WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  G/AG/16/Add.1 
13 June 2006 
 
 (06-2824) 
Committee on Agriculture Original:   English 
  
COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE (REGULAR MEETINGS) 
IMPLEMENTATION-RELATED ISSUES 
 
Report by the Committee on Agriculture to the General Council
 
 
Addendum  
 
 1. The present report provides an up-date of the follow-up by the Committee on Agriculture of 
the three relevant implementation-related issues that  are referred to in the Decision of 14 November 
2001 by the Doha Ministerial Conference on Im plementation-Related Issues and Concerns.
1  T h e  
report was adopted through a written procedure as ag reed to by the Committee in its meeting on 
12 May 2006. 
_______________  
A. ARTICLE 10.2  OF THE AGREEMENT ON AGRICULTURE : THE DEVELOPMENT OF 
INTERNATIONALLY AGREED DISCIPLINES TO GOVERN THE PROVISION OF EXPORT CREDITS , 
EXPORT CREDIT GUARANTEES OR INSURANCE PROGRAMMES , TAKING ACCOUNT OF 
PARAGRAPH 4 OF THE MARRAKESH NFIDC  DECISION  
2. This matter has been a standing agenda item of the regular meetings of the Committee on 
Agriculture as an implementation-related issue.  The development of disciplines in this area has also 
been addressed in the agriculture negotiations (Special Session).   
3. In December 2005, the Hong Kong Declaration reaffirmed Members' commitment to the 
development of internationally-agreed disciplines for export credits2: 
"[...] We note emerging convergence on some el ements of disciplines with respect to 
export credits, export credit guarantees or insurance programmes with repayment 
periods of 180 days and below.  We agree that such programmes should be self-financing, reflecting market consistenc y, and that the period should be of a 
sufficiently short duration so as not to effectively circumvent real commercially-
oriented discipline. [...] The disciplines on export credits, export credit guarantees or 
insurance programmes, exporting state tr ading enterprises and food aid will be 
completed by 30 April 2006 as part of the m odalities, including appropriate provision 
in favour of least-developed and net food-importing developing countries as provided for in paragraph 4 of the Ma rrakesh Decision. [...]"   
4. During the informal consultations on implemen tation-related issues held  in February 2006, 
and again in the May 2006 regular Committee meeting, it was acknowledged that currently Members were prioritizing the discussion of issues under Article 10.2 in the agriculture negotiations rather than 
pursuing discussions in the regular Committee on Agri culture.  However, should the negotiations fail 
to find an acceptable solution, discussions would ne ed to be pursued within the regular Committee. 
                                                     
 
1 WT/MIN(01)/17, paragraph 2. 
2 WT/MIN(05)/DEC, paragraph 6 of the Hong Kong Ministerial Declaration. G/AG/16/Add.1 
Page 2  
 
  B. E
XAMINATION OF POSSIBLE MEANS OF IMPROVING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE 
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE DECISION ON MEASURES CONCERNING THE POSSIBLE NEGATIVE 
EFFECTS OF THE REFORM PROGRAMME ON LEAST -DEVELOPED AND NET FOOD-IMPORTING 
DEVELOPING COUNTRIES3 
1. Food Aid (paragraph 3(i) and (ii) of the Marrakesh NFIDC Decision) 
5. In June 2004, the Food Aid Committee decided to undertake a renegotiation of the Food Aid 
Convention 1999 (FAC) with the aim of bringing into  effect a "more effective instrument to provide 
food to those identified needs when food aid is the most appropriate response." 4  At its December 
2004 session, the Food Aid Committee concluded that the relationship between its own review process and WTO negotiations was such that any recommendations should await the outcome of the 
Doha Round.  In these circumstances, the FAC 1999 was extended for a further two years, i.e. until 
30 June 2007.  
6. As regards the negotiations on food aid in the Special Session of the Committee on 
Agriculture, under the export competition p illar, in December 2005 Ministers agreed: 
"[...] On food aid, we reconfirm our commitmen t to maintain an adequate level and to 
take into account the interests of food aid recipient countries.  To this end, a "safe 
box" for bona fide food aid will be provide d to ensure that there is no unintended 
impediment to dealing with emergency s ituations.  Beyond that, we will ensure 
elimination of commercial displacement. To this end, we will agree effective 
disciplines on in-kind food aid, monetization and re-exports so that there can be no loop-hole for continuing export subsidization.[...]" 
5  
7. The recommendations in the area of food aid6 have been subject to a review within the 
framework of the Committee's annual monitoring ex ercise of the NFIDC Decision at the November 
meetings in 2003, 2004, and the January 2006 mee ting on the basis of Table NF:1 notifications 
submitted by donor Members concerned.   The Committee will continue to review food aid levels on 
the basis of existing procedures and established mechanisms. 
 
2. Technical and Financial Assistance in th e Context of Aid Programmes to Improve 
Agricultural Productivity and Infrastructu re (paragraph 3(iii) of the Marrakesh NFIDC 
Decision) 
8. Within the framework of the Committee's annual monitoring exercise of the Marrakesh 
NFIDC Decision, the provision of technical and financial assistance continued to be subject to 
specific review at the November meetings in 2003, 2004, and the Ja nuary 2006 meeting.  For this 
purpose, updated Table NF:1 notifications we re submitted by donor Members concerned.  
Contributions made by the observer organizati ons (FAO, International Grains Council, IMF, 
UNCTAD, World Bank and the World Food Progr amme) in this context were circulated.7  
9. At the meeting in November 2003, the IMF presented a financing initiative aimed at 
supporting trade-related adjustment needs of deve loping countries in the context of the Doha 
                                                      
3 See also background Secretariat notes, G/AG/W/42/Rev.6, Rev.7, and Rev.8. 
4 G/AG/GEN/68. 
5 WT/MIN(05)/DEC, paragraph 6. 
6 G/AG/11, Section B-1 refers. 
7 See also G/AG/GEN/64, 68 and 71.  G/AG/16/Add.1 
 Page 3 
 
 
  Development Agenda,8  and the World Bank introduced a progr amme for enhanced assistance to help 
countries meet new commitments made in the D oha Round and to resolve transition problems.9 
10. At this point in time, there are no further pr oposals by Members in respect of this subject. 
3. Financing Normal Levels of Commercial Im ports of Basic Foodst uffs (paragraphs 410 
and 5 of the Marrakesh NFIDC Decision) 
11. In line with the recommendation in paragraph 19(c) of G/AG/16, the Committee on 
Agriculture continued to explore options and so lutions within the frame work of the Marrakesh 
NFIDC Decision to address short-term difficulties of LDCs and NFIDCs in financing commercial 
imports of basic foodstuffs.   Since June 2003, the Committee's work in this area has been undertaken 
on the basis, in particular, of an S&D proposal by the African Group.11  Discussions focussed 
primarily on the proposed revolving fund as a po ssible means to address the short-term financing 
aspect covered by the NFIDC Decision.  Several Memb ers considered that the other elements of the 
African Group proposal would more appropriately be addressed in the context of the agriculture 
negotiations.  
12. Although Members engaged in discussions, an impasse was reached, at which point the 
African Group considered submitting a modified proposal. Recently the African Group expressed 
disappointment at the absence of any counter-proposal  which might have assisted it in amending some 
elements of the proposal.  The African Group also ur ged all participants to be more forthcoming in 
finding a solution to this issue given its crucial im portance to the LDCs and the NFIDCs.  Concerns 
were also expressed about leaving these issues solely to  be dealt with in the negotiations, especially if 
the Doha negotiations do not deliver the desired outcomes.  
13. Another project for a financing facility was brought to the attention of the Committee on 
Agriculture at its January 2006 meeting.  FAO and UNCTAD reported on their joint work on the elaboration of a multilateral food import financin g facility (FIFF) that would protect LDCs and 
NFIDCs against possible food import financing constr aints in times of high world prices.   The FAO 
representative informed the Committee that work on the elaboration of such a financing scheme had 
been initiated at the request of the African Gr oup and had been already presented to some WTO 
delegations in May 2005. 
                                                     
 
8 G/AG/GEN/68 (pp. 10-11) and G/AG/GEN/71 (pp. 9-10). 
9 G/AG/GEN/64 (pp. 18-23). 
10 See also paragraph 3 above, with respec t to the Hong Kong Ministerial Declaration. 
11 The proposal itself is contained in paragraph 52 of  document TN/CTD/W/3/Rev.2 (17 July 2002).  It was 
referred to the Committee on Agriculture in 2003 by the Chai rman of the General Council under the Category II S&D 
proposals (G/AG/17 and Corr. 1; G/AG/20; a nd G/AG/22).  The submission by the African  Group also contains certain food 
aid-related proposals but, as some Members considered that fo od aid issues fell under the purview of the Special Session of 
the Committee or, in any event, under the Food Aid Convention, th ese aspects were not further pursued in the regular session 
of the Committee on Agriculture. G/AG/16/Add.1 
Page 4  
 
  C. T
HE SUBMISSION  BY  MEMBERS ADMINISTERING TARIFF QUOTAS OF ADDENDA TO THEIR 
NOTIFICATIONS TO THE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE (TABLE MA:1)  IN ACCORDANCE WITH 
THE DECISION OF THE GENERAL COUNCIL IN WT/L/384  REGARDING THE ADMINISTRATION 
OF TARIFF RATE QUOTA REGIMES IN A TRANSPARENT , EQUITABLE AND NON-
DISCRIMINATORY MANNER  
14. The current position is that, out of thirty-eight Members12 with tariff quota commitments, nine 
(9) have submitted the required Table MA:1 A ddenda in accordance with the General Council's 
Decision:  Australia, Canada, EC, Japan, New Ze aland, Norway, Switzerland, Thailand and the 
United States.  Since July 2003, no additional Table MA:1 Addenda have been submitted.   
15. Members, however, have continued to notify changes in the administration of tariff quotas 
through ad hoc  Table MA:1 notifications, as required by the notification procedures adopted by the 
Committee.13  Members are able to raise any matters relati ng to the administration of particular tariff 
quotas in the course of the Committee’s regular revi ew process.  The Committee noted the sustained 
obligation to provide Table MA:1 notifications a nd clarified that the addenda notifications were 
intended to ensure that relevant details of Me mbers' tariff quota administration are provided.  
However, the Committee further noted that sinc e notifications of changes in the tariff quota 
administration are also made through ad hoc  notifications, the existing Table MA:1 requirement, 
combined with the Committee's review of these notif ications could provide adequate transparency on 
these issues. 
16. The Committee debated, and some Members acknow ledged, the further usefulness of keeping 
the Table MA:1 Addenda as a standing implemen tation item on the Agenda of the Committee, 
notwithstanding the on- going notification requirements, the Co mmittee's review process, as well as 
the working procedures of the Committee.  
D. CONCLUSION  
17. In conclusion, it has to be said that so fa r no consensus solution has been found in the 
Committee – nor, as for that matter, in the ongoing ne gotiations – for any of the three implementation-
related issues. Pending further developments in th e negotiations or new instructions from the General 
Council, the Committee will therefore keep th ese issues as a standing item on its agenda.  
 
__________ 
 
 
                                                      
12 Counting the European Communities and its 25 member St ates; and Switzerland-Liechtenstein; respectively, as 
one. 
13 G/AG/2.