G/AG/W/128  
 
28 May 2014  
(14-3192)  Page: 1/2  
Committee on Agriculture  Original: English  
 
 TRANSPARENCY OPPORTUNITIES – EXPORT RESTRICTIONS 
COMMUNICATION FROM THE UNITED STATES 
PAPER FOR JUNE 6, 2014 COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE 
1.1.  The United States was encouraged by the strong interest Members showed at the March 2014 
Committee on Agriculture (COA) to discuss transparency of export restrictions. COA papers and discussion on export restrictions over the past two years have displayed clearly that transparency 
of export restrictions is not stymied by Member s' questions regarding notification requirements 
(see Communication from Japan G/AG/W/107 and Communication from the United States G/AG/W/117). Additionally, COA papers and discu ssion have shed light on the vast number of 
export restrictions being used (examples can be pulled from specific instances of export 
restrictions on agricultural products catalogued in the OECD Restriction on Export of Raw Materials 
database); the number of countries using export restrictions (OECD database cites 16 countries, including 14 WTO Members); and the scope of export restrictions being used (see Communication 
from the United States G/AG/W/113 and G/AG/W/113/Ad d.1). In this context, the United States is 
committed to improving transparency with regard to  Members' notifications of export restrictions 
by continuing to discuss these subtopics, and expa nd the conversation to include the effects of 
export restrictions on importing Members' food security.  
1.2.  The COA papers and discussion since 2011 have lacked in-depth analysis of the effects of 
export restrictions. Paragraph 1(b) of Article 12 of the Agreement on Agriculture, states that a "Member instituting an export prohibition or restriction shall give due consideration to the effects 
of such prohibition or restriction on importing Members' food security." As such, it is important to 
build a common understanding among Members of th e effects of export restrictions on importing 
Members' food security so that due consideration can be given when a Member is contemplating 
whether or not to implement an export restriction.  
1.3.  Export restrictions have on occasion become a significant component of trade policy, 
particularly during recent price spikes, resulting in new empirical analysis from which 
the Committee can draw. To start with, the United States highlights main points from two 
International Food Policy Research Institute reports and research by the World Bank focusing on the relationship between export restrictions and price spikes. 
a. In 2008, one study
1 built a case (using a mix of economic theory and reasoning, 
economic history, and statistical analysis) that export restrictions are a significant 
contributor to price spikes. In a specific exam ple, the authors used the timing of export 
restrictions for rice to help explain causality with the price spike in 2008, which 
happened despite record rice production. A subsequent study2 expanded this idea by 
adding economic analysis that supports the notion that trade-related factors (including export restrictions) can be an important contributor to prices spikes. The study analyzed 
separately spikes in the rice, wheat, maize,  and soybean markets. In an example of the 
spike in rice prices in 2007 and 2008, the study concluded that export restrictions and panic purchases contributed to the sharp spike in world rice prices. The study also concluded that export restrictions had major effects on the markets for grains and 
wheat. A similar study
3 quantified the aggregate contribution across countries that 
                                               
1 Headey, D. and Fan, S. (2008).  “Anatomy of a cr isis: the causes and consequences of surging food 
prices”. Agricultural Economics, 39 supplement 375-391. 
2 Headey, D. (2011). "Rethinking the Global Food Crisis: The Role of Trade Shocks". Food Policy, 36, 
136-46. 
3 Martin, W. and K. Anderson. (2012). "Export Restrict ions and Price Insulation During Commodity Price 
Booms", American Journal of Agricult ural Economics 94(2): 422-27. Originally released as a World Bank Policy 
Research Working Paper 5645. G/AG/W/128 
 
- 2 - 
 
  market-insulating policies played in the f ood price spike of 2006-2008. The analysis 
shows that these insulating policies during the 2006-08 surge explained 45 percent of the increase in the international rice price and almost 30 percent of the increase in the international price of wheat.  
b. The United States notes that during the time period analyzed in these three papers 
(2006-2008), only one WTO export restriction notification was submitted (Kyrgyz Republic, G/AG/N/KGZ/2). 
1.4.  The United States remains strongly intere sted in improving the transparency of Members' 
export restrictions. By discussing new research on the effects of export restrictions, the United States hopes to build a more clear understanding among Members of the consequences of such restrictions on world markets and importing Members' food security. The United States encourages 
other Members to share relevant insights, based on research or Members' experience. 
 
__________