  identified under this agenda item . The FAO would  contribute to the work of the 
Commit tee to address  these gaps and submit a report on the same , in the next review cycle . 
2.1.3   Review of the International Food Aid provision of the Nairobi Ministerial Decision 
on Export Competitio n 
2.12.   Egypt, on behalf of the NFIDC Group reiterated the importance attach ed to food a id as one 
of the pillars of the Marrakesh Decision . The NFIDC Group recalled that in the MC10 Decision on 
export competition, Ministers reaffirmed their commitments to mai ntain an adequate level of aid, 
and to take into account the interests of the recipient countries . The D ecision also provided 
disciplines with an objective of preventing or minimizing commercial displacement resulting from 
Food Aid.  The NFIDC Group advocated that Members should review the provisions of the decision 
in line with the annual exercise of monitoring the implementat ion of Marrakesh NFIDC Decision, 
as mandated in paragraph 32 of the MC10 Decision on export competition.  
2.13.   The NFIDC Group argued  that a review of  the implementation of Nairo bi Decision should be 
based on the M ember 's practices. Therefore, the food aid chapter in the S ecretariat 's background 
document9 used for export competition annual dedicated discussion would be a good basis for their 
review of Nairob i provisions on food a id. The NFIDC Group noted , however,  that the Secretariat's 
background document  lacked  adequate details on importan t transparency requirements in the food 
aid annex  such as  a description of the products supplied, relevant needs assessment, re -export, 
and conditions for  monetization.  The NFIDC G roup believe d that there was room to imp rove 
transparency in reviewing food a id deliveries and encourage d donor countries to r espond to the 
questionnaire on food a id with further  details. The NFIDC Group stressed  the importance of 
                                                
7 A reminder (WTO/A IR/AG /16) was also circulated on 13 October 2016. 
8 G/AG/GEN/ 136 circulated on 3 November 2016.  
9 G/AG/W/125/R ev.5 G/AG/R/83  
 
- 6 - 
 
  updated data  from the NF notifications of the Members and  international organizations to 
complement the food a id review process.  Morocco echo ed the Egypt's comments and suggestions . 
2.14.   The European Union agreed on the points highlighted by the NFIDC Group  such as the need 
to address  the data gap concerning food aid, particularly from other international organizations. 
The European Union noted that  the FAO Committee on Commodity  Problems , in the context of the 
review of the Consultative Sub -Committee on Surplus Disposal  (CSSD) at its  71st session held in 
October 2016, had decided to improve the notifications on food aid transactions . This include d the 
commitment of donors on food aid to provide ex-ante and ex-post information on the mode of the 
donations on type and monetization of food aid.  
2.15.   The United States reaffirmed  its commitment to  the Nairobi Ministerial Decision and the 
1994 Marrakesh Decision  and stated that as the largest donor of humanitarian response, th eir 
programmes aim ed to ensure that the levels of international food aid to those countries needing 
emergency assistance or other forms of assistance to alleviate hunger did not decline. The 
United  States also agreed with Egypt's  call for Members to provid e more information on food aid 
and other components of the decision in  their replies to the  export competition questionnaire.  
2.2  Annual consultation under Article 18.5 – Members' participation in the normal 
growth of world trade  
2.16.   The Chair referred to the rev ised "compliance document", i.e. document 
G/AG/GEN/86/Rev.26, which reflect ed the state -of-play of Members' compliance with their 
notification obligations including in the export subsidy area.  The document showed that for the 
implementation period 1995 -2014, 762  Table ES:1 notifications and 42 Table  ES:2 notifications 
remain outstanding.  
2.17.   The Secretariat informed Members that it could not update its annual Article 18.5 
background note containing data on export volumes and v alues with respect to  select agricu ltural 
products or product groups  as the data, which was normally sourced from the FAO , was 
unavailable . The latest statistics were included  in the document G/AG/W/32/Rev.15 and presented 
to Members during the March 2016 meeting of the Committee.  The Secre tariat explained  that the 
delay occurred due to methodological adjustments being co nsidered in the FAO data system . 
The Secretariat had been in  touch with the FAO with a view to  obtaining the updated statistics for  
the next revision of the W/32 background note and expected data  constraints to be resolved soon . 
2.3  Implementation -related Issues (G/AG/16 and G/AG/16/ Add.1; G/AG/22)  
2.18.   In the Doha Ministerial Decision on implementation -related issues and concerns, the 
Committee had been  asked to follow up on three is sues:  development of disciplines to govern the 
provision of export credits, export credit guarantees or insurance programmes i n accordance with 
Article  10.2;  examination of the possible means of improving the effectiveness of the 
implementation o f the Marr akesh NFIDC Decision;  continued review of the administration of TRQs  
and the submission of addenda to Table  MA:1 notification s on tariff rate quota regimes.  
2.19.   The Chair noted that w ith respect to the development of disciplines to govern the provision 
of expo rt credits, export credit guarantees or insurance programmes as well certain aspects raised 
under the implementation discussions on the Marrakesh NFIDC Decision, some progress had been  
made at the end of 2015 in the context of Nairobi Ministerial outcomes.  Egypt requested that this 
item remain a standing agenda item for the CoA.  
2.4  Implementation of Ministerial  outcomes  
2.20.   The Chair noted that the  CoA was responsible for implementation of Ministerial outcomes in 
several areas: the monitoring of information submit ted under the Bali Decision on Public 
Stockholding for Food Security purposes; monitoring and review of Members' obligations 
established under the Bali Decision on TRQ administration ; and monitoring of the  Nairobi 
Ministerial Decision on export competition , including the annual dedicated discussion on export 
competition.  No information ha d been provided by Members in the context of the monitoring 
foreseen  under the Bali Decisions on Public Stockholding for Food Security purposes and G/AG/R/83  
 
- 7 - 
 
  TRQ administration to th is date. According to the Decision on TRQ administration, a review of the 
operation of that Decision should begin no later than the end of 2017.  
2.21.   The Chair recalled that the  first post -Nairobi dedicated discussion on export competition had 
taken  place in Ju ne 2016. Questions and responses provided during those discussions could  be 
found in the document G/AG/W/155. The Secretariat background document had been  revised 
subsequent to the June CoA meeting and circu lated in document G/AG/W/125/R ev.5 and addenda. 
The Chair would  initiate the next dedicated discussion on export competition scheduled for the 
June 2017 meeting by sending the questionnaire lat er in the year.  
2.22.   The Chair further noted that the June dedicated discussion provide d an opportunity for 
Members t o have a focused exchange on issues related to the implementation of this decision and 
during the June meeting Members engaged in a robust discussion. As part of the monitoring of this 
Decision, Members also had the possibility to raise questions during ot her meetings under this 
agenda item. In this context, Chile had posed a question to New Zealand. The question and 
response were  included in section 5 of document G/AG/W /159. 
2.23.   The Chair reminded the Members that a fax had been  circulated on 31 October to ini tiate 
the next dedicated discussion on export competition scheduled for the June 2017 meeting. 
The fax contained the questionnaire and noted a deadline for submiss ions to the questionnaire of 
31 March  2017.  
2.5  Chair report on follow -up on the September 2016 T ransparency Information Session  
2.24.   The Chair noted that some suggestions of work for the Committee had been highlighted at 
the conclusion of the September 2016 Transparency Information Session . These had been 
summarized in the r eport of the September meeting .10 Following the September information 
session the Secretariat had circulated a survey that asked for feedback from Members regarding 
the session.  All the respondents had indicated that they had found the information session useful 
and many had suggested th at this type of information should be held again in 2017. The 
Secretariat would explore dates for a second transparency information session in 2017 and 
communicate them to Members in due course.  
2.25.   The Chair recalled  the recommendation  to increase the use of informal meetings, 
information sharing events and other side events to the committee to deepen the level of 
discussions. The Chair highlighted several side events scheduled in the w eek of the Committee 
meeting. The Chair noted  that Members had also specifi cally expressed an interest in information -
sharing regarding domestic agriculture policies and recalled earlier Committee informal meetings 
when Members had made this type of presentation. The Chair encouraged Members to consider 
whether they could provide  this type of presentation to the Committee at one of the meetin gs in 
2017. The Secretariat would  circulate a call for volunteers in this regard in the coming weeks.  
2.6  Annual report to the Council for Trade in Goods  
2.26.   The Chair informed Members that he would s ubmit the  annual report on the activities of this 
Committee for consideration by the Council for Trade in Goods  at its meeting on 17 November .11 
The report would  include the four meetings held in 2016.  The Chair also drew Members ' attention 
to a note from t he Secretariat summarizing the Article 18.6 Review proce ss of the Committee 
since 1995.12 
2.7  Renewal of ad hoc observer status to Inter -American Institute for Cooperation on 
Agriculture IICA  
2.27.   The Chair noted that there ha d been no change in Members' positions w ith regard to the 
ad hoc observer status of the IICA. The Committee agree d to invite IICA to participate in its formal 
meeting s in 2017 as an ad hoc observer.  
                                                
10 G/AG/R/82.  
11 G/L/1165.  
12 G/AG/GEN/138.  G/AG/R/83  
 
- 8 - 
 
  3  OTHER BUSINESS  
3.1.1   Update of the on-line notification system  
3.1.  The Chair recalled that the Secretariat has been working on enhancing  on-line systems 
including the development of a web-based notification system and encouraged Members to attend 
an information session organized by the S ecretariat on 10 November 2016.  
3.1.2   Notification Workshop  2017  
3.2.  The Secretariat provided information on the Notification Workshop to be held in 2017 . 
The workshop would provide information on  the online notification system that would be launched 
next year.  
3.1.3   Date of next regular meeting  
3.3.  Based on the Member s' comments , the eighty -third (83rd) regular meeting of the Committee 
on Agriculture was moved  to 27-28 March  2017. 
__________