RESTRICTED  
  
G/AG/R/94  
 
17 August 2020  
(20-5589) Page: 1/13 
Committee on Agriculture    
 
 
SUMMARY REPORT OF THE SPECIAL MEETING HELD ON 18 JUNE 2020  
NOTE BY THE SECRETARIAT1  
The Committee on Agriculture held a special meeting (94th) on 18 June 2020 under the Chairmanship 
of Ms. Christiane Daleiden Distefano of Luxemb ourg. The meeting, convened pursuant to 
paragraph  6 of the Committee 's working procedures (G/AG/1), focused on COVID -19 and agriculture 
trade policies within the framework of the Agreement on Agriculture (AoA).  
 
The agenda contained in convening airgram WTO/AIR/ AG/43 circulated on 8 June 2020 was adopted 
with the following additio ns under item 1 on "Submissions/Statements by Members on  COVID -19 
and Agricultural Trade –Related Matters ". 
 
• Australia - communication on "COVID -19 initiative: protecting global food secu rity through 
open trade" on behalf of the co -sponsors of the Cairns Group (G/AG/31;  TN/AG/44; 
WT/GC/218).  
• Canada - communication on "June 2020 statement of the Ottawa Group: focusing action on 
COVID -19" (WT/GC/217).  
1  AGENDA ITEM 1 – SUBMISSIONS/STATEMENTS B Y MEMBERS ON COVID -19 AND 
AGRICULTURAL TRADE –RELATED MATTERS  
1.1  Joint statement on "Responding to the COVID -19 pandemic with open and predictable 
trade in agricultural and food products" (WT/GC/208/Rev.2 - G/AG/30/ Rev.2)  
1.1.  Canada introduced the submission on "Responding to the COVID -19 pandemic with open and 
predictable trade in agricultural and food products" (WT/GC/208/Rev.2  - G/AG/30/Rev.2 ). Canada 
noted that the 29 co -sponsors of the joint statement (with the European  Union count ed as one) 
accounted for 67% and 60% of global agricultural exports and imports , respectively . With the virus 
spread ing globally, the pandemic had created uncertainty in international agricultural trade 
highlighting the need for a coordinated global response. Canada stated that the joint statement 
aimed at  agreeing on  actions to ensure that the global health crisis did not become a global food 
securi ty crisis. Canada and the co-sponsors considered it timely to commit to open and predictable 
trade in agricultural and food products in response to COVID -19. Canada also underlined that 
recourse to measures such as export restrictions and to unjustified ba rriers to agricultural trade 
could adversely affect food availability  and create volatility in food prices  leading to an unpredictable 
international trading environment. Referring to the  Agriculture Market Information System (AMIS) 
market monitoring report s, Canada emphasized that global food markets remained well balanced  
with cereal stocks expected to reach their third highest level this season . Additionally, e xport 
availability of key commodities such as rice, maize, soybeans and wheat were more than ade quate 
to meet the anticipated demand.  
 
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/94  
 
- 2 - 
 
  1.2.  The co -sponsors pledged a series of actions , including:  
• Ensure that supply chains remained open and connected so that international markets could 
continue to function without disruptions caused by : domestic food stocks  exports ; export 
restrictions on agricultural products ; or unjustified trade barriers . 
• Use targeted, proportionate, transpa rent, temporary  and WTO -consistent  emergency 
COVID -19 measures . 
• Support transparency by informing the WTO as soon as practicable of COVID -19 measures 
and provide information on production,  stocks, prices and consumption through existing 
international mechanisms.  
• Engage in and support a dialogue on COVID -19 measures at the WTO, including in the 
Committee on Agriculture ( CoA), and in other fora.  
1.3.  Australia thanked Canada and expressed its support for the joint statement. Australia stressed  
the importance of Members abiding by their WTO commitments and the critical role of the CoA to 
assist Members  find a way forward in respond ing to and recover ing from the pandemic. Recalling 
the importance o f a resilient, market -oriented and rules -based global agricultural trading system , 
Australia encouraged all Members to consider the commitment s detailed in  the joint statement in 
order to  collectively come out of COVID -19 crisis stronger.  
1.4.  As co -sponsors, Chile and Japan reiterated their full support of the joint statement. Chile 
encouraged Members to avoid trade -restrictive measures and affirmed the need to maintain trade 
openness for agricultural products. Norway also reminded Members of the need to respect  WTO rules 
during the pandemic and for adopted measures to be temporary and minimally trade -distorting so 
as to keep trade flowing. Norway affirmed that it would not be imposing any export restrictions 
during the crisis and encouraged oth er Members to follow suit.  
1.5.  Brazil questioned the rationale  and feasibility of policy goals based on self-sufficiency , both in 
terms of an efficient  allocation of factors of production as well as in meeting dietary needs of the 
population. Brazil further n oted that the  pursuit of self -sufficiency distorts international trade , and 
that export restrictions or subsidies rarely achieved the desired objectives . Such measure s often 
resulted in domestic distortions necessitating  additional measures and thus trigge ring a vicious cycle.  
Brazil also acknowledged that there had been a lesser recourse to export restrictions during the 
COVID -19 pandemic compared to during the 2007/08 and 2010/11 crises.  
1.6.  New Zealand and ten other WTO Members committed to keep supply chain s open for essential 
goods including agriculture and medical supplies. New Zealand and Singapore also agreed to remove 
any tariff and non -tariff barriers on products essential to combat the pandemic  and noted the 
ongoing cooperation  with various groups of  countries such as  APEC to keep u p trade and investment 
flows. They  reaffirmed their support for the Cairns statement and the multilateral trading system.  
1.7.  South Africa noted that it had to cope with the concurrent and parallel challenges of COVID -19 
and locusts ' infestation , exacerbating the market impacts of COVID -19. South  Africa had set up 
special posts at the borders to speed up certification processes  and the  measures dealing with  plant 
health had been notified to the  SPS committee. South Africa saw  this crisis as an opportunity to 
strengthen food systems for more resilience in facing future pandemics. Drawing from the flexibility 
under Art icle 6.2 of the  AoA, South Africa sought policy space to strengthen domestic production 
focus sing on small scale farmers  and strengthening  local and regional supply chains. South Africa 
emphasized the importance of disciplines on trade -distorting domestic support  which resulted in  
dumping of products such as  frozen potato chips. South Africa called for more engagemen t on public 
stockholding (PSH) for food security and allowing new programmes. South Africa also called for 
progress on the SSM negotiations and special and differential treatment , noting that developing 
countries should be allowed to have tailored approach es within their WTO  commitments.  
1.8.  Hong Kong, China supported the joint statement and noted that open and predicable trade in 
agriculture and food products was fundamental to ensuring food security. Hong Kong, China called 
on Members to refrain from export restrictions and unjustified trade barriers on essential products 
and reiterated the call to continue discussions on this subject at the WTO.  G/AG/R/94  
 
- 3 - 
 
  1.9.  As a co -sponsor , Colombia clarified that it had notified all measures adopted in relation to  the 
pandemic.  Colomb ia also referred  to documents G/SPS/GEN/1778/Rev.1 and 
G/TBT/GEN/296/Rev.12, noting that the implementation of certain SPS measures during the 
pandemic could create additional restrictions or burdens on  the trade of animals, plants or plant 
products , potentially  hamper ing economic recovery. Agricultural producers, particularly the smallest, 
and MSMEs would be greatly affected by new measures and more restrictive requirements for 
exports, such as the reduction of Maxi mum Residue Levels  (MRLs). Colombia urged the European 
Union, the largest common market in the world and the biggest  importer of fruits and vegetables, 
to suspend all current  MRLs review processes, as well as the entry into force of MRL s reductions 
planned  for 2020.  
1.10.   The Russian Federation noted that the unprecedented economic and social challenges posed 
by the COVID -19 pandemic and the remedial measures adopted by governments underlined the 
significance of a predictable  and balanced international trading environment. Members should seek 
to respond to the challenges posed by the pandemic and address domestic  food security  needs while 
keeping food supply chains open and minimizing impact s on international agricultural trade . The 
Russia n Federation  was of the v iew that measures  invoked to respond to the crisis , including export 
restrictions, should be balanced, temporary and WTO consistent.  
1.11.   Jamaica, on behal f of the ACP group, stressed the group 's inherent vulnerabilities and 
their WTO recognized need for specia l treatment. Jam aica anticipated a fall in agricultural production 
and trade as a result of export restrictions, social distancing and disruptions in global supply chains , 
with logistical challenges potentially threatening  ACP members ' food and livelihood security. Local 
producers of perishable goods were hit hardest due to limited storage and transport facilities. 
Exacerbating factors included the high food import dependency rate of some ACP members, low 
productivity in agriculture and  export concentration in a few commodities , in addition to p rice 
volatility and export restrictions and prohibitions which were key concern s to the ACP group. Jamaica 
added that global supply chain disruptions and the slowdown in the global economy had led to lower  
demand for cash and high -valued export crops such as fruits, coffee and tea, leading to income 
losses for farming households , as well as posing foreign exchange challenges  to the affected 
countries in the region . The ACP group e xpress ed concerns regarding  export restrictions and large 
stimulus packages  which could aggravate the crisis and  emph asized that COVID -19 agricultural  
measures should be targeted, proportionate, transparent, temporary and WTO compliant. The ACP 
group supported a  dialogue am ong Members to cope up with the crisis and looked forward to 
multilateral action to address issues such as trade -distorting domestic support , the disposal of 
subsidised stocks and preparedness for future pandemics. Jamaica also noted  that COVID -19 had 
highlighted the urgency to address longstanding issues such as PSH  and SSM to ensure a balanced 
outcome in the agriculture negotiation  with S&D at its core .  
1.12.   The European Union highlighted the FAO and AMIS statistics indicating that global stocks of 
many food commodities were at record high levels , and the forecast for 2020/21 was for a bumper 
production of arable and cereal crops. Receding demand was, however, an important concern. The 
European Union noted the need to keep in mind that no Member was fully self -sufficient  and that it 
was importan t to maintain trade and transports links. The joint statement in WT/GC/208 - G/AG/30 , 
of which the E uropean Union was co -sponsor , included important recommendations in th at regard . 
The European Union also highlighted , as an example,  its "Green Lanes" initiative aimed at facilitating 
food flows . 
1.13.   Switzerland thanked Canada for the joint statement , noting that  in an interconnecte d world 
with global supply chains  determining international  trade  flows, the COVID -19 crisis and its 
commercial impact required a coordinated response to ensure a global economic recovery. 
Switzerland was convinced that the WTO had to play an important role in mitigating the COVID -19 
crisis' effect s on global trade and prosperity. Switz erland also welcomed the convening of a special 
 
2 Document refers to communication entitled ''Request for the suspension of the processes and entry 
into force of reductions of maximum residue levels (MRLs) for plant protection products in light of the 
COVID -19 pandemic. '' Communication from Argentina, Benin, Burkina Faso, Cabo Verde, Colombia, Cost a Rica, 
Côte d'Ivoire, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, The Gambia, Ghana, Guatemala, Guinea, 
Guinea Bissau, Honduras, Israel, Kenya, Liberia, Mali, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, 
Senegal, Sierra Leone, South Africa and Togo.  G/AG/R/94  
 
- 4 - 
 
  meeting of the CoA towards enhanced transparency and to deliberate on the policies Members 
adopted in response to the pandemic . 
1.2  Ad Hoc Report on COVID -19 Measures in the Agricultural Sector, Submission by the  
European Union (G/AG/GEN/159)  
1.14.   The European Union introduced document  G/AG/GEN/159 on measures adopted by the 
European Union and its member States in relation to COVID -19 as of 25  May 2020. 
The European  Union noted that it had taken a limited and carefully targeted set of market 
stabilisation measures in the sectors most impacted by the pandemic. It noted that t here were also 
other economy -wide measures which could  benefit farmers and other operators in the ag ri-food 
sector.  A temporary framework on national state aid had also been implemented to allow member 
States to take measures mostly aimed at ensuring sufficient liquidity and partly cover losses 
suffered. In addition to adopting temporary administrative s implification measures, the E uropean 
Union had also temporarily relaxed its antitrust regulations to allow private actors to engage in 
collaborative actions  to stabilise markets . The latter measures encompassing anti -trust law s were 
private arrangements an d not subject to WTO disciplines.  
1.15.   The European Union also highlighted the importance of transparency and expressed its 
disappointment that other Members had not submitted ad hoc reports on their COVID -19 measures 
for the meeting . The E uropean Union welcome d the nearly 60 questions raised for the special 
meeting but noted that more proactive steps were required about self -reporting than the focus on 
questioning alone. The European Union acknowledged  Members ' right to apply suitable measures 
within the WTO commitments to deal with the exceptional circumstances arising from the pandemic. 
In this context, it expressed serious concern s about the use by some developed Members of 
measures which appeared to be prohibited export subsidies. The E uropean Union also highlighted 
the size of some of the subsidy packages being implemented, and which risked breaching existing 
domestic support limits. The European Union noted the  limited use of export restricti ons during the 
crisis, although  the transparency deficit was a cause of concern, with only a few of those measures 
having been notified .  
1.16.   The European Union was cognizant of the impact the pandemic had had in Africa and noted 
that a task force had been launched by the Af rican Union, the FAO and the E uropean Union to support 
the African a gri-food sector  through investment and development aid . Finally, the  European Union  
underlined the importance of the rules -based multilateral system to ensure that food chains continue 
to operate, especially in the current circumstances. The E uropean Union called on all Members to 
maintain open and predictable trade in agricultural and food products which, in its view , was the 
best way to ensure food security for all.  
1.17.   China shared its exper ience on safeguard ing agricultural supply chains and maintain ing food 
security during the crisis. China  considered that maintaining the production and transportation sector 
steady was crucial and thus  had stabilized grain planting area by securing farmer i ncome and 
providing certainty. China had also relaxed control measures to ensure farmers ' access to inputs for 
the sowing season coupled with a stable policy environment by providing information and services 
to producers and firms concerned. Regarding  agriculture import s, the authorities had extended help 
to producers to solve problems related to raw materials , and  e-commerce had helped promote 
transport efficiency and ensure supplies of agricultural inputs such as seeds and fertilizers. Based 
on demand, China had increased imports of soybeans , corn and other products  and provide d 
consult ing and certification services t o business es facing difficulty.  
1.18.   Brazil briefed Members on its policy response to COVID -19 and acknowledged the role of 
agriculture for the economy, food security and environmental protection. Brazil noted that the  AoA, 
despite need ing updat ing, already pr ovided Members with the tools to manage such emergenc ies in 
a least distorting way. The focus of the Brazilian agricultural initiatives had been on the most affected 
sectors , i.e. small and medium -size family farming  on the supply side and  the poorest and most 
vulnerable population  on the demand side . Brazil had chosen to reinforce, in budgetary terms, 
support programmes that had already been notified under paragraphs 3 and 4 of Annex 2 of the 
AoA (public stockholding for food security purposes and domestic  food aid, respectively).  
1.19.   The main element  of Brazil 's support w as through "the Programa de Aquisição de 
Alimentos " / "Food Acquisition Program " (PAA) which received an additional allocation, through a G/AG/R/94  
 
- 5 - 
 
  provisional measure, of R$ 500 million (around USD 95 million). The funds were earmarked for the 
purchase of food from family farms and their cooperatives, through the modality "PAA Compra com 
Doaçã o Simultânea " / "PAA Purchase with Simultaneous Donation", which allowed purchases for 
donation to socially vulnerable entities and families. In addition, the Brazilian government had also 
adjusted the market mechanisms available to Brazilian producers ; postponed repayments by 
affected farmers of rural debt ( contracted with the equalization of interest rates by the government ); 
and established a special credit line for family and medium sized farms. Brazil had also put in place , 
since March 2020, an expedited system of electronic signatures  for SPS phytosanitary certificates, 
as notified to the SPS committee (G/SPS/N /BRA/1642).  
1.20.   Switzerland reported on its measures taken in response to COVID -19, which had already been 
or would soon be notified.  These measures were in the form of additional domestic support for 
certain sectors as well as favourable market  access conditions to ensure stable domestic supply of 
certain  commodities  to deal  with demand and supply imbalance. Switzerland had doubled the  
support for the storage of veal meat and contributed up  to CHF 10 million  towards  declassifying 
expensive appellation of controlled origin (AOC) wines into cheaper table wines. With regards to 
facilitating  favourable market access conditions , the measures  entailed expanding eggs and butter 
tariff quota  import quantities  and extending importation rights under  the red meat tariff quota . 
Switzerland noted that these measures had been prompted by demand and supply fluctuations and 
were temporary in nature.  
1.21.   Australia welcomed the  European Union 's ad hoc  report as an important demonstration of 
transparency and accountability, two critical elements to  support Membe rs' proactive  and 
comprehensive fight against the COVID -19 pandemic. Austral ia stated that ad hoc  report s were a 
good approach for  reporting  COVID -19 agricultural measures, an d it should be further explored by 
all Members.  
1.3  Monitoring Export Restrictive Measures, Statement by Japan  
1.22.   Japan stressed that all emergency measures related  to the COVID -19 pandemic should be 
targeted, proportionate, transparent, temporary, and WTO-consistent , in line with the various recent 
statements by Ministers and by international organizations. Japan underlined the importance of 
transparency and noted i ts concerns regarding export restriction measures. Although there were 
specific disciplines on export restrictions in Article 12 of the AoA and Article XI of General Agreement 
on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), including notification requirements, there were a n umber of cases 
where these measures had not been notified. Japan encouraged Members who had introduced export 
restrictions but had not yet provided relevant notifications to do so as soon as possible. Japan hoped 
that discussions in the CoA would ensure th e necessary transparency on the no tifications already 
made and  would be an occasion to clarify the reasons behind  the lack of, or delay in, notifications. 
Japan was interested in explor ing possible improvements of the review process on export 
restrictions. Japan also encouraged Members to withdraw any current export restrictive measures 
as soon as possible.  
1.23.   Switzerland expressed concerns regarding export  restrictions during the COVID -19 crisis  and 
referred to lessons learned from previous crises that export restrictions amplify food insecurity 
concerns especially for the poor and vulnerable populations. Switzerland also noted that the WTO 
was the only organization with specific rules on export restrictions and with  the mechanism to 
examine the implementation of those rules. Switzerland echoed  Japan 's call for  Members to submit 
relevant notifications in order for those to be examined by the Committee.  
1.24.   The European Union supported Japan 's initiative and noted that export  restrictions had thus 
far been sparingly used during the COVID -19 crisis. In view of a h igh degree of interdependence 
among Members for  trade in agri -food products, the European Union noted that such measures could 
have a wider impact, especially for deve loping and low-income  countries  who rely on imports for 
their food needs . Referring to th e existing transparency deficit in this area , the E uropean Union 
considered that transparency and disciplines on export restrictions would be a key element of the 
agriculture negotiations in view of  MC-12. Singapore  and Chinese Taipei also shared Japan 's 
transparency concern and called on Members to notify their export restrictive measures.  G/AG/R/94  
 
- 6 - 
 
  1.4  COVID -19 initiative : protecting global food security through open trade  (WT/GC/ 218, 
TN/AG/44, G/AG/31)  
1.25.   Australia, on behalf of the Cairns group, introduced document WTO/GC/218; TN/AG/44 and 
G/AG/31 on "Protecting global food security through open trade". Australia noted that the initiative  
sought to limit the impacts of COVID -19 on global food security by reinforcing the importance of 
open markets, maintaining global supply chains and transparency. Australia noted that the initiative 
grew out of the need to act on the growing number of agricultural measures being introduc ed in 
response to COVID -19, including export restrictions and agricultural subsidies. The initiative 
reiterated the call for such measures to be targeted, proportionate, transparent, temporary and 
consistent with WTO rules; with further calls for restraint , timely roll -back, and the avoidance of 
market distortions. Australia noted that the initiative also called for an agreement not to impose 
export restrictions on food purchased for humanitarian purposes and proposed greater WTO scrutiny 
of COVID -19 agricu ltural support measures through different mechanisms , including tracking by the 
WTO Secretariat, regular CoA  discussions and a voluntary Member -driven WTO COVID -19 
Agricultural Working Group. Australia stated that the initiative sought  to address  the curre nt 
challenges resulting from the pandemic, while ensuring agricultural markets were able to continue 
to function and assist Members during the recovery phase . 
1.26.   Australia, speaking in i ts own capacity, noted that the  pandemic had stressed the need to 
continu e the reform process with a view to achieving positive results by MC12, and giving the 
agricultural sector a key role in the economic recovery. Based on its initial assessment  of 
governmental measures introduced in response to the pandemic , Australia noted  that about twenty 
countries had impo sed export restrictions on agricultural items,  most of those being temporary, 
whereas around fifty countries had introduced some form of new domestic support. Australia call ed 
for the pursuit of negotiations across all pillars towards a fairer and more market -oriented 
agricultural trading system  and referred to the Framework for Negotiations laid out by the Cairns 
Group to ensure trade and production -distorting subsidies were appropriately addressed.  
1.27.   Pakistan acknowledge d the importan ce of  international trade in supporting global supply 
chains and its commitment to open and predictable trad e, while also stressing the importance of 
domestic food production and food security. Pakistan  noted that  WTO-consistent market correc tion 
mechanisms such as export restrictions  were important in protecting  domestic markets of poor 
countries from food shortages in times of global crisis . Referring to the work of Professor Amartya 
Sen on Irish and Bengal famines , Pakistan underlined that market failures and food shortages in 
times of global crisis threatened  poor people 's access to food as purchasing power becomes the real 
determinant  for procur ing food from the market . Pakistan also referred to  the recent locust attack 
on its food crops where, a ccording to FAO estimates, 37% of its cultivable area was in immediate 
danger of serious invasion. A loss of around USD  3 billion at 25% damage level was projected for 
major crops such as wheat, gram and potato alone , with s ome experts statin g that locust could pose 
a greater threat to Pakistan 's economy than the coronavirus pandemic . Pakistan supported the call 
for COVID -19 agricultural measures to be temporary and transparent and simultaneously asserted 
Members ' right to invoke policy option s in a WTO -consistent manner to ensure the food and livelihood 
security of their populations.  
1.28.   Paraguay associated itself with the statement made by Australia on behalf of members of the 
Cairns Group and by Canada on behalf of the co -sponsors  of the joint statement  on Agricultural 
Trade and COVID -19. Paraguay underlined the importance of an open and predictable trading system 
and considered it important to avoid a false dichotomy between trade and food security.  It also 
emphasized that measures adopted duri ng the pandemic should be targeted, transparent, 
proportional, science -based, WTO consistent and not adversely affecting the food security of others. 
The measures adopted should be withdrawn as soon as the associated objectives were fulfilled. 
Paraguay welcomed  commitments related to restraint  and roll -back,  food aid, transparency and 
reform  and urged others to also subscribe to them . Paraguay also clarified that the proponents of 
the COVID -19 initiative were not asking  Members to renounc e their right to in voke WTO -consistent  
measures but only to exercise restraint so as to limit the negative effect s of such measures on 
others. Similarly, the commitments sought on transparency were not new notification obligations for 
Members , and the  requests to the Secretariat w ere only to complement existing trade monitoring 
work and collect information in respect of trade in agricultural goods and report on the period of 
validity of the concerned measures. As regards the commitments on food aid, Pa raguay highlighted 
the importance of compliance with the Nairobi Decision on Export Competition. Paraguay also called G/AG/R/94  
 
- 7 - 
 
  for the resumption of negotiations to advance the agriculture reform process  within the framework  
of Article 20 of the AoA to obtain posit ive results at the next Ministerial Conference.  
1.29.   Uruguay noted that it had joined the two initiatives presented respectively by Australia and 
Canada.  Uruguay mentioned that, as a food exporter, it had taken , together with other 
WTO Members, the commitment not to impose restrictions on exports of agricultural products, 
including within the framework of food aid p urchases by the World Food Programme (WFP) and other 
humanitarian agencies. At the same time, Uruguay had adopted specific protocols to ensure that the 
various production chains could continue to function, while providing full guarantees for the health 
of workers and the safety and quality of food . Uruguay noted that to ensure food can travel from 
the producing countries to consumers in the importing countries , both exporters and importers must 
take measures that contribute to the proper functioning of supply chains. It called on Members to 
avoid imposing unjustified obstacles to imports of agricultural and agri -food products, and to 
consider the adopt ion of trade facilitating measures when possible. Uruguay stated that measures 
taken at the border, including those covered by the SPS and TBT Agreements, must comply with all 
the requirements established therein, and in particular not be more trade restrictive than necessary 
to fulfil their legitimate objectives, and be based on scientific justifications and risk assessment  as 
appropriate. Uruguay expressed concerns regarding the implementation by some Members of large 
subsidy programmes towards production  and sto rage as well as subsidizing marketing costs of 
export s. Uruguay urged members to exercise utmost restraint when considering measures that 
might distort markets , lead to commercial displacement or compromise  other Members ' food 
security. Uruguay encouraged Members to ensure that COVID -19 agriculture measures were 
targeted, proportionate, transparent , temporary and WTO consistent and that these were rolled back 
in a timely manner. In order to ensure an effective monitoring of COVID -19 measures  already 
implemented , Uruguay urged Members to provide detailed and timely information to the WTO, 
without prejudice to existing notification obligations. Uruguay encouraged the Secretariat to continue 
its trade monitoring work and addit ionally include measures in the field of domestic support and 
export competition.  Uruguay em phasiz ed the role of international trade during the crisis  and 
cautioned against the narratives of food sovereignty and self -sufficiency. Uruguay considered it 
important to advance the agriculture reform process under the three pillars and looked forward to 
positive outcome s at MC12.  
1.30.   The Philippines, despite forecast s on abundant food supplies for the 2020/2021 season and 
stable prices, cautioned Members about contin ued disruptions to supply chains and restrictive and 
distortive trade policies and domestic support measures. The Philippines also flagged its concern on 
food safety, noting that widespread lockdowns and social distancing measures had resulted in many 
food establishments, including slaughterhouses, struggling to implement adequate regulatory 
inspections , which  could lead to food contamination and food wastage. The Philippines extended its 
appreciation to the Cairns Group for its initiative  and noted that op en trade complemented domestic 
production to feed people. The Philippines also viewed the crisis as an opportunity to identify capacity 
loopholes and resource constraints in current policy instruments. In this context, it was worth 
exploring how one could continue to promote liberalization and industrialization in a gr owing ly hostile 
environment while  at the same time catering to Members ' development needs. The Philippines 
encouraged M embers to adopt WTO-consistent policies and to respect Ministerial Decisi ons, so that  
Members ' response to the pandemic would ensure a level playing field for agriculture stakeholders.  
1.31.   Brazil noted that it was still analysing the document but saw many positive aspects therein 
including the focus on transparency  which was partic ularly important. Brazil noted that AMIS, WTO 
and FAO, among others, had contributed to transparency and enable d decision -makers to adopt 
more efficient measures. Brazil also considered that the existing WTO framework of rules provided 
ample  policy space to Members which had, inter alia , permitted  them to launch large domestic 
support programmes. Brazil welcomed the organization of a Special CoA meeting to deliberate on 
such measures and supported the call for keeping the COVID -19-related matters on the agenda of 
future CoA meetings. Brazil urged Members to dismantle support measures which were no longer 
justified  in order to respect WTO agricultural commitments during the pandemic . Brazil also believed 
that the crisis had further highlighted the importance of furthering the agriculture reform process.   
1.32.   Chile, as a co -sponsor, acknowledged the import ant contribution of the Cairns G roup 
document and noted that, the language and the approach  sought therein were consistent with its 
objectives.  G/AG/R/94  
 
- 8 - 
 
  1.33.   The European Union noted that the document  did not take into account  the need for  balance 
of the measures taken in the wake of the crisis, notably considering the large amount of support 
granted by a few Members. The E uropean Union added that the document lac ked reference to illegal 
export subsidies, which had been introduced during the crisis by at least one co -sponsor. On food 
aid, the E uropean Union reiterated its view that it should not be used to circumvent export subsidy 
commitments  and suggested to add a point that monetization of food aid should be avoided. The 
European Union noted that it had long been exempting WFP purchases from export restriction 
measures and that this was an overdue issue from MC11. The European Union underlined the need 
for transp arency in agriculture and lamented that none of the co -sponsors had submitted 
ad hoc report s on COVID -19 measures. The European Union encouraged other Members, notably 
the co -sponsor s of the document , to step up efforts and provide the necessary transparency. The 
European  Union supported the inclusion of COVID -19 and agriculture as a standing item on the CoA 
agenda  but did not see a need to create a new structure such as a working group on  COVID -19.  
1.34.   India re called  that the negative effects of the pandemic w ere felt widely but unevenly with 
disproportionately negative impact s on developing countries and LDCs with large populations and 
limited resources . India acknowledged the importance of coordinating the global response in a way 
that avoid ed unnecessary disruption in the flow of critical medical and agricultural supplies. India 
noted that it had been playing a proactive role in ensuring the availability of vital drugs such as 
hydroxychloroquine ( HCQ) and paracetamol across the globe , and it had donated and exported 
critical medical supplies to more than 120 countries following the outbreak of the pandemic. India 
had also put in place a system of electronic filing of several trade -related documents to fa cilitate the 
uninterrupted movement of goods during the pandemic. India remained committed to the G20 
leaders ' statement that emergency measures taken in the wake of the pandemic should be targeted, 
proportionate, transparent, and temporary. India noted th at, although Members were free to reduce 
customs duties on imports of certain medical or agricultural products , the narrative pushed by some 
WTO Members to seek permanent tariff liberalization on a range of products in response to a 
temporary crisis were a thinly veiled bid to use the crisis as an opportunity to gain market access 
for their exporters. India noted that it could not agree to permanent tariff concessions and a dilution 
of the tariff bindings that it had paid for in the Uruguay Round. Addition ally, it noted that export 
restrictions were a WTO -consistent policy tool important to prevent critical domestic shortages of 
essential supplies. India agreed  that export restrictions should be  imposed with restraint, considering  
the dependence of others  on the international market to source their food needs . However, it 
cautioned against the narrative to prohibit the use of these measures on medical and agricultural 
products to facilitate developing countries ' access to such products. India believed that s uch a 
narrative ignored the ground reality that during supply shortages , producers would prefer to sell 
their products to the highest bidders  who might not originate in developing countries . India also 
reported  that it had not imposed export restrictions on any agricultural products in response to 
COVID -19. Finally, India viewed the elimination of the historic as ymmetries in AMS entitlements 
under  the Agreement on Agriculture and addressing growing hunger throug h effective food security 
programmes as more effective and lasting ways of ensuring the food and livelihood security of the 
most vulnerable while promoting sustainable agriculture trade. India also expressed its readiness to 
work with other Members to form ulate a balanced, inclusive and calibrated response to COVID -19. 
1.35.   Indonesia welcomed  the Cairns Group initiative and shared the view that trade should remain 
open with an emphasis on local production. Indonesia opined that countries should avoid excessive 
reliance on international trade to achieve food security, especially to reduce the vulnerability of small 
farmers which was a crucial concern.  
1.36.   Egypt, on behalf of the African group, cautioned that COVID -19, primarily a public health 
concern  currently , shou ld not become a humanitarian disaster. Egypt noted that the food security 
of 135  million people globally was already precarious and that it could be further exacerbated by 
COVID -19. Twelve million people in sub -Saharan Africa faced food insecurity in the last four months, 
not only due to the pandemic but also desert weather and locusts  infestation . On 16 April, the African 
commission and the FAO convened a virtual meeting to discuss the impact of COVID -19, and a 
ministerial declaration was adopted to highli ght the measures undertaken for safeguarding the food 
sector and supporting vulnerable populations. Egypt stated that rural development strategies could 
provide safety nets to vulnerable groups and ensure farmers ' access to timely inputs. Transportation 
of agro-food products and strategic food reserves remained a priority. Ending hunger in Africa 
by 2025 required deepening the coordination and co operation among countries. Egypt also flagged 
the need to negotiat e and deliver on the sustainable development go als (SDG s), PSH, Cotton, SSM, 
and trade -distorting support while preserving policy space.  G/AG/R/94  
 
- 9 - 
 
  1.37.   The United States thanked the Cairns Group for document  G/AG/31 and concurred with its 
general premise. The United States noted that export restrictions were a measu re through which 
global shocks could be amplified by the actions of individual Members, thus, undermining global 
supply chain s and causing the greatest harm to the most vulnerable Members. While the use of 
export restrictions during the pandemic was concer ning, the United States was pleased to note that 
the recourse  to such measures was far less than during the 2007/08 financial crisis.  
1.38.   Ukraine supported Canada and other Members ' efforts and initiatives aimed at minimising 
trade distortions and avoiding ad verse effect on food security . As an observer to the Cairns Group, 
Ukraine had been closely following the developments around the COVID -19 Initiative in G/AG/31 
and the document was being analysed towards its possib le co-sponsorship.  Ukraine also reconfirmed 
its interest to explore ways to minimize and overcome the negative effects of COVID -19 on 
agricultural trade and food security.  
1.39.   The United Kingdom welcomed the convening of the special CoA meeting to support a 
COVID -related r eview  process and noted that the pandemic  had reaffirmed the important work of 
the WTO and the CoA in coordinating a global response and laying the ground work for strong 
economic recovery. R ecognis ing that the COVID -19 pandemic was a collective challenge , the United 
Kingdom had co-sponsored the Canada -led statement in WT/GC/208 affirming the importance of 
responding to the COVID -19 pandemic with open and predictable trade in agricultural and food 
products. The United Kingdom noted that it also spoke recently at  an STDF seminar on safe trade, 
underlining that collaboration and partnerships would be vital in keeping supply chains moving and 
overcoming th e crisis. The United Kingdom was pleased to sign up to the statement by G20 
Agriculture Ministers that called fo r all emergency measures introduced in response to COVID -19 to 
be targeted, proportionate, transparent, temporary and WTO -compliant. The United Kingdom further 
referred to the recent virtual meeting of the Committee on Agriculture in Special Session  where  
Members had noted the diverse impact of COVID -19 on agricultural trade ; transparency  was all the 
more essential to assess properly th ose impacts . The CoA therefore had an important role to play 
by offering Members an opportunity to share information on the ir COVID -19 related measures  and 
to address the impacts of COVID -19 on agricultural trade in a coordinated and sustainable manner . 
The United Kingdom demonstrated its commitment to transparency by submitting its first Table DS:2 
notification on 18 February  and had since ensured timely and detailed  responses to the questions 
thereon , as uploaded onto Ag -IMS for the March CoA meeting (93rd) despite its suspension. The 
United Kingdom also referred to its demand for a return to quarterly Trade Monitoring Reports during 
COVID -19, as during the Global Financial Crisis. The United Kingdom considered these measures to 
be valuable transparency tools in bringing order to a challenging moment in world trade.  
1.5  June 2020 s tatement of the Ottawa Group: focusing action on COVID -19 
1.40.   Canada introduced the Ottawa G roup statement in WT/GC/217. Canada, along with the other 
12 Ottawa Group members, had agreed to concrete steps contained in the "Joint Statement of the 
Ottawa Group: F ocusing Action on COVID -19". The statement established key actions by member 
countries to support an inclusive, sustainable and resilient global recovery. Ottawa Group Ministers 
agreed to take action to keep agriculture trade open and predictable  and under lined that as Members 
respond to the pandemic, it was imperative that these measures did not adversely affect trade in 
agriculture and agri -food products, a nd hence  food security, nutrition and health of Members and 
their populations. Canada drew attention  to the following three agriculture action items agreed upon 
by ministers : 1) engaging in ongoing discussions on the fulfilment of joint declarations on 
maintaining predictable and open agriculture trade; 2) lead by example, and withdraw or end any 
emergen cy measures introduced in response to COVID -19 that may adversely affect trade in 
agriculture as quickly as possible; and 3) advance analysis and consideration on what steps WTO 
Members could take to continue improving agriculture trade based on the lesson s learned from 
COVID -19 to ensure that future crises will not undermine trade, food security, and the stability of 
agricultural markets in the long -term.  
1.41.   Canada 's statement was echoed  by co -sponsors including Brazil, Singapore, the 
European  Union and Switz erland reiterating the importance of the action -oriented steps outlined in 
the Ottawa Group statement. Singapore noted  that WFP contracts for lifesaving food for countries 
in the Caribbean and Africa were delayed due to export restrictions  and repeated its  call for a 
multilateral commitment to exempt food donated through WFP from export restriction measures. 
Singapore referred to Japan 's statement on export restrictions and high lighted the importance of 
keeping transparency on the issue.  G/AG/R/94  
 
- 10 - 
 
  2  AGENDA ITEM 2  - REVIEW PROCESS ON COVID -19 AND AGRICULTURAL 
TRADE -RELATED MATTERS RELEVANT TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMMITMENTS 
UNDER THE AGREEMENT ON AGRICULTURE  
2.1.  Questions were raised under this item both regarding  Article 18.6 as well as specific 
notifications. The C hair noted that 31 out of the 59 questions submitted for th e meeting already had 
replie s available on the AG -IMS. The C hair encouraged Members , to the extent p ossible , to make it 
a practice to provide responses  at the latest 48 hours prior to Committee meetings to  facilitate 
proper  engagement  between  Members under the Committee 's review process .  
2.1  Matters raised under Article 18.6 of the Agreement on Agriculture  
2.2.  There were 28 specific implementation matters ( SIMs) raised at the special meeting under 
Article  18.6. The full list of the questions raised is included in Table 1 of the A nnex to this report.3 
Members ' responses and follow -up comments can be accessed directly by clicking on the hyperlinks 
in column 3 of the t able for the relevant quest ion ID numbers . These can also be accessed through 
the AG -IMS4 and may be consulted there using the relevant question ID numbers.  
2.2  Review of Notifications: Specific Questions Raised  
2.3.  Table 2 of the Annex to this report includes the list of questions relati ng 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 in column 6  of the Table 
for the relevant question ID numbe rs. The se can also be accessed through the AG -IMS and may be 
consulted there using the relevant question ID numbers. The relevant notifications subject to specific 
questions are also included in table 2 and may be accessed by clicking on the hyperlink in column 1  
of the table.  
3  OTHER BUSINESS  
3.1  Date of next regular meeting  
3.1.  The Committee agreed to hold the suspended 93rd meeting of the CoA on 
Tuesday,  28 July 2020. The Secretariat reported  that responses to more than half of the questions 
raised for the 93rd meeting had been received. The Chair noted that in view of the good percentage 
of questions raised for the 93rd CoA meeting having already been responded to and those response s 
being accessible through the AG -IMS, the meeting should be able to be conducte d efficiently. 
Further, i n light of the time and logistical constraints  to conduct the rescheduled 93rd CoA meeting , 
the Chair suggested that responding Members would not be invited  to read the responses provided 
in advance of the meeting and only the concerned questioning Members might react to advance 
responses during the meeting to register follow -up comments.  
3.2  Information Session for COVID -19 and related issues  
3.2.  Following a request from  Members, the Secretariat announced that an information session on 
COVID-19 and agriculture would take place on 28 July 2020 in the margins of the 93rd CoA meeting. 
The information session would tentatively include the participation of the Food and Agriculture 
Organization ( FAO), the International Grains Council  (IGC), the I nternational Trade Centre  (ITC) and 
the International Food Policy Research Institute  (IFPRI). The information session would enable the 
participating organization s to present their work on the monitoring and analysis of COVID -19 related 
agricultural policie s.  
3.3.  Japan welcomed  the information session proposal and lauded the Secretariat 's Trade 
Monitoring work in collating the COVID -19 related information on the WTO website. Japan suggested 
to single out  the food and agriculture related information on the WTO COVID -19 webpage .  
 
3 WTO/AIR/AG/43, Attachment Section A. The full version of the questions raised can be found under 
section 1 of the compilation document G/AG/W/206.  
4 http://agims.wto.org . 
5 WTO/AIR/AG/43, Attachment Section B. The full version of the questions raised can be found under 
section 2 of the compilation document G/AG/W/206.  G/AG/R/94  
 
- 11 - 
 
  3.4.  Paraguay echoed the request made by Japan and suggested  to include an indication in the 
trade monitoring database as to when these COVID -19 related temporary measures would lapse i n 
order to facilitate an effective monitoring of those measures .  
3.3  Upcoming Export Competition Ded icated Discussion and Replies to  the Questionnaire  
3.5.  The Chair reminded Members that the 2020 dedicated discussions on export competition would 
be conducted at t he September CoA meeting. In view of the limited number of replies by Members 
to the questionnaire by the deadline of 15 June 2020, the Chair extended the deadline for Members 
to send their replies to Friday, 3 July 2020  and encouraged  Members who d id not implement 
programmes covered by the questionnaire, to submit  a "nil" reply to the Secretariat.  G/AG/R/94  
 
- 12 - 
 
  ANNEX  
The Annex includes the full list of questions raised under the various agenda items of the special 
meeting . Members ' responses and follow -up exchanges ( where  applicable) can be accessed by 
clicking on the hyperlinks in the table below for the relevant ID n umbers. These can also 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.  
 
A compilation of up -to-date responses to all questions raised during a CoA meeting can now be 
generated at any time o n the password protected site of the AG -IMS1 (Q&A function).  Question IDs 
where replies were yet to be submitted into the AG -IMS as of 11:00, 1 7 August 2020  have been 
identified with the symbol “*”. Members are invited to provide outstanding replies through the 
AG-IMS at the earliest opportunity.  
Table 1  - Specific Implementation Matters (Article 18.6)  
Question Summary  Question by  ID 
number  
Australia 's International Freight Assistance Mechanism   Canada  94034  
European Union  94048  
Thailand  94033  
United States of America  94049  
Cambodia 's prohibition of rice exports  Japan  94002 * 
Canada 's agriculture support package  Australia  94001  
Canada 's dairy policies   Australia  94003  
New Zealand  94004  
Canada 's Farm Credit Canada  United States of America  94053  
China 's measures to ensure agricultural inputs supplies  United States of America  94054  
Egypt 's export prohibitions on agricultural products   Japan  94005 * 
Switzerland  94006 * 
El Salvador 's export prohibitions on dried leguminous vegetables  Japan  94007  
EU's private storage aid  Australia  94008  
EU's aid to the potato sector  Australia  94009  
EU's Czech guarantee scheme  Australia  94010  
EU's support measures in response to COVID -19  Australia  94011  
Brazil  94042  
Canada  94035  
Romania 's export prohibition on agricultural products   Japan  94041  
Switzerland  94013  
EU's support measures in response to COVID -19  New Zealand  94012  
United States of America  94055  
United States of America  94056  
Honduras ' export prohibitions on dried leguminous vegetables  Japan  94014  
India's COVID -19 stimulus package  Canada  94036 * 
Japan 's beef support   Australia  94015  
United States of America  94058  
Japan 's support package   Brazil  94044  
Canada  94037  
United States of America  94057  
Japan 's transportation support  United States of America  94059  
Kazakhstan 's export prohibition measures on certain food 
products   Japan  94016 * 
Switzerland  94017 * 
Myanmar 's export quota on rice  Japan  94018  
New Zealand 's International Airfreight Capacity scheme   Canada  94038  
European Union  94050  
United States of America  94051  
Russian Federation 's export quot a Brazil  94043  
Japan  94019  
Switzerland  94020  
Tajikistan 's export prohibitions on certain food products  Japan  94021 * 
Turkey 's Treasury - Backed loans  Australia  94022  
Turkey 's prior export authorization/registration   Japan  94023  
Switzerland  94024  
U.S. Coronavirus Food Assistance Program   Australia  94025  
 
1 https://agims -qna.wto.org/public/Pag es/en/Search.aspx   G/AG/R/94  
 
- 13 - 
 
  Question Summary  Question by  ID 
number  
Brazil  94045  
Canada  94039  
European Union  94052  
New Zealand  94026  
U.S. Paycheck Protection Program  European Union  94047  
Viet Nam 's export restriction measures on rice   Brazil  94046  
Canada  94040  
Japan  94027  
Switzerland  94028  
 
Table 2  - Questions raised in connection with individual notifications  
ID 
number  Question 
by Answer 
by Notification 
Format  Products  Reference  
94029 * Japan  Kyrgyz 
Republic  ER:1 -  
Export restrictions  Wheat, Rice, Sugar, Cane 
or beet sugar, Other  G/AG/N/KGZ/8  
94031  Japan  North 
Macedonia  ER:1 -  
Export restrictions  Wheat  G/AG/N/MKD/26  
94030  Japan Thailand  ER:1 -  
Export restrictions  Eggs G/AG/N/THA/107  
94032  Japan  Ukraine  ER:1 -  
Export restrictions  Wheat  G/AG/N/UKR/37  
 
__________