RESTRICTED  
  
G/AG/R/87  
 
23 May  2018 
(18-3078) Page: 1/9 
Committee on Agriculture    
 
 
SUMMARY REPORT OF TH E MEETING HELD ON 20 FEBRUARY  2018 
NOTE BY THE SECRETAR IAT1 
The Committee on Agriculture held its eighty -sixth (86th) regular meeting on 20 February  2018 
under the Chairmanship of Mr Alf Vederhus  of Norway . 
 
The agenda of the meeting as set out in WTO/AIR/AG/ 26 was adopted with the following 
modifications:  
 
 Part 1 (Review Process):  
 Article 18.6:  
 Australia clarified that question AG -IMS ID 86004  concerned India's puls es policies , 
instead of India's minimum support prices.   
1  THE REVIEW PROCESS  
1.1  Matters relevant to the implementation of commitments under the reform 
programme: Article 18.6  
1.1.  The 21 implementation -related issues raised as well as the responses provided and fol low-up 
exchanges are compiled in section 1 of document G/AG/W/ 173. These relate to:  
a. Argentina's  export subsidies to pork meat (raised by the European Union ); 
b. Egypt's domestic support for wheat  (raised by Canada ); 
c. Indonesia's soybean imports  (raised by  the United States ); 
d. Mongolia's quota regime for importation  (raised by  the Russian Federation ); 
e. Suriname's poultry tariffs  (raised by the United States ); 
f. U.S. support to cotton sector  (raised by the European Union ); 
g. Brazil's domestic support programmes  (raised  by the United States ); 
h. Canada's New Milk Ingredient Class  (raised by Australia, New Zealand and the  
United  States ); 
i. Canada's wine sale policy  (raised by  the United States ); 
j. European Union  intervention stocks of skim milk power  (raised by Australia and  New 
Zealand ); 
k. India's pulses policies  (raised by Australia, Canada, the Russian Federation and  
Ukraine ); 
l. India's minimum support prices  (raised by Australia, Canada and the  European Union ); 
m. India's quantitative restrictions  (raised by Australia and the Un ited States ); 
n. Indonesia's dairy import system  (raised by the United States ); 
                                                
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.  G/AG/R/87  
 
- 2 - 
 
  o. Korea's rice imports  (raised by Thailand ); 
p. Pakistan's sugar policies  (raised by Australia and Brazil ); 
q. Philippines' rice waiver  (raised by Australia ); 
r. Russian Federation's railway  subsidy for exports (raised by Australia, Canada, 
the European Union, Ukraine  and the United States ); 
s. Thailand's import permits for feed wheat (raised by the European Union) ; 
t. Turkey's IPR programme (raised by the Russian Federation ); and 
u. U.S. dairy policies (raised by Canada ) 
1.2.  Ukraine welcomed the analysis done by the Secretariat in its document G/AG/GEN/138/Rev.1 
which presents an overview of the questions raised by Members under Article 18.6 of the 
Agreement on Agriculture. Ukraine suggested includi ng in the document a similar analysis on 
questions pertaining to individual notifications.  
1.2  Review of Notifications  
1.3.  The Chairperson  informed Members that since the October  2017 meeting the Committee had 
received 71 notifications . These  had been distributed electronically to all delegations.  
1.2.1   Notifications in respect of which questions have been raised in advance of the 
issuance of the convening airgram  
1.4.  Section 2 of document G/AG/W/ 173 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.2 
1.2.2   Deferred replies to questions raised under the review process  
1.5.  The Chairperson  noted that a total of 105 responses in the context of the review process 
remained outstanding  since 2012. Two questions were raised under this agenda item.  The 
questions and the corresponding answers can be found in Section 3 of G/AG/W/ 173.  
1.6.  The Chairperson  strongly advised Members  to submit the ir replies to the Secretariat in order 
to enhance the efficiency of the review process. A list of outstanding written responses from the 
February meeting is included in document G/AG/W/17 3. 
1.2.3   Overdue notifications  
1.7.  The Committee took no te of docu ment G/AG/GEN/86/Rev.30  circulated on  9 February  2018, 
reflecting the current status of Members' compliance with notification obligations.  
1.8.  The Chairperson  highlighted a few numbers with respect to the outstanding notifications. 
For the period 1995 to 201 6: 
 37% (845 ) Table DS:1 domestic support notifications  remain ed outstanding ; and 
 34% (894 ) export subsidy notifi cations in the ES:1 series  remain ed outstanding . 
1.9.  Members had raised six  question s under this agenda item. The question s, corresponding 
answer s and Members' follow -up comments can be found in section 4 of document G/AG/W/ 173. 
1.10.   The Chairperson  noted the importance of transparency and echoed some of the Members ' 
calls for increase d efforts to get up to date with notification obligations . The Chairpe rson also 
brought into attention various  databases that  could  help manage informati on in order to facilitate 
the work of Committee . 
                                                
2 WTO/AIR/AG/ 26, Attachment Section B. G/AG/R/87  
 
- 3 - 
 
  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  
1.11.   The Commi ttee took note of the 47  notifications circulated before 9 February 2018 , 
including notificat ions carried over fr om the October  2017 meeting but  in respect of which no 
questions had been raised by that date under the Committee's working procedures.3 
1.2.5   Notifications circulated or made available after the issuance of the convening 
airgram  
1.12.   Eight notifications had  been cir culated after the issuance  of the convening airgram on 
9 February  2017: 
 Japan - Table MA:3 (G/AG/N/JPN/222 ); 
 Mexico - Table DS:1 for 2016 (G/AG/N/MEX/36 ); 
 Philippines - Table DS:1 for 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 and 2015 (G/AG/N/PHL/48, 
G/AG/N/PHL/49, G/AG/N/PHL /50, G/AG/N/PHL/51, G/AG/N/PHL/52 ); 
 Ukraine - Table DS:1 for 2011  (G/AG/N/UKR/18/CORR.2 ). 
1.13.   These notifications would be reverted to for substantive review during the next regular 
meeting, in accordance with the Committee's working procedures.  
1.2.6   Points concerni ng 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  WTO list of net food -importing developing countries (G/AG/3 and G/AG/5/Rev.10)  
2.1.  The Chairperson  recalled tha t within the framework of the Marrakesh NFIDC Decision, and 
pursuant to the Decision of the Commi ttee (G/AG/3), the Committee was required to review the 
list of NFIDCs, including on the basis of specific requests  from Members for inclusion in  the list.  
2.2.  The Chairperson  noted  that the Committee had not receive d any new demands from 
Members to be added to the list of NFIDCs ; therefore the list contained in document 
G/AG/5/Rev.10 remain ed unchanged .  
2.2  Annual monitoring exercise on the follow -up to the Marrakesh  NFIDC Decision under 
Article 16.2 of the Agreement on Agriculture  
2.3.  The Chairperson  recalled that Article 16.2 of the Agreement on Agriculture mandates the 
Committee to monitor the follow -up to the Marrakesh Ministerial Decision on NFIDCs. The 
chairperson stated that the 2017 monitoring exercise would normally ha ve been covered in the 
October 2017 CoA meeting,  and that in light of the busy schedule leading up to the Buenos Aires 
Ministerial  Conference , this exercise  had been postponed to the Feb ruary meeting. A reminder was 
circulated to Members on 22 January in the document WTO/AIR/AG/25.  
2.4.  The Committee took not e of a background note prepared by the Secretariat on the 
implementation of the NFIDC Decision to facilitat e Members' consideration of th e mandate . The 
most recent version of th e document was circulated as G/AG/W/42/Rev.19.  
                                                
3 WTO/AIR/AG/ 26, Attachment Section C. G/AG/R/87  
 
- 4 - 
 
  2.5.  With respect to  the changes made in the revision of the document, the Secretari at informed 
Members that  section 2 of the document dealing with the "review of food aid levels" no longer 
include d information on quantities of global food aid shipments  due to unavailability of the 
information . The Secretariat noted  that previous revisions of the  note included v olumetric data on 
global food aid shipments , based on the W orld Food Programme (W FP) food aid data system called 
INTERFAIS  which was discontinue d in 2016. The Secretariat highlighted that the FAO was 
establishing mechanisms to ensure continued monitor and report on food aid shipments. The food 
aid information included in the revis ed document wa s based on the contribution of donor members 
under the Food Assistance Convention (FAC) 2013.   
2.6.  The Secretariat further recalled  that d uring the 2016 annua l monitoring discussions, the 
NFIDC group of Members had expressed concerns on the declining quantities of global food 
deliveries and had suggested to look at commercial food imports of LDCs and NFIDCs. Hence, the 
current revised version of the note includ ed volumetric data on total imports of cereals by LDCs 
and NFIDCs for 2007-2016, sourced  from the UN COMTRADE. In addition, t he revised note 
contain ed updated information on international cereal prices based on International Grains 
Council's price index , which capture d a declining price trend beginning  in the latter part of 2012 . 
The price trend  seem ed to have  stabilized  since 2016.  
2.7.  Pakistan expressed their concern o ver the  lack of notifications and how this affected the 
review foreseen in the Marrakesh De cision on NFIDCs. Pakistan highlighted the importance of 
agriculture trade reforms and predictable trade regime  in ensuring food availability , affordability  
and overall food security of NFIDCs.  Pakistan advocated policy reforms that c ould help NFIDCs 
increase their  domestic production and respond  to chronic food security issues. Pakistan also 
endorsed globally coordinated programmes to a ddress food insecurity, hunger, mal nutrition and 
the enhancement of agricultur al productivity.   
2.8.  The Chairperson  noted that the Committee monitor ed the actions taken within the framework 
of the Marrakesh Decision based on two main sources of information : Members' contributions , 
including Table NF:1 notifications , and contributions made by inter -governmental organiza tions 
that ha d an observer status in the Committee.  
2.2.1   Contributions by Members, including Table NF:1 notifications circulated since the 
November 2016 monitoring exercise  
2.9.  The Chairperson  referred  to the reminder airgram regarding the submission of Table NF:1 
notifications that was circulated on 22 January 2018 (WTO/AIR/AG/25). These notifications 
represent ed important contributions by Members to the Annual Monitoring Exercise.   
2.10.   The Chairperson  noted that the Table NF:1 notification cover ed information  on the q uantity 
of food aid provided to LDCs and NFIDCs; an indication of the proportion of food aid provided in 
fully grant form or appropriate concessional terms; technical and financial assistance under 
paragraph 3(iii) of the Decision ; and other relevant infor mation with respect to actions taken 
within the framework of the Decision.  
2.11.   The Chairperson  listed 13 Table NF:1 notifications that had been circulated (including a 
corrigendum)  since the November 2016 monitoring exercise . These included:  
 Australia: G/AG/N/ AUS/105, G/AG/N/AUS/108;  
 Cuba: G/AG/N/CUB/55, G/AG/N/CUB/56:  
 New Zealand: G/AG/N/NZL/101;  
 Norway: G/AG/N/NOR/93;  
 Russia n Federation : G/AG/N/RUS/17;  
 South Africa: G/AG/N/ZAF/89;  
 Switzerland: G/AG/N/CHE/81, G/AG/N/CHE/81/CORR.1; and 
 United States: G/AG/N/USA/113, G/AG/N/USA/116, G/AG/N/USA/119.  
 G/AG/R/87  
 
- 5 - 
 
  2.12.   The European Union informed Members that its Table NF:1 notification for 2016 would be 
available in due course.  
2.2.2   Contributions by observer organizations  
2.13.   The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Na tions (FAO) provide d a summary of 
the issues raised in their contribution contained in document G/AG/GEN/144. The FAO informed 
Members that their contribution dr ew from the latest issues of the FAO Cereal Supply and Demand 
Brief, the Agriculture Market Inf ormation System (AMIS) Market Monitor and the FAO Food Outlook 
series. The FAO highlighted  that the global value of food imports was estimated at USD 1.413 
trillion in 2017, which represent ed a 6% (USD  86 billion) increase from 2016. Further, the 
expenditu res on food imports by LDCs, low-income food deficit countries and countries in sub -
Saharan Africa were expected to climb considerably. During 2017, the FAO Food Price Index (FFPI) 
recorded an averaged of 174.6 points, (8.2% higher compared to 2016), repre senting the highest 
annual average since 2014. However the average for 2017 was 24% (almost 230 points) below 
the 2011 record. Moreover, in ternational price volatility could  have serious implications for LDCs 
and NFIDCs who depend on imports to meet their domestic food needs . The FAO highlighted that 
in 2017, the historical price volatility of wheat, maize and soybeans peaked during the summer 
months, but ultimately decreased by the end of the year. In addition, implied volatility, which 
measures the level of expected future volatility, exhibited a similar pattern in the summer months, 
but since then it was  hovering close to all -time low levels.  In terms of food aid, the FAO informed 
the Committee that it will assume the monitoring of and reporting on food a id shipments as 
decided during the 71st Session of the Committee on Commodity Problems in 2016. This initiative 
would complement WFP reporting on shipments.  
2.14.   The Chairperson  noted the contribution of the International Grains Council (IGC)  on behalf 
of the Food Assistance Committee contained in document  G/AG/GEN/143 . The document 
highlighted the activities of the Food Assistance Convention . The Chairperson also noted the 
contribution of the Inter -American Institute for Agricultural Cooperat ion (IICA) contained in the 
document G/AG/GEN/142 . The document provided information on technical cooperation activities 
carried out by IICA in 2017  to support Latin American and Caribbean (LAC) countries in the area of 
food and nutrition security (i.e. , access to food,  availability, stability and utilization ).  
2.2.3   Review of the International Food Aid provision of the Nairobi Ministerial Decision 
on Export Competition  
2.15.   The Chairperson  reminded Members that  as per paragraph 32 of the Nairobi Decision on 
Export C ompetition , Members had agreed to review the provisions on international food aid 
forming part of the Decision within the regular CoA monitoring of the implementation of the 
Marrakesh Ministerial Decision . The Chairperson  noted that this specific review on  international 
food aid was held in addition to the other review and monitoring provisions co ntained in the 
Nairobi Decision, including the dedicated discussion on export competition scheduled in to take 
place at the  June meeting s of the CoA .  
2.16.   The Chairper son recall ed that at the November 2016 exercise, Members continued to reflect 
on the international food aid review process mandated in the Nairobi Export Competition Decision. 
A number of Members had noted that the food aid chapter in the Secretariat's bac kground 
document used for the export competition annual dedicated discussion would be a good basis for 
this review , while noting that it lacked additional transparency requirements. Another Member had 
noted the need to address the data gap concerning food aid, particularly from other international 
organizations.  
2.17.   There were no requests for the floor under this agenda item.  
2.3  Annual consultation under Article 18.5 – Members' participation in the normal 
growth of world trade  
2.18.   The Chairperson  recalled  that the Article 18:5 calls on Members to consult annually with 
respect of their participation in the normal growth of world trade in agricultural products within the 
framework of commitments on export subsidies. The Commit tee's Working Procedures specified  
that th is annual consultation was to be undertaken at the regular November meetings of the G/AG/R/87  
 
- 6 - 
 
  Committee.  The Chairperson noted that due to heavy workload in anticipation to the Buenos Aires 
Ministerial Conference, the 2017  exercise had been postponed to the February  2018 CoA meeting.   
2.19.   The Chairperson  highlighted that export subsidy notifications were one of the main bases for 
the consultations "within the framework of the commitments on export subsidies. " These 
notifications cover ed subsidized exports and related bud getary outlays, as well as total food aid 
and total export volumes.  Hence , Members' compliance with their notification obligations in the 
export subsidy area was crucial to enable the Committee to undertake its consultations.   
2.20.   The Chairperson  referred to t he revised "compliance document", document 
G/AG/GEN/86/Rev.30, which reflected  the state -of-play of Members' compliance with their 
notification obligations including in the export subsidy area. The document show ed that for the 
implementation period 1995 -2016, 894 Table ES:1 notifications and 63 Table ES:2 no tifications 
remain ed outstanding.  
2.21.   The Committee took note of the background note prepared by the Secretariat  for this 
exercise  (G/AG/W/32/Rev.16) . The Secretariat informed Members that in past editions it had used 
FAOSTAT data in the preparation of the background note. The product categories indicated in the 
FAO data closely matched  the group of products used in Committee's monitoring of export subsidy 
commitments  and FAO data also provi ded trade data in volumetric terms. However, due to delays 
in the availability of updated trade statistics from the FAO, the Secretariat had decided to prepare 
the updated background note with the assistance of the WTO international trade statistics unit. 
The principal source of data for the updated note was UN COMTRADE. In view of the change in the 
source data (available at HS 6 digit level), some minor adjustments ha d been made in the product 
definitions. The Secretariat pointed out that the product compo sition in the note was limited to HS 
chapter 2 only for meats product s (i.e. beef, pork and poultry) . Processed meat products in HS 
chapter 16 were not included in the trade statistics as this would have necessitated the use of 
tariff codes beyond the HS 6 -digit level in defining those processed meat products. Hence, t his 
could  explain  why the global trade figures for meat products were lower than the corresponding 
figures reported in previous revisions  to the background note , where  the data was sourced fro m 
FAO. The HS 2012 product definitions were included in Annex 1 of the document.  
2.22.   Australia and the European Union welcomed the background note and highlighted the useful 
information contained therein, in particular details provided on  the trends in world a gricultural 
trade. The European Union noted the increasing role of developing countrie s in global agricultur e 
exports . 
2.4  Implementation related issues  
2.23.   The Chairperson  reminded Members that i n the Doha Ministerial Decision on 
implementation -related issues and concerns, the Committee was required to  follow up on three 
issues:  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 of the Ma rrakesh NFIDC Decision and 
continued review of the administration of TRQs and the submission of addenda to Table MA:1 
notificati ons on tariff rate quota regimes.  
2.24.   There was no request for the floor under this agenda item.  
2.5  Implementation of Ministerial outcomes  
2.5.1   Review of the Bali Ministerial Decision on TRQ administration  
2.25.   The Chairperson  noted that as per the timeline stipulated in t he Bali Decision on 
TRQ administration, the Committee ha d two years to complete the review of the Decision to make 
recommendations to the 12th Ministerial Conference through the General Council.  
2.26.   The Chairperson  reported on the in formal meeting held 20 Feb ruary 2018 to discuss a  
proposed process for the review and to collect Members ' initial thoughts on the specific issues to 
be considered during this  review.  G/AG/R/87  
 
- 7 - 
 
  2.27.   During the informal session, t he Chairperson  had noted that the objective of th e review was 
to promote improvement in the utilization of TRQs and to enable the General Council to make 
recommendations to the 12th Ministerial Conference on the status of paragraph 4 of the underfill 
mechanism , as included in Annex A of the Decision. On t he invitation of the Chairperson , the 
Secretariat had provided a brief overview of the review provisions in the Decision and their 
relationship to paragraph 4 of the underfill mechanism. The Chairperson  had also sought Members' 
views on the proposed proces s for the conduct of the review as contained in the Secretariat note 
(G/AG/W/171).  In the ensuing discussions, a number of Members highlighted the importance of 
the review exercise towards the fulfilment of the objectives outlined in the Bali Decision. Som e 
Members suggested that the Committee should engage in a deeper enquiry into the TRQ 
administration arrangements practised by the various Members , to examine the underlying causes 
of underfill. This could assist an assessment of whether an underfill resulted from market 
circumstances or from how  the TRQ was administ ered. Some Members had also indicated that they 
would submit written submissions on some specific issues to facilitate the review process. A 
number of Members requested the Secretariat to prepar e background data and information on TRQ 
administration methods used by various Members maintaining TRQs so as to facilitate the review 
discussions.   
2.28.   Members expressed support for the Secretariat's proposed process for the review of the 
TRQ Decision contai ned in G/AG/W/171.   
2.5.2   Preparation for the June Export Competition Dedicated Discussion and 
Chairperson  report of the informal meeting on the review of the Nairobi Decision on 
export competition  
2.29.   The Chairperson  noted that the second post -Nairobi dedicated discussion on export 
competition had taken  place in the Jun e 2017 m eeting. The q uestions and  responses provided 
during the  discussions were circulated in document G/AG/W/166. The Secretariat background 
document was revised  after the June CoA meeting and cir culated in document G/AG/W/125/R ev.7 
and addenda on 27 September 2017.  
2.30.   As part of the monitoring of this Decision, Members have the possibility to raise questions 
during other meetings. In this context, China posed a question to Japan. The question , response 
and follow -up comments could be found in section 5 of document G/AG/W/ 173. 
2.31.   The Chairperson  reminded Members of  a fax circulated on 16 November 2017 to initiate the 
next dedicated discussion on export competition sc heduled for June 2018 meeting. The fax 
contained the questionnaire and noted a deadline for submissions to the questionnaire of 2 March 
2018. The Chairperson  announced the extension of the deadline to 16 March 2018.  The 
Chairperson encourage d all Members t o reply to the questionnaire . 
2.32.   Further, the Chairperson  noted that the Nairobi Decision also contain ed provisions relating 
to its periodic review , particularly  that a review of the Decisions ' disciplines be conducted every 
three years by the Committ ee (para graph 5 of the Decision) . At the June 2017 Committee 
meeting, a suggestion was made that the review of this Decision be included within the June 2018 
Dedicated Discussion .  
2.33.   The Chairperson  reported on the informal meeting held on 20 February 2018 on the re view 
of the Nairobi Decision on Export Competition.  The Chairperson  noted that this review was an 
opportunity to assess whether the disciplines contained in the Nairobi Decision on Export 
Competition  and the way they are monitored through the annual dedicated discussion process 
could be improved "to ensure that no circumvention threatens export subsidy elimination 
commitments and to prevent non -commercial transactions from being used t o circumvent such 
commitments". The Chairperson  had invited  Members  to express their initial views on this review, 
based on the CoA's experience wi th this Decision, including on the provisions of the Decision; the 
content of the Questionnair e annexed to the Decision, and the process followed thus far for the 
annual dedica ted discussion. The Chairperson  also invited Members to reflect on the process to be 
followed for this review, including in particular how its outcome should be reflected, as well as the 
timing for the completion of the review. The Chairperson  noted that o ne possible outcome could be 
that the Chairperson  report to the Committee on the discussions that ha d taken place in the 
context of the Review at the November 2018 CoA meeting.  G/AG/R/87  
 
- 8 - 
 
  2.34.   Several Members considered that the Nairobi outcome on export competition was still 
"unfinished business" and supported the aim of enhancing the disciplines contained in the Nairobi 
Decision with regards to export credits, export credit guarantees or insurance programmes, 
agricultural exporting State Trading Enterprises as well as i nternational food aid. Several Members 
also stressed the importance of the implementation of the commitments made in Nairobi more 
than two years ago to eliminate the remaining scheduled export subsidies entitlements. These 
delegations called in particular for enhanced transparency on the steps being undertaken by the 
relevant Mem bers to implement the Decision. Several Members commended the process 
established for the June dedicated discussion on export competition through the replies to the 
questionnaire fo llowed by a questions and answers process. One Member noted however that this 
process could be further developed and possibly be used in other part s of the work of the 
Committee. All the interveners stressed the need to improve the rate of replies to the 
questionnaire to ensure an effective monitoring mechanism through this June dedicated 
discussion, and hence encouraged other Members  to reply to the questionnaire. One delegation 
also suggested including data on the use of article 9.4 export subsidies in th e Secretariat's 
background document.  
2.5.3   Other implementation on Ministerial Outcomes  
2.35.   Members provided an update regarding changes to their export subsidies schedules based 
on the Nairobi Decision on export competition. Norway, Israel and Canada  informed the Committee 
that they had submitted to the WTO their modified schedule phasing out  their export subsid y 
entitlements . Brazil , Colombia, the European Union, Indonesia, Mexico, Turkey , the United States  
and Uruguay  informed Members that internal work for the modification of their export subsid y 
schedul es were under way. South Africa reported that the legal processes to amend the schedule 
had been concluded and that it expected to submit it s amended schedule  by mid -March  2018. 
Switzerland stated that its p arliame nt had approved the reform to its schedule, and that, if there 
was not a request for referendum, it would be submitted to the WTO in due course.  
2.36.   New Zealand welcomed Members' updates on their implementation of the Nairobi Decision 
on export competition  and suggested that this exercise be repeated in future Committee meetings.  
2.6  Information from Observer Organizations  
2.37.   The Committee took note of IICA's work plan regarding its activities in relation to the work 
of the Committee on Agriculture for 2018.4  
2.7  Other business  
2.7.1   On-line submission of notifications and modifications to the Q&A function of the 
AG IMS  
2.38.   The Chairperson  reminded the Committee of the Secretariat 's ongoing work to enhance  the 
on-line systems including the development of a web -based notificatio n system.  
2.39.   The Secretariat  informed Members that a test site of the online n otification submission 
facility  had been available since 2017 . The Secretariat ha d been working on testing the system 
with an aim to identify and fix remaining issues  and to furthe r improve the system. To this end, 50 
Members had requested login credentials for the test site. The Secretariat  thanked th ose Members 
who ha d used the system to prepare notifications and those who h ad provided feedback  which  had 
been taken into account to initiate a project to introduce further improvements.  The Secretariat  
noted  that improvements to the system would  be completed with a view to launch the online 
system in 2018.  
2.40.   The Secretariat  highlighted that during  the first y ear using the system the processing times 
of the notifications might take longer as users  get accustomed to the  features of the  new system. 
The Secretariat, however, expected that the processing time would be reduce d significantly  from 
the second year onwa rds.  
                                                
4 G/AG/GEN/145.  G/AG/R/87  
 
- 9 - 
 
  2.41.   The Secretariat  recalled that at the October 2017 CoA meeting Members  had engaged in 
discussions regarding improvements to the AG IMS. The Secretariat  noted  that they were currently 
working out the details to follow -up on the recommendation that emerged from th ese discussion s 
to link original and subsequent follow -up questions  raised in the CoA . The Secretariat informed  the 
Committee that th is project would  be carried out within a bigger project that involve d the creation 
of a single platform that  would also cover issues raised in the SPS and TBT Committee meetings.  
2.7.2   Workshops in 2018  
2.42.   The Secretariat provided information on the workshops planned for  2018.  The Secretariat 
announced that the advanced workshop on notifications in agriculture was sched uled to take place  
during 24-27 April 2018. The Secretariat reminded Members that an invitation fax was circulated 
on January 30 2018 which had indicated the deadline for the submission of candidacies as 
23 February  2018. The Secretariat emphasised that th e candidates must be government officials 
from developing countr y Members  and that must be directly involved in the preparation or analysis 
of notifications in agriculture . The Secretariat further  noted that 25 participants would be selected 
for funded par ticipation  and that, depending on availability of space, additional participants with 
self-funded participation could  be accepted.  
2.43.   The Secretariat also informed Members that a workshop on trends in the agriculture 
landscape was schedule to take place in the margins of the Co A June  meeting , 13-14 June . The 
objective of this workshop was to provide Members the opportunity to examine the latest trends in 
the agriculture  policy  landscape.  
2.7.3   Date of next regular meetings  
2.44.   The Chairperson  proposed that the eighty -seventh  (87th) regular meeting of the Committee 
on Agriculture be held on  11-12 June 2017. On this basis , the airgram convening the meeting 
would be issued on 1 June 2018 . 
 
 
__________