RESTRICTED  
  
G/AG/R/89  
 
7 November 2018 
(18-6991) Page: 1/7 
Committee on Agriculture    
 
SUMMARY REPORT OF TH E MEETING HELD ON 25-26 SEPTEMBER  2018 
NOTE BY THE SECRETAR IAT1 
The Committee on Agriculture held its eighty -eighth  (88th) regular meeting 
on 25-26 September  2018 under the Chairmanship of Ms. D ébora Cumes of Guatemala . 
 
The agenda of the meeting as set out in WTO/AIR/AG/ 30 was adopted with the following 
modifications:  
• Part 1 (Review Process):  
• Article 18.6:  
• Brazil to co -sponsor questions from Australia to India and  to Pakistan regarding their 
sugar policies . 
• Notifications:  
• Indonesia 's questions concerning the Philippines' SSG notification (G/AG/N/PHL/53) . 
1  THE REVIEW PROCESS  
1.1  Outstanding responses  to questions raised, 2012 -2017  
1.1.  The Chair person  noted that there has been a steady increase in the number of outstanding 
responses over the last  years. Given that a  key mandate of the Committee was to review the 
progress in the implementation of commitments negotiated under the Uruguay Round reform 
programme , timely responses to Members' questions were essential.  
1.2.  The Secretariat had dist ributed on May 2018 a document  containing details of outstanding 
responses under the CoA review process from 2012 till 2017.2 To assist Members in identifying the 
progr ess made in addressing outstanding questions the Chair person  had requested the Secretariat 
to update this list. The Secretariat distributed on 14 September 2018 a revised list of the outstand ing 
responses for 2012 to 2017 .3 Eight responses had been receive d bringing down the total of 
outstanding responses for this period from 71 to 63. This represent ed an 11% improvement in the 
number of outstanding responses for that period.  
1.3.  In addition to the five -year compilation the Secretariat included a table indicat ing those 
questions with outstanding responses from the February and June CoA meetings this year in the 
compilation  of questions for this meeting .4  
1.4.  The Chairperson  invited Members with outstanding responses to provide them at their earliest 
convenience , including responses that might have already been provided bilaterally or questions that 
might have found an answer through recently submitted notifications. Members may provide their 
responses either through the online system, by sending these responses to the Secretariat or by 
providing their responses during the Committee meeting under the relevant agenda item (Deferred 
                                                
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/177.  
3 G/AG/W/177/Rev.1.  
4 G/AG/W/184.  G/AG/R/89  
 
- 2 - 
 
  replies to questions raised under the review process). All responses woul d be made available in the 
AG IMS.  
1.5.  The Secretariat will produce a  document summarizing the outstanding responses for the 
complete period 2012 to 2018 in January. In 2019, the Secretariat will follow a similar process 
producing a compilation for 2013 -2018 for the March Committee meeting and separately tracking 
outstandin g responses for Committee meeting in 2019.  
1.2  Matters relevant to the implementation of commitments under the reform 
programme: Article 18.6  
1.6.  The 28 implementation -related issues raised as well as the responses provided and follow -up 
exchanges are compiled in section 1 of document G/AG/ W/187. These  relate to:  
a. China's premium contributions for rice, corn and wheat seeds  (raised by Canada ); 
b. EU's CAP reform  (raised by New Zealand);  
c. India's skim milk powder export subsidies  (raised by Australia, the European  Union,  
New Zealand and the United States);  
d. India's proposed domestic support programmes (raised by the European  Union);  
e. Korea's support for seaweed producers (raised by China);  
f. Russian Federation's modification of excise taxes on wine (raised by the European  Union); 
g. Thailand's import licensing for meat (raised by the United States);  
h. Turkey's export subsidies (raised by the European Union);  
i. United States' proposed domestic support measures (raised by Australia, Canada, 
the European Union, India, Japan and New Zealand);  
j. Zimbabwe's export incentive (raised by the United States);  
k. Canada's new milk ingredient class  (raised by Australia, New  Zealand and 
the United  States);  
l. Canada's wine sale policy  (raised by the United States);  
m. European Union's sugar policies (rais ed by Australia);  
n. United Kingdom's modification of its agricultural schedule of commitments (raised 
by India)  
o. India's sugar policies (raised by Australia and Brazil);  
p. India's pulses policies  (raised by Australia, Canada, the Russian  Federation, and 
the United States);  
q. India's Merchandise Exports from India Scheme ( MEIS) (raised by Australia, New  Zealand 
and the United States);  
r. Indonesia's import restrictions on horticultural products  (raised by Japan);  
s. Indonesia's dairy import system  (raise d by New Zealand and the United  States);  
t. Indonesia's soybea n imports (raised by the United  States);  
u. Korea's rice imports (raised by Thailand);  
v. Mongolia's quota regime for importation (raised by the Russ ian Federation);  
w. Pakistan's sugar policies (raised by Australia, Guatem ala and Brazil)  
x. Pakistan's  wheat export subsidies (raised by the United States);  
y. Philippines'  rice waiver (raised by Australia ); 
z. Russian Federation's  railway subsidy for exports (raised by the United States);  
aa. Suriname's  poultry tariffs (raised by the United States); and  G/AG/R/89  
 
- 3 - 
 
  bb. Thailand's  import permits for feed wheat (raised by Ukraine).  
1.3  Review of Notifications  
1.7.  The Chairperson  informed  Members that since the June 2018 meeting the Committee had 
received 65 notifications . These  had been distributed electronically to all delegations.  
1.3.1   Notifications in respect of which questions have been raised in advance of the 
issuance of the convening airgram  
1.8.  Section 2 of document G/AG/W/ 187 reflects the questions raised, responses provided, an d 
Members' follow -up comments on which questions had been raised in  advance of the iss uance of the 
convening airgram.5 
1.3.2   Deferred replies to questions raised under the review process  
1.9.  No delegation took the floor on this item . 
1.3.3   Overdue notifications  
1.10.   The Commit tee took no te of document summarizing  the current status of Members' 
compliance with notification obligations.6 
1.11.   The Chairperson recognized Members efforts  to bring their notifications up to date  noting that 
a number of Members had recently submitted agricu lture notifications covering multiple years. As 
an example, the Chairperson noted that Mongolia had notified Table ES:1 covering nine 
implementation years, Ecuador had notified Table MA:2 covering three implementation years and 
Papa New Guinea had notified Table DS:1 covering four implementation years. Indonesia had 
recently submitted 20 notifica tions that include table DS:1, table MA:2, table MA:5 and t able NF:1 
notifications.   
1.12.   The Chairperson  highlighted a few numbers with respect to the outstandi ng notifications. 
For the period 1995 to 201 6: 
• 35% (811) table DS:1 domestic support notifications  remain ed outstanding ; and 
• 33% (845 ) export subsidy notifi cations in the ES:1 series  remain ed outstanding . 
1.13.   Members had posed questions to ten  Members under this item . The question s, corresponding 
answer s and Members' follow -up comments can be found in section 3 of document G/AG/W/ 187. 
1.14.   The Chairperson  noted the importance of transparency and called for increase d efforts to get 
up to date with notification obligations . The Chairperson  also highlighted  various  databases that  
could  help Members  manage informati on and facilitate the work of Committee . 
1.3.4   Notifications subject to review in respect of which no questions have been raised 
in advance of th e issuance of the convening airgram  
1.15.   The Commi ttee took note of the 28 notifications circulated before 14 September  2018, 
including notificat ions carried over from the June 2018 meeting but  in respect of which no questions 
had been raised by that date under  the Committee's working procedures.7 
1.3.5   Notifications circulated or made available after the issuance of the convening 
airgram  
1.16.   Twenty -two notifications had  been circulated after the issuance  of the convening airgram 
on 14 September  2018: 
                                                
5 WTO/AIR/AG/ 30, Attachment S ection B. 
6 G/AG/GEN/86/Rev.32.  
7 WTO/AIR/AG/ 30, Attachment Section C. G/AG/R/89  
 
- 4 - 
 
  • Indonesia –Table MA:5, Table MA:2 and Table DS:1,  each covering six years 
(2012  to 2017)  and Table NF:1 (2013 to 2016) . 
1.17.   These notifications would be reverted to for substantive review during the next regular 
meeting, in accordance with the Committee's working procedures.  
1.3.6   Points concerning notifications raised at previous meetings which have been 
pursued bilaterally: information regarding outcome where the issue involved is one of  
general interest  
1.18.   There were no requests for the floor under this agenda item.  
1.3.7   Counter -notifications (Article 18.7 of the Agreement on Agriculture)  
1.19.   No Member took the floor under this item.   
2  OTHER MATTERS WITHIN  THE PURVIEW OF THE COMMITTEE  
2.1  Implementation  issues  (G/AG/16, G/AG/16/ADD.1, G/AG/22)  
2.1.  There was no request for the floor und er this agenda item.  
2.2  Implementation of Ministerial outcomes  
2.2.1   Review of the Bali Ministerial Decision on TRQ administration  
2.2.  The Chairperson recalled that the CoA had adopted at its February 2018 meeting the process 
for the review of the Bali Decision on TRQ administration.8 As noted in the adopted process, the 
review would initially be conducted through open -ended informal meetings of the Committee 
scheduled back -to-back with the regular meetings of the Co A. The first informal session as part of 
this process was held on 11 June 2018 .9  
2.3.  The Chairperson noted that an informal session held on 25 September had provided Members 
an opportunity to  continue deliberations on the review of the Bali Decision on TRQ administration. A 
new submission from Australia10 and the updated background paper on TRQ administration and fill 
rates prepared by the Secretariat11, together with previous submissions from the Cairns Group12 and 
the European Union13, had assisted the discussions.  
2.4.  The Chairperson had reminded Members that  according to the Bali TRQ Decision, the General 
Council would take a decision on the recommendations arising from the review in the CoA of the 
Decision no later than 31 December 2019.14 In view of that deadline and given the agreed timelines 
for the Review , the Committee would  finalize the review discussions, if possible, by June 2019.  
2.5.  Members identified the following themes in the review discussions:  
2.6.  Effective implementation and follow -up of the substantive obligations arising out of the Bali 
TRQ Decision : Members had emphasized the need to ensure that the TRQ administrations systems 
employed by WTO Members respected the requirements in the Bali Decision. The paper introduced 
by Australia specifically referred, for example, to the reallocation requirements  in the Decision. Some 
other Members also attached priority to specifically explore the issue of  reallocation of unused TRQs.  
                                                
8 G/AG/W/171.  
9 Details of this discussion may be found in the report of the June 2018 CoA meeting in 
document  G/AG/R/88.  
10 G/AG/W/186.  
11 G/AG/W/183.  
12 G/AG/W/179 . 
13 G/AG/W/175 . 
14 WT/MIN(13)/39, footnote 2.  G/AG/R/89  
 
- 5 - 
 
  2.7.  TRQ transparency requirements : Another recurring theme of Members' interventions concerned 
the need to have timely and complete TR Q notifications, including consistent reporting of fill -rates. 
The importance of guidance on harmonization of notification practices among Members was also 
underlined. Some Members had mentioned that the AG -IMS system could provide support in this 
regard. Others considered  that transparency requirements should not be unduly burdensome and 
that S&D should be respected.  
2.8.  Many members raised the issue of TRQs in Members ' Schedules that no longer offer ed any 
tariff advantage and thus generally were not implement ed. Members also highlighted the need for 
consistent reporting practices with regard to these TRQs. A point was also made that such TRQs may 
add complexity to the Schedule s of concerned Members without offering any market access.   
2.9.  Members welcomed the Secr etariat background paper and requested that it be regularly 
updated. Members also recognized that the forthcoming on -line agriculture notification system would 
be helpful to promote transparency.  
2.10.   Underfill Mechanism : A number of Members expressed the need to have a better 
understanding  of the causes of TRQ underfill and to have recourse to an effective mechanism to 
address cases of chronic underfill. Concerns were raised on the differing obligations of Members 
under the Bali underfill mechanism and its pote ntially less -than-universal applicability in future. 
Other Members had explained  that the Decision applie d to ever yone, and that the difference was 
based on special and differential treatment agreed by all Members. One Member noted a willingness 
to discuss the elimination of Annex B of the Bali Decision, if Members would also agree to eliminate 
the flexibilities provided for developing countries in paragraph 4 of that Annex. In this context, the 
need for a better understanding of paragraphs 13 -15 of the Bali TRQ Decision was underlined. The 
relationship between preferential TRQs and WTO TRQs and the effect of the former on WTO TRQ fill -
rates also cam e up in the discussions.   
2.11.   Some  Members suggested  to have targeted thematic discussion s on TRQ administration and 
underfill during an informal meeting in the margins of the November CoA meeting to promote sharing 
of experiences on this issue. The Chairperso n invited the Secretariat to explore those ideas and 
possible timing and logistics . 
2.2.2   Follow up of the Nairobi Decision on Export Competition   
2.2.2.1   First Triennial Review of the Nairobi Decision  
2.12.   The Chairperson recalled that th e Nairobi Decision require d the Comm ittee to conduct a review 
of the Decision's  disciplines every three years.  A draft report of this first triennial review15 had been  
considered by the Committee during the informal discussion held on 25 September on the review of 
the Nairobi Decision. Some M embers had reiterated the importance of a prompt implementation of 
the commitments made in Nairobi to eliminate the remaining scheduled export subsidies 
entitlements. One Member had reiterated its call for the inclusion of data on the use of Article 9.4 
export subsidies in the Secretariat's background document.16  
2.13.   The Committee adopted by consensus the report of the First Triennial Review of the Ministerial  
Decision on Export Competition which  was distributed on 29 September 2018 .17  
2.2.2.2   Developments in export competition, including the 2018 dedicated discussion  
2.14.   The Committee concluded its dedicated discussion on export competition in June 2018. 
Questions and responses provided during those discussions were circulated in document 
G/AG/W/1 82. The Secretariat subsequently revised the export competitio n background document18, 
incorporating  replies of four additional Members (Argentina, Guatemala, Malaysia and the 
Philippines) as well as complements and corrections by Brazil and the European Un ion.  
                                                
15 RD/AG/65.  
16 G/AG/W/125 series.  
17 G/AG/28.  
18 G/AG/W/125/Rev.9 and addenda.  G/AG/R/89  
 
- 6 - 
 
  2.15.   The Cairns Group had circulated an addendum to its submission on the annual export 
competition review.19 New Zealand on behalf of the Cairns Group  noted  the number of replies to the 
questionnaire had been decreasing beginning with  36 replies  in 201 6, dropping to 34 in 2017 and 
subsequently dropping to 28 in 2018 . New Zealand noted that the Committee had  the task of 
monitoring the implementation of the Decision and this was not possible to do effectively without 
Members' response s. New Zealand further n oted that it would be desirable for Members to provide 
information on whether their e xport credit  guarantees , insurances and re-insurance prog ramme s 
were self-financing  as required by the Nairobi Decision and on the time -windows for export credit 
support .  
2.16.   New Zealand noted that there had been progress on the implement ation of the decision  
through the amendment of schedules , highlighting that 12 Members had taken measures to 
eliminate their export subsidy entitlemen ts. New Zealand and the EU encourage d the remaining six 
Members to do the same before the next Ministerial Conference. Norway requested an update on 
the six Members who had not taken any steps to amend their schedules and also from those Members 
that ha d not yet certified their amended schedule.  
2.17.   Concerning the implementation of the Nairobi Ministerial Decision, the Chairperson 
congratulated Switzerland for the certification of its revised export subsid y schedule as of 
2 August  2018. This certified schedule ha d been circulated as document WT/LET/138 5. Colombia 
stated that the period for comments on its revised schedule, submitted on 22  June 2018, had  
finished  and that the revised schedule would be certified soon.  
2.18.   The Chairperson invited those Members who had submitted changes to their export subsidy 
schedules to inform the Committee on their submissions. South Africa stated that its revised 
schedule was divided into two, one pertaining to cotton which was in process of certification, and 
the other part of the schedule which was in Capital for further consultations with stakeholders. 
Uruguay noted that further information on its submission would be provided at a later stage . 
The United States informed the Committee that its revised schedule had been  submitted on 2  August 
as G/MA/TAR/ RS/571  and that no comments had been received  to that date .  
2.19.   The Chairperson also invited  other Members with export subsidies reduction commitments 
incorporated in their schedules to inform the Committee on the process of revising their schedules 
for export subsidies. Brazil  stated that they would soon send the project to their national congress 
and recalled that they do not pro vide that form of support.  Indonesia  stated that it was still in the 
proce ss of establishing the legal basis to implement the Decision. Mexico  informe d Members of the 
ongoing work in capital on this regard noting that they expected  to send to the WTO a revised 
scheduled before the beginning of 2019 . Turkey  stated that their relevant authorities were working 
on the implementation of the Nairobi Decision on export competition.  
2.20.   Concerning the preparation for the 2019 Dedicated Discussion , as per previous practice, a 
communication w ould be circulated in the coming weeks to initiate the next dedicated discussion 
scheduled for June 2019.  
2.21.   As part of the monitoring of the Nairobi Decision Members also had the possibility to raise 
questions during other meetings under this agenda item20. In this context, the United States posed 
questions to India, Indonesia, Japan, Pakistan and Paraguay.21  
2.2.3   Other implementati on of ministerial outcomes  
2.22.   There was no request for the floor under this agenda item.  
2.3  Chair report on remaining issues from informal meeting - Enhancing transparency and 
the CoA review process  
2.23.   The Chairperson highlighted that the work of the Committee  was a ssisted by the  AG-IMS, the 
database that contained information on all agriculture notifications, as well as all questions and 
                                                
19 G/AG/W/180/Add.1.  
20 WTO/AIR/AG/ 30, Attachment Section D. 
21 G/AG/W/187.  G/AG/R/89  
 
- 7 - 
 
  responses provided by Members during the CoA Review process. After four years of experience using 
the system the Committee  had initiated discussions at the June Committee meeting to consider 
whether possible enhancements to the system would be possible. On 25 September the Committee 
held an informal meeting to continue to reflect on these ideas .  
2.24.   The informal meeting also served a s forum to discuss a submission from Norway22 which 
aimed at improving the notification compliance in the CoA and suggest ed the review and update of 
the notification requirements contained in G/AG/2.  Norway had noted that the notification guidelines 
did not  reflect the Ministerial Decisions from Bali on TRQs and fro m Nairobi on Export Competition . 
Additionally, Norway noted that some the deadlines for notifications set forth in G/AG/2  needed to 
be updated to reflect current realities.  
2.25.   Members welcomed the o pportunity to discuss possible ways to improve transparency and 
the work of the CoA. Some  Members supported Norway's suggestions of modifying the deadlines set 
forth in G/AG/2, while others expressed their scepticism concerning this approach as they did no t 
consider it would lead to  increase d transparency. Other Members noted that while timely notifications 
were important, the completeness and quality of notifications were equally important. A number of 
Members called for harmonization in the type of inform ation being provided. Some Members 
considered  that there was a need to understand the obstacles faced by Members in preparing 
notifications and welcomed Members' suggestions to exchange experiences on best practices. A 
number of Members had noted the role that capacity building and new technology could play in 
tackling some of the problems Members faced when preparing notifications. Some Members that the 
online notification system being developed by the Secretariat could help Members in their compliance 
with their notification requirements in the area of agriculture.  
2.4  Other business  
2.4.1   On-line submission of notifications  
2.26.   The Secretariat informed the Committee that  a few improvements would be introduced to the 
on-line system based on Members ' feedback and the Se cretariat 's own experience. Preparations for 
launching  the system were under way, including training materials and an introductory video  which 
was available at https:/www.wto.org/vidagims . The Secretariat encouraged Members  to request 
their login credentials to access  the test site of the online system. The Secretariat was available for 
meetings (in person or online) for any questions or training regarding the system. Additionally, 
Member s who wished to schedule one -on-one training sessions with the Secretariat were invited to 
send an email to  agims@wto.org .  
2.4.2   Technical Assistance, including the 2018 notification workshop  
2.27.   The Secretariat reminded the Committee that Members  may request support from the 
Secretariat for technical assistance activities on notifications in the area of agriculture. This request 
could be made through a form that can be completed online in the following link: 
https://wto.formstack.com/forms/national_ta_requests . The Secretariat noted that it had received 
requests for workshops on agricultural notifications from Moldova, Peru and the Dominican Republic 
and that it expected to addres s these requests during the latter part of 2018.  
2.28.   The Dominican Republic encouraged Members facing problems fulfilling their notification 
requirements to make us e of the technical assistance activities provided by the Secretariat.   
2.4.3   Date of next regular meet ings 
2.29.   The Chairperson proposed that the eighty -ninth (89th) regular meeting of the Committee on 
Agriculture be held on 26-27 November  2018. On this basis, the airgram convening the meeting 
would be issued on 1 6 November  2018.  
 
 
__________  
                                                
22 G/AG/W/185.