_________________________
* English only/En anglais seulement/En inglés solamente.WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION
ORGANISATION MONDIALE DU COMMERCE
ORGANIZACIÓN MUNDIAL DEL COMERCIOG/AG/GEN/46
28 November 2000
(00-5127)
Committee on Agriculture Original:  English
anglais
inglés
ANNUAL MONITORING EXERCISE IN RESPECT OF THE FOLLOW-UP TO
THE MINISTERIAL DECISION ON MEASURES CONCERNING THE POSSIBLE
NEGATIVE EFFECTS OF THE REFORM PROGRAMME ON LEAST-DEVELOPED
AND NET FOOD-IMPORTING DEVELOPING COUNTRIES
Attached are copies of statements* made by the representatives of the Food and Agriculture
Organization (FAO), the Internationa l Grains Council (IGC), the In ternational Monetary Fund (IMF),
the OECD, the UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), and the World Bank at the
meeting of the Committee on Agriculture on 14 Nove mber 2000 (agenda Item Part II.A refers).
Comité de l'agriculture
EXERCICE ANNUEL DE SURVEILLANCE DE LA SUITE DONNÉE À LA DÉCISION
MINISTÉRIELLE SUR LES MESURES CONCERNANT LES EFFETS NÉGATIFS
POSSIBLES DU PROGRAMME DE RÉFORME SUR LES PAYS LES MOINS
AVANCÉS ET LES PAYS EN DÉVELOPPEMENT IMPORTATEURS
NETS DE PRODUITS ALIMENTAIRES
On trouvera ci-joint la copie de s déclarations* faites par les représentants de l'Organisation des
Nations Unies pour l'alimentation et l'agriculture (F AO), du Conseil international des céréales ( CIC), du
Fonds monétaire international (FMI), de l'OCDE, de  la Conférence des Nations Unies sur le commerce
et le développement (CNUCED), et  de la Banque mondiale à la réunion du Comité de l'agriculture du
14 novembre 2000 (point A de la deuxi ème partie de l'ordre du jour).
Comité de Agricultura
EJERCICIO ANUAL DE VIGILANCIA DEL SEGUIMIENTO DE LA DECISIÓN
MINISTERIAL SOBRE MEDIDAS RELATIVAS A LOS POSIBLES
EFECTOS NEGATIVOS DEL PROGRAMA DE REFORMA EN
LOS PAÍSES MENOS ADELANTADOS Y EN LOS PAÍSES
EN DESARROLLO IMPORTADORES NETOS
DE PRODUCTOS ALIMENTICIOS
A continuación se adjuntan copias de las declar aciones* formuladas por los representantes de
la Organización de las Naciones Unidas para la  Agricultura y la Alimentación (FAO), el Consejo
Internacional de los Cereales, el Fondo Monetario Internacional (FMI), la OCDE, la Conferencia de
las Naciones Unidas sobre Comercio y Desarrollo (UNCTAD), y el Banco Mundial en la reunión del
Comité de Agricultura celebrada el día 14 de noviembre de 2000 (véase el punto A de la Parte II delorden del día).G/AG/GEN/46
Page 2
STATEMENT BY THE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE FOOD
AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION (FAO)
FAO has been reporting annually to the Committee about developments in the global cereal
supply and demand balance and, in particular, on trends in cereal import bills of the LDCs and theNFIDCs.  I would like to give you an update on this situation today based on the latest information
available to FAO.
World cereal supply/demand situation
FAO's latest  forecast of world cereal production  in 2000 is 1848 million tons (milled rice
equivalent), down by about 2 percent from the 1999 level.  Sharp reductions in output are expected inAsia for all cereals, some 40 million tons in total,  with China accounting for virtually all of the
decline.  Adverse weather and falling area are among main causes for the reduction in this year's
cereal production in China.  World wheat production in 2000 is forecast to fall be about 8 million tons
from 1999 to 582 million tons.  Output has increased this year only in Europe and Central America
and these gains were more than offset by significant declines in all other regions.  The forecast forglobal output of coarse grains  in 2000 points to a decline of about 13 million tons from the previous
year. Persisting drought in China, southern and ce ntral parts of the United States, and throughout most
of eastern Europe has been particularly hard on maize crops.  World paddy output in 2000 is forecast
to decline by 15 million tons from 1999.  Harvesting of the 2000 paddy crop is proceeding in the
northern hemisphere countries but it is generally concluded in the southern hemisphere.  While paddyproduction has been affected by weather and flood problems, especially in parts of Asia, government
policies and low prices have played important role in encouraging farmers to diversify towards other
crops.
Overall, cereal output in 2000 is anticipated to be well below utilization in 2000/01.  As a
result, world cereal stocks,  by the close of the seasons ending in 2001, are now forecast at
288 million tons, 15 percent lower than their opening level and the lowest in five years.  The biggest
declines in cereal stocks are expected in countries where production is likely to contract most, i.e.
mostly in China and several countries in eastern Europe.
Cereal trade and prices
The current FAO forecast of world cereal trade in 2000/01 is 238 million tons, slightly above
the previous season level, reflecting higher import demand in several countries.  Global wheat imports
in 2000/01 (July/June) are forecast to remain close to the previous season's record volume of
109 million tons;  imports of coarse grains could rise by 1.5 million tons to 104.5 million tons; for
rice, the tentative outlook for calendar year 2001 is for trade to rise above the current year’s level to24 million tons.
After remaining under downward pressure during  the previous season due to weak demand
and abundant supplies, international cereal prices  have started making small gains in light of stronger
import demand and indications of lower production and prospects for a large draw down of stocks.For wheat , the increase in higher quality categories has been most pronounced, rising from an average
price of US$115 per metric ton at the start of the season to $US131 in October.  Maize  prices (FOB
Gulf) have also strengthened between July a nd October, gaining about US$10 per ton.  The FAO
Export Price Index for rice (1982-84=100), which has been falling since the beginning of the year,
increased by one point in October to an average of 95 points, still one of the lowest level in ten years.This slight recovery reflects some limited strength ening of prices for high quality rice, while lower
quality grades remain under downward pressure.G/AG/GEN/46
Page 3
With reduced carryover stocks and a relative tightening of global cereal markets, the size of
forthcoming plantings play an even more important  role in determining the direction and extent of
price movements during the next season.
Food aid
According to the latest information supplied by the World Food Programme (WFP), total
cereal food aid shipments in 1999/2000 (July/June) under programme, project and emergency
operations amounted to 10.2 million tons, down by 800 thousand tons from the previous year.  Among
individual cereals, shipments of coarse grains (m ostly maize) increased by over 200 thousand tons;
rice fell by 600 thousand tons and wheat also fell by nearly 400 thousand tons.
Preliminary indications suggest that cereal food aid shipments in 2000/01 could reach
10 million tons, close to last year's estimated volume.  Shipments to the Russian Federation are
forecast to decrease sharply, following this year’s improved harvests in that country.  However, food
aid needs are expected to be larger in Africa, but also in the People’s Democratic Republic of Korea
and the southern republics of the former Soviet Union.
As of late October, the number of developing countries facing serious food shortages and
emergency situations stands at 32.  Between October 1999 and October 2000, the number of people
facing serious food shortages increased from 52 to 62 million, the largest increase (45%) being in sub-
Saharan Africa, mainly in the Horn of Africa.
Cereal import bills
The combined cereal import bill of the LDCs  and the NFIDCs  during the 1999/2000 season
came to some US $5.8 billion, down 10 percent from the previous year and about the same level as
the average of the 1993/94 to 1994/95 period.  Out of this 10 percent decline in the cereal import bill,3 percent is due to a reduction in the volume of imports and the remaining 7 percent due to a decline
in the average price paid for imports.  The per unit import cost in 1999/00 for these countries, was
about US$122 per ton compared to US$131 in 1998 /99.  Cereal food aid to these countries was
relatively unchanged from the previous season and, thus, had little impact on the import bill.
For the 2000/01 season cereal imports by LDCs and NFIDCs are forecast to increase by some
750 thousand tons from last season's level.  Based on this forecast, and taking into account the currentprospects for slightly higher cereal prices and freight rates during the course of the 2000/01 season,
the cereal import bill of the these countries is forecast to increase by some US$ 800 million.  More
details as regards the composition of the cereal import bills of LDCs and NFIDCs can be found in the
Table accompanying this statement.
Overall, while the situation in the LDCs and NFIDCs, as reflected by recent levels of cereal
import bills, has improved somewhat compared to 3-4 years ago, the food security situation in many
of these countries remains precarious.  Of the 32 developing countries mentioned above currently
facing serious food shortages and emergency situations, the majority are in the LDC and NFIDC
category.
Technical assistance activities
Finally, I would like to draw the attention of the Committee to the work that FAO has been
doing to assist LDCs and NFIDCs in adjusting to the new trading environment and, in accordancewith the mandate of the World Food Summit, "to be well informed and equal partners in the current
negotiations on agriculture".
FAO is providing assistance at the Regional and Sub-Regional levels and through country
specific activities.  These trade-related assistance activities in Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry aimG/AG/GEN/46
Page 4
at raising food and agriculture production and productivity and hence increasing competitiveness in
these sectors.
Increasingly, assistance is shifting towards providing analytical support to countries to be
better prepared to engage in the on-going negotiations on agriculture.  In this context I like to drawyour attention to the FAO umbrella programme of  training workshops, information on which can be
obtained from the FAO website www.fao.org.  An FAO report which has recently been circulated
entitled “WTO Negotiations on Agriculture, Post-Seattle major issues, analytical needs and technical
assistance requirements”  highlights some of the major analytical issues of interest to developing
countries.  FAO is currently investigating some of these issues in collaboration with relevant
organizations and institutions.G/AG/GEN/46
Page 5
Cereal imports of LDCs and NFIDCs (1993/94 to 2000/01) - Information as of November 2000
1993-94 1994-95 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999/00 2000/01
estimate f'cast
Import Bill (US $ million)
LDCs 1417 2124 2281 1865 2327 1977 1755 1893
NFIDCs 3688 4417 6020 5573 5161 4439 4026 4677
LDCs & NFIDCs 5105 6541 8302 7438 7488 6416 5782 6570
% change over 1993/94-1994/95 -12.3 12.3 42.6 27.7 28.6 10.2 -0.7 12.8
Total volume imported (000 tons)LDCs 11167 13356 12484 11093 14757 15659 15682 15139
NFIDCs 27172 27487 27407 29543 32961 33419 31815 33103
LDCs & NFIDCs 38339 40843 39892 40636 47718 49078 47497 48242
% change over 1993/94-1994/95 -3.2 3.2 0.8 2.6 20.5 24.0 20.0 21.9
Food aid (000 tons)
LDCs 3932 4326 3305 2693 2853 4001 3831 3961
% of total imports 35.2 32.4 26.5 24.3 19.3 25.6 24.4 26.2
NFIDCs 1868 1327 644 509 640 794 756 638% of total imports 6.9 4.8 2.4 1.7 1.9 2.4 2.4 1.9
LDCs & NFIDCs 5800 5654 3949 3202 3493 4795 4587 4600
% of total imports 15.1 13.8 9.9 7.9 7.3 9.8 9.7 9.5
Commercial imports (000 tons)
LDCs 7236 9029 9180 8399 11904 11658 11851 11178
NFIDCs 25304 26160 26763 29035 32321 32625 31060 32464
LDCs & NFIDCs 32539 35189 35943 37434 44225 44283 42910 43642
% change over 1993/94-1994/95 -3.9 3.9 6.1 10.5 30.6 30.8 26.7 28.9
Per unit import cost  (US $/ton) 1/
LDCs 126.9 159.0 182.7 168.1 157.7 126.3 111.9 125.1
NFIDCs 135.7 160.7 219.7 188.6 156.6 132.8 126.6 141.3
LDCs & NFIDCs 133.2 160.1 208.1 183.0 156.9 130.7 121.7 136.2
% change over 1993/94-1994/95 -9.2 9.2 41.9 24.8 7.0 -10.9 -17.0 -7.1
1/ Based on per unit cost of total imports
Source: FAOG/AG/GEN/46
Page 6
STATEMENT BY THE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE INTERNATIONAL
GRAINS COUNCIL (IGC)
Under the Grains Trade Convention of the International Grains Agreement, 1995, the
International Grains Council continues its regular monitoring of world grains markets.  As described
in the monthly Grain Market Reports, the general market situation during 2000 for both wheat and
coarse grains remains one of surplus supplies.  Grain export prices and availabilities have been, and
continue to be, favourable to net food-importing developing countries.
Details of the new Food Aid Convention, 1999, which entered into force on 1 July 1999, were
previously reported to WTO.  At its half-yearly  Sessions, the Food Aid Committee, which administers
the Convention, reviews the food situation in developing countries as well as donor Governments’
responses to current food emergencies.  Preliminary data on members’ food aid shipments in
1999/2000 suggest that members with tonnage commitments collectively supplied at least 8.3m. tons
of food aid (wheat equivalent) to eligible recipients, with a further €150m. supplied against
commitments expressed in value terms.G/AG/GEN/46
Page 7
STATEMENT BY THE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE
INTERNATIONAL MONETARY FUND (IMF)
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for this opportunity to speak to the Committee.  In previous years
we have made substantial statements and I certainly do not wish to cover ground with which the
Committee is already familiar.  I would, however, like to mention the recent trends in world food
prices since last year.  I would also wish to return to the matter of Fund resources available to meet
the needs of members.
1. Overview
It will be recalled that commodity prices fell in 1997-98 on account of weak global demand in
the wake of the Asian financial and economic crises, coupled with continued growth in the production
of commodities.  Now, two years later, the Fund's overall index of US dollar prices of primary
commodities, including petroleum, is nearly 50 per cent higher.  However, the sharp rise in the price
of petroleum – from an average of about $13 per barrel in 1998 to over $30 per barrel in recentmonths – alone is sufficient to account for this increase.  By contrast, there has been little upward
movement in the level of prices for most non-fuel commodities.  Stocks of these commodities
accumulated in 1997-98 and production has tended to increase in pace with the subsequent recovery
of demand.  The Fund's index of prices of non-oil commodities in September 2000 was about 5 per
cent below  its level in the second half of 1998.
With generally favorable weather conditions in the major producing regions for cereals and
soybeans for a number of consecutive years, supplies have been more than ample to meet the growth
in food consumption and some recovery in demand for livestock feed.  Estimates of the world cereal
crops in 2000/01 show a decline from 1999/00 and have  been reduced in recent weeks, with adverse
weather reported in both China and the United States, but world soybean production is expected to be
on record, up 5 per cent from 1999/00.  The prices of cereals and foodstuffs (in US dollars) have
remained at or near their lowest levels for many years.  The price of wheat in September-October
2000 has increased, but only marginally from its lowest level in 25 years.  The price of maize in
September-October also edged up – from its lowest level since the mid-1980s – but it remains well
below the level of a year ago.  The price of rice continues to fall.  The record crop and the expectation
of some increase in stocks have kept prices of soybeans near their 1999 trough, although the price ofsoybean meal has increased somewhat on account of strong growth in consumption.
Ample supplies have also characterized the markets for vegetable oils;  the prices of soybean
oil and palm oil are at their lowest levels in about a decade.  The price of sugar (outside the controlled
markets of the EU and the United States) also remains at a low level on account of generallyfavorably supply conditions, notwithstanding a rise in the past two months on fears of lower-than-
expected harvests this year.  While beef prices remain above 1998 levels, the increases in 1999 have
not been sustained.
Given these price movements, the import bill from food items incurred by net food-importing
countries is likely to remain comparatively low in the near future.  However, the burden of this bill for
those net food importers that are also substantial net oil importers has been increasing because of the
need to provide resources to finance more expensive oil imports.  This burden will be much higher
this year than last year because of the further increase in oil prices.  In addition, the prices of many of
the non-fuel primary commodities exported by these countries either have decreased further or haveincreased by only small amounts.  Particularly vulnerable are those countries which are net importers
of food and oil that are also heavily dependent on exports of coffee and/or cocoa.  Demand growth for
those two commodities has been sluggish, supplies abundant, and prices have continued to slide.G/AG/GEN/46
Page 8
2. Fund Resources
The document (G/AG/W/42/Rev.3, 31 October 2000) prepared for this meeting reports on
previous statements made by the Fund staff to the Committee.  Specifically, it notes the "general
conclusion of the IMF … that, under existing facilities and anticipated resources, the IMF was in aposition to meet any additional balance-of-payments-related needs that may arise from higher world
food prices".  Recently, Fund financial support for the poorer countries is provided through the
Poverty Reduction and Growth Facility and the Compensatory Financing Facility (with the latter
having a component to help eligible countries deal with temporary high cereal import costs).  Since
the Fund's staff statement to the Committee last year, the Fund's ability to help its members had been
improved.  The Poverty Reduction and Growth Facility (PRGF), established in September 1999 to
replace the Enhanced Structural Adjustment Facility (ESAF), is open for 80 low-income countries –many of them the least developed and net food importers.  At this juncture, the IMF has begun to
receive bilateral contributions to the PRGF – HI PC Trust Fund, thus strengthening the PRGF as an
effective instrument of support.  Thus, the view cited above continues to be correct.G/AG/GEN/46
Page 9
STATEMENT BY THE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE OECD
The trade related programme of work of the Food, Agriculture and Fisheries Directorate
Among the shared goals adopted by OECD Agriculture Ministers in March 1998 is the further
integration of the agro-food sector into the multilateral trading system.  In pursuit of this goal,Ministers mandated the OECD to address ongoing and emerging agricultural trade policy issues and
to provide analytical support to the process of agricultural trade liberalisation.  The agricultural trade
policy work programme consists of three core elements.  The first element deals with the evaluation
and strengthening of trade liberalisation, the second considers issues arising at the interface of trade
and domestic policy, and the third element focuses specifically on the interests of non-membereconomies.
The first element aims to assist policy makers and negotiators by:
• assessing the effects of the URAA on trade and protection levels.  An in-depth analysis of the
implementation of the three pillars of the URAA --market access, domestic support and export
subsidies is being completed.  The study addresses the following general questions:  How
effective have the three disciplines been in bringing about a reduction in the level of trade
protection?  What policy lessons can be drawn from the experience so far?  What might be
inferred about opportunities and challenges for further trade liberalisation?  The analysis is
primarily based on country notifications to  WTO and URAA country Schedules and the OECD
PSE/CSE database.  Indicators such as nominal protection coefficients, dispersion indicators and
ad valorem  equivalents are calculated to estimate changes in the level of support and protection
across countries and commodities.  Further, some empirical evidence on agricultural trade
openness is provided by comparing indicators for periods prior to and following the start of the
implementation of the URAA.  The empirical results of the study lead to the conclusion that
although the URAA marked an historic point in the reform of the agricultural trade system, the
immediate quantitative effects on trade and protection levels are moderate.  The challenge nowfacing WTO members is to build upon the foundation of the URAA to further reduce trade
distortions.  This would require strengthening the disciplines already established under the URAA
and addressing those weaknesses of the current agreement which have been identified, as well as
to reach an agreement on emerging trade issues.  At the same time, it would require maintaining
an appropriate role for governments to address domestic policy goals in ways that are targeted,transparent, cost effective and avoid distortion of production and trade.
• The OECD's commodity projection model, Aglink, is  being modified and used to evaluate in a
forward looking manner various options for furt her trade liberalisation regarding the market
access and export subsidy pillars of the URAA.  The work on export subsidies has been finalised.
The starting point of the analysis is a medium term outlook for rising prices in most agriculturalcommodity markets, which results in only limited use of export subsidies
1.  In this context, the
market impacts of a complete elimination of such subsidies is limited.  But market conditions can
differ from those projected, and the importance of a multilateral agreement on reduction or
elimination of export subsidies is therefore that their future use will become disassociated from
market conditions and unilateral policy changes.  The work on market access is in progress and
further analytical results will become available in 2001.  The development of a database
supporting the work on market access has been finalised, and the database is available for public
use on a dedicated web site ( www/amad/org ).
                                                     
1 OECD Agricultural Outlook 2000-2005, Paris, April 2000.G/AG/GEN/46
Page 10
• Analysis of officially supported export credits aims at evaluating the effects of export credits on
agricultural commodity markets by using survey responses and interest rate data to compute the
effects of export credits on the present value importers pay.  The analysis indicates that the use of
export credits has increased over the implementation period of the URAA and in 1998 exceeded
that of export subsidies.  While these credits are trade distorting, their subsidy equivalent is
relatively small; around 3% of the total amount of export credits extended.  However, this result issensitive to variables such as the duration of th e credit and the spread between the risk-bearing
and risk-free interest rates.  The report also indicates that the bulk of export credits is used in trade
between OECD countries.  This, and the relatively low subsidy equivalent, leads to the conclusion
that these credits are unlikely to be of great importance in generating additional trade.
Analysis of issues at the interface of domestic and trade policies include the following:
• Work is underway on the impacts of further trad e liberalisation on the food security situation in
developing countries.  A series of food security indicators have been identified that are relevant in
an assessment of the food security status of developing countries following trade liberalisation.
Future work will analyse changes in these indicators in the case of further reform in a number of
OECD trade and trade-related policies.  The results of the analysis will be presented to a meeting
of the OECD Joint Working Party of the Agriculture and Trade Committees in September 2001.
• On agricultural trade liberalisation and environment, a study on " Domestic and International
Environmental Impacts of Agricultural Trade Liberalisation " is planned for publication by the
end of 2000, and a companion study on " Reconciling Trade and Environmental Objectives " is
expected to be published early in 2001.  Work planned in 2001-2 will look in more detail at the
environmental effects of agricultural trade liberalisation in the intensive livestock sector, and the
trade implications of meeting environmental targets with alternative policy measures.
• Work on multifunctionality is exploring relationships between policies to ensure an adequate
supply of agriculture’s non-food outputs and international trade commitments.  In particular this
work proposes an analytical framework capable of exploring the extent to which the various non-
commodity outputs that are mentioned in the context of multifunctionality are joint products of
agriculture, to what extent they are externalities and to what extent they exhibit characteristics of
public goods that would justify government interv ention and the nature of that intervention.  This
work is highly relevant to green box issues and non-trade concerns as is a related project on
decoupling which is investigating the mechanisms  whereby different policy instruments, even
seemingly decoupled ones, may impact on production and trade of agricultural products.
• Trade repercussions of domestic policies in the area of food safety and quality (biotechnology and
animal welfare) and competition policy (geographical labels and state trading) are also being
explored.  On geographical labels a preliminary study has reviewed relevant legal and economic
aspects, and examined implications for competition policy and trade.  A planned study will look
at economic and trade aspects of labelling more broadly.  On state trading a conceptual
framework has been developed within which to examine the impacts of state trading underdifferent competitive conditions.  A further phase of the work about to be undertaken will attempt
to apply the framework empirically.  In all the work on interface issues the particular focus is onclarifying the characteristics of policies that are minimally or non-trade distorting as required
under the URAA.  Reports on multifunctionality, state trading, biotechnology and geographical
labels are being revised with a view to declassification and publication.
The third element of the work programme encompasses a range of agricultural trade policy
issues of importance to Emerging and Transition Economies, and has been initiated by the OECD
Forum on Agricultural Policies in Non-Member Countries:G/AG/GEN/46
Page 11
• The first phase of this activity examined the policy lessons to be learned from implementation of
the URAA and identified the key interests of Non-Member Countries.  The results of this
examination were published in the report "Agricultural Policies in Emerging and Transition
Economies 2000".
• The Secretariat's current analytical work and policy dialogue is focused on technical barriers to
trade, and considers ways in which the concerns of Non-Member Countries might be addressed in
the context of a multilateral agreement.  The result s of this work will be published in the first half
of 2001.
In each case, the Secretariat's analytical work has been informed by responses to
questionnaires which have been sent to a group of about a dozen emerging and transition economies
with a heterogeneous trade profile.
Completed work
Information on work underway or completed is provided on an on-going basis to the WTO
Secretariat as well as to other interested international organisations, and is posted on relevant
websites.  A significant amount of this work, expect ed to be of interest to a wide audience, is now
nearing completion.  Reports will encompass asse ssment of the URAA impacts, forward looking
analyses of possible trade policy reforms and a range of non-trade concerns of relevance to many
countries, including both agri-environmental measures and the broader concept of multifunctionality.
This information will be made generally available through both electronic and print media.
In addition to ensuring that interested publics are aware of the availability of these completed
reports, it might also be useful to ensure that the relevant conclusions and implications are widely
understood by governments and by interested members of civil society more generally.  Towards this
end, and within the limit of available resources, th e OECD Secretariat will be exploring alternative
ways to more broadly disseminate and effectively communicate its key findings to interested
participants in the on-going process of agricultural policy reform and trade liberalisation.  Queries andsuggestions in this respect would be welcome.G/AG/GEN/46
Page 12
STATEMENT BY THE REPRESENTATIVE
OF UNCTAD
On 24-26 July this year, UNCTAD held an Expert Meeting on "Impact of the reform process
in agriculture on LDCs and NFIDCs, and ways to address their concerns in multilateral trade
negotiations".  I would like to make a very brief report of the outcome of the expert meeting to this
Annual Monitoring Exercise. 1
Based on their country-specific experience, over 50 national experts put together their
suggestions in the following three broad areas.
a. First, with regard to Actions under the Marrakesh Ministerial Decision on LDCs and NFIDCs, it
was suggested that the Marrakesh Decision should be made more operational and aim at solving
the long-term food security problems, rather than at short-term needs. Experts also suggested that
the areas where technical assistance from donors is desired include not only those to increaseagricultural productivity, but also to enhance market information dissemination and export
performance, as those would provide necessary incentives to domestic agricultural producers.
b. Second, on negotiations on the continuation of the reform process in agriculture, it was argued,
amongst other things, that a possible "Devel opment Box" may include development policy of
LDCs, NFIDCs and other developing countries, which target; the viability of small scalesubsistence farmers; rural poverty alleviation; product diversification; as well as improvement of
export competitiveness.
c. Third, on horizontal issues concerning the interests of LDCs and NFIDCs in multilateral trade
negotiations, there was a view among various experts that LDCs and NFIDCs should not be
required by programmes of Bretton-Woods institutions to accept market liberalization or subsidyreduction exceeding the commitment levels accepted at the WTO, nor at a pace  exceeding that in
the WTO agreements, nor which exceed the capacity of adjustment of those countries.
Finally, UNCTAD continues to provide technical and analytical support to LDCs and
NFIDCs in the areas of trade in goods, services and commodities with the mandate as agreed in the
UNCTAD X Bangkok Plan of Actions, as the specia l coordinator of the United Nations programmes
for LDCs, and under special programmes for land-locked and small island developing countries.
                                                     
1 Copies of the outcome of the expert meeting in English, French and Spanish are available from the
Agriculture and Commodities Division, Office 1035.G/AG/GEN/46
Page 13
STATEMENT BY THE REPRESENTATIVE
OF THE WORLD BANK
World Bank Support for  the Least Developed
and Net Food Importing Countries
There are 1.2 billion people in the world who live on less than US$1 per day.  Around 800
million go to bed hungry every night, one third of all preschool children are clinically malnourished,
and 2 billion people are deficient in one or more micronutrients such as iron, vitamin A and zinc.  The
bottom line of these abject statistics is that more than 6 million children a year die of causes related to
malnutrition.
Yet between 1960 and 1990, world cereal production more than doubled, per capita food
production increased 37 per cent, daily caloric intake increased 35per cent, and real food prices fell by
almost 50 per cent.  Today world food prices are at historic lows; so how do these two sets of
apparently paradoxical statistics exist side by side?
Food security is achieved when everyone has sufficient food to sustain a healthy and active life.
At the national level this is the result of sufficient domestic production and/or food imports, at the
household level sufficient production and/or income for food purchases, and at the individual level the
outcome of intra-household food distribution.  Except in time of war, natural disaster or politicallyimposed famine, today food security is a poverty problem.  The rich do not go to bed hungry at night.
Poverty is largely a rural problem, although urban poverty is growing, and farmers represent a
dominant share of the poor.  Its solution, therefore, requires broad-based agricultural and economic
development, to empower several hundreds of millions of low-income people with sufficientpurchasing power to improve the quality of their diet and the quality of life in general.
Experience in recent decades has shown that a market driven, open economy development path
has been the most effective at reducing poverty; much more effective than a protectionist, import
substitution approach to economic development.  In many developing countries agriculture is the
engine of growth.  It is a sector in which many of these countries have a comparative advantage and
would be able to compete in a fair global trading system.
To prime the pump of economic development in agriculture we must start by sustainably
increasing productivity, increasing the value per hectare of what is grown through improved crop
yields and management practices.  Too often developing countries have put neither enough resources
or a sustained commitment into either agricultur al or non-farm rural development to solve the
problem of rural poverty.
The end result is that in many cases developing countries' agriculture sectors are still
underperforming relative to their potential.  While there has been progress on market liberalization in
developing countries in the last decade or so, many are still artificially depressing the incentives totheir farmers and agricultural sectors through policy distortions, – such as price ceilings, use of food
aid, and under-investment in rural infrastructure - resulting in lower overall food production and
depressing farmers' incomes.  The net effect of the entire constellation of public policies in these
countries is to effectively tax the agricultural sector, reducing performance relative to the sector's
potential.
Many net food import developing countries are rightly concerned regarding the volatility of
international commodity prices, a situation pre-dating the Uruguay round of trade negotiations.  Many
analysts prior to the Uruguay round argued that the prevalence of non-tariff barriers, such as export
and import quotas, that cut the link between domestic and international prices were the problem.  TheG/AG/GEN/46
Page 14
outcome of the Uruguay round did little to re-establish that link.  Changes in agricultural policies in
the US and EU have resulted in smaller stocks of grain in government hands, which previously
buffered international commodity price volatility.  Thus international commodity price volatility has
actually increased post Uruguay round agreement. Annex 1 provides an overview of recent
developments and prospects for commodities in world trade.
National food security concerns, in the light of such price volatility, can lead countries to
pursue a policy of domestic food self sufficiency to abrogate the need to rely on global grain markets.
This can be costly in terms of both economic waste and environmental.  The World Bank proposed a
crop price insurance scheme to assist low income food importing countries deal with the risk inherent
in volatility of global grain prices, particularly longer term risk which cannot be handled by present
futures markets.
While today we have more than enough food in the global marketplace, we cannot afford to be
complacent with almost half as many people again forecast to be added to the world's population by
2050.  The challenge is to increase crop production without damaging the environment.  However,
given the unequal distribution of arable land, population, and increases in purchasing power thatwould be generated through successful poverty reduction, a larger fraction of the world's agricultural
production will need to move through international markets.  To that end the global market place must
represent a fair playing field for developing countries.
Although each developing country needs to invest in its own agricultural development,
removing policy biases against domestic agricultural production, partners in the development process
need to assist countries them in securing liberalized domestic markets.  More importantly, there is a
need to ensure that the policies advocated for developing countries are reciprocated in the developed
countries to ensure a fair global trading system.  It is unreasonable to expect market liberalization in
the developing world while the United States of America and the European Union maintain highlyprotectionist policies for their own agricultural sectors.
World Bank Activities
The World Bank has an active programme of assistance to help the least developed and net
food importing countries in a number of ways that are relevant to the deliberations of the Committee.
The first is through improvements in agricultural production technology.  A second is through itslending in support of agricultural supply response and policy reform in developing countries.  A third
is through analytical support for developing countr y participation in WTO negotiations on agriculture.
Agricultural production technology and supply response
The World Bank is a key supporter of the Consultative Group on International Agricultural
Research (CGIAR), which works through a network of 16 international agricultural research centers
to mobilize the best agricultural science on behalf of the world's poor and hungry.  Fifty-eight
developing and developed countries, private founda tions, and regional and international organizations,
including the Bank, collectively support the CGIAR.  In 1998 CGIAR contributions totaled $340million, up from the previous year's $320 million.  The CGIAR leverages the Bank's support - $50.1
million in 1998 - almost eightfold.  The CGIAR's research is critical to the Bank's commitment to
environmentally and socially sustainable development and its renewed focus on rural development.
Some 300 CGIAR research projects are increasing agricultural productivity, strengthening national
agricultural research systems, protecting the environment, improving policies, and preservingbiodiversity.  The third independent System Review, completed in 1998, concluded that investment in
the CGIAR has been the most effective use of official development assistance.
The World Bank also assists least developed and net food importing countries to improve
their agricultural technology through its projects and technical assistance work.  This work is typicallyG/AG/GEN/46
Page 15
a component of a broader project designed to help the country improve its agricultural supply
response.
The emphasis placed on rural sector lending has increased in recent years, in large part
because of recognition that approximately 75 per cent of poor people in developing countries live inrural areas. Therefore,  the Bank's objective of poverty reduction cannot be met unless widely shared
growth, food security, and sustainable natural resources management are achieved in these areas. The
Bank's rural sector work is undertaken within a broad framework to ensure consistency with overall
development goals, but includes projects in a wide range of areas, ranging from sustainable land and
crop management, livestock, agricultural research and extension, irrigation, river basin management,
natural resources management, and rural finance to cross-cutting areas of food security, gender in
development, and community-based rural development. In addition, some projects provide importantinfrastructure support, such as upgrading of rural roads.
Analytical Support for the WTO Negotiations
Because of their capacity constraints, the least developed and net food importing countries
have a particularly acute need for support to help them determine the effects of agricultural policies
and negotiating options and proposals.  A major project to support developing countries in these
negotiations was launched under the title "Agriculture and the WTO 2000 Negotiations:  Economic
Analyses of Issues and Options for Developing Countries".  A number of conferences and workshops
have been held under auspices of the project (see Annex).  The World Bank also presented a papersynthesizing many of the results of recent research to the UNCTAD X meeting in Bangkok.
Strengthening the capacity of developing count ries to participate in and benefit from more
open markets is critical for poverty reduction.  A global trading system that enhances market access,
creates opportunities for poor countries to boost exports, and adopt sound rural sector policies andinstitutions can provide significant gains for the poor, particularly the rural poor.  Food security in
poor countries requires access on an assured basis to world market supplies, as well as agricultural
raw materials for encouraging light manufacturing in rural areas.  Hence, developing countries have a
great stake in building an efficient global food system and maintaining global market stability.
However, they often lack the capacity to participate effectively and negotiate with partner countries in
the developed world.  The project, financed in part by generous grants from the UK Department for
International Development (DFID) and the Govern ment of the Netherlands, supports efforts by
developing countries to evaluate their policy options, to identify their interests, and to formulate
negotiating objectives and strategies.  The programme also aims to identify approaches for Bank
lending and non-lending assistance to achieve an enabling policy and institutional framework to
strengthen the capacity of our clients to benefit from more open markets.  Knowledge dissemination is
pursued through workshops and training activities that target policy makers in developing countries.A handbook on agricultural trade issues is being prepared for policy makers and negotiators that
provides information in an accessible and operationally-relevant form on the key issues on the
agricultural negotiating agenda.  Country specific technical assistance is also available.
Annex 2 to this note describes recent activities under the capacity-building project, as well as
World Bank lending activities in agriculture during 1999-2000.
Ongoing and Planned Activities on Capacity-Building and Research
Regional and Country case analyses on Agriculture and the WTO Negotiations:  The key
issues, interests and options significantly vary by country and sectors within countries.  The second
part of the analytical work  in 2000-2001 involves a set of country case analyses for selected focus
countries.  Much of the sector analyses and analytical work will be carried out by developing country
scholars, policy analysts, and international experts.  A select group of international experts will
provide analytical and advisory assistance (AAA) and policy advise to agricultural trade policyG/AG/GEN/46
Page 16
makers in selected countries.  Background studies have been commissioned for specific countries and
regions including the following:
• Sri Lanka, Pakistan
• India, Bangladesh
• Southern Africa Development Community
• UEMOA
• Uganda
• Tanzania
• Ghana
• Nigeria
• Cameroon
Technical Diagnoses of  Impact of  Selected  WTO Proposals on Least-Developed and Net-Food
Importing Countries.    Technical analyses of proposals will be prepared to analyze the impact of on
developing countries, analyze their interests and options, and  evaluate approaches and modalities for
the negotiations in trade policy and agricultural policy reform.  Most of the work will be carried out
by experts in developing countries in cooperation with international experts as advisers.
Handbook on Trade and Agricultural Negotiations;  Volume on Database of Trade and
Agricultural Policy Indicators:   The third component of the project is the preparation of a Handbook
and Policy Indicators for trade negotiators, agricultural policy analysts and agricultural policy
practitioners.  Experienced negotiators and international experts will prepare short summaries of all
the key issues, providing negotiators with a useful reference.  The handbook will also include briefguidelines for preparing negotiating objectives and evaluating interests and options.   Examples based
on the country case studies will be summarized.  A second volume will include a quantitative
measures of policy indicators (e.g. Market access) for selected focus countries.  The database will be
used to monitor changes in trade policies, and to evaluate market access conditions in trade in food
and agriculture products during the implementation.  These policy indicators would also be useful forthe Bank's monitoring of Rural Sector Policies in developing countries.  The Handbook can be used as
reference by trade policy and agricultural trade analysts, policy makers, practitioners, and agri-
business.
Regional Outreach and Knowledge Dissemination during the negotiations.   This will involve a
series of dissemination meetings and regional workshops in 2000-2001 targeting policy advisors,
trade negotiators, agricultural and trade policy makers, and senior policy makers from Chambers ofCommerce, Ministries of Agriculture and Trade, complemented by outreach activities for the press,
private sector and relevant NGOs.  These events will be implemented in cooperation with regional
partners,  FAO, the UNDP, WTO, DSE, Regional Hub for Southern Africa, AERC, WBI.  A
discussion forum in the project web-site will aim facilitate exchange of views during the negotiations.
This component will involve  regional workshops and organizing country consultations meetings inselected countries in both regions to discuss and publicize results.
Regional workshops
• East and Central Africa : October 2-6, Dakar, Senegal, in cooperation with
BMZ,DSE,CTA,CMA-OC.  (completed)
• South Asia :, Katmandu Nepal, in cooperation with UNDP and SAARC,
• Latin America and Caribbean ,  proposed dates by SELA on Feb 8-10, 2001, VenezuelaG/AG/GEN/46
Page 17
• Southern Africa  (SADC countries): tentative dates: January/Feb 2001; follow-up meetings
in 2001 for the Bank's Regional Hub in Southern Africa, Harare.
• Middle East and North Africa:   proposed dates by ESCWA April/May 2000, Jordan, in
cooperation with ESCWA and WBI
On-Line Interactive Discussion Forum,  December 2000- March 2001
Global Conference ,  Summer/Fall 2001
Country specific technical assistance.   Finally, the project will continue supporting capacity-
building in selected least-developed and low-income net-food importing countries, with emphasis on
Africa, in collaboration with local institutions, regional agencies, and Bank country programmes.
Information and expertise relevant to the implementation of international agreements, developing
complementary policies and institutional framework to enhance competitiveness remains weak inthese regions.  A much more concerted capacity-building effort in policy and institutional
development to facilitate ability of countries to su ccessfully benefit from the global reform process is
needed.  Pilot countries will be selected in partnership with or in the context of preparation of Bank
assistance programmes.G/AG/GEN/46
Page 18
ANNEX 1
Global Commodity Price Prospects1
Global commodity prices have followed many different paths since the lows after the Asian
crisis, with crude oil prices rising sharply, agricultural prices remaining low, and metals and minerals
prices staging a modest recovery.  The recovery of non-oil commodity prices lagged behind that of oil
prices because supplies of non-oil commodities were slow to adjust to low prices while oil production
was significantly reduced by OPEC producers. Producers of non-oil commodities have been left with
large inventories that still need to be absorbed before prices can rise significantly.  Metals and
minerals prices have begun to recover, rising 27 per cent since their lows. However, agricultural
prices remain near their cyclical lows (after a brief rally that was not sustained), because of continuedproduction increases and large stocks.  Rapid global economic growth, which contributed to the sharp
increase in crude oil prices in 1999 and 2000, is expected to fuel a recovery in non-oil commodity
prices during the next several years.
The near-term outlook is for the divergence in commodity prices to be reduced with declines
in energy prices, further increases in metals and minerals prices, and a recovery in agricultural prices
(see Tables A1 and A3 for nominal price forecasts for individual commodities and indexes).  In
nominal terms, crude oil prices are expected to decline 11 per cent in 2001, relative to 2000, and an
additional 16 per cent in 2002 as OPEC and non-OPEC  supplies increase in response to the surge in
prices in 1999 and 2000. Metals and minerals prices are projected to rise 2.1 and 2.3 per cent,respectively, in 2001 and 2002 after rising 13.7 per cent in 2000.  Agricultural prices continued to fall
in 2000, with a decline of 4.7 per cent, but are expected to increase 4.2 per cent in 2001 and an
additional 6.3 per cent in 2002 as global stocks begin to fall and demand increases in response to
current low prices and rapid economic growth.
Over the balance of the decade, real commodity prices
2 are expected to reverse recent moves
as energy and metals prices fall and agricultural prices rise (see Tables A2 and A3 for real price
forecasts for individual commodities and indexes).  Real energy prices are projected to fall sharply
from current levels, with real petroleum prices down 47 per cent by 2010 compared to 2000 levels as
OPEC and non-OPEC supplies increase. Agricultural pr ices are low by historical comparison, and real
prices are expected to rise modestly over the balance of the decade.  By 2010, real agricultural prices
are projected to rise 8 per cent relative to 2000. Metals and minerals prices have already made asignificant recovery from the lows of 1999, and by 2010 they are projected to fall 8.4 per cent from
the 2000 levels.  This would still leave metals and minerals prices above the 1999 levels.  The long-
term decline in real commodity prices, which has been observed for many decades, is expected to
continue.  However, these trends will largely be dominated during the decade by the reaction of prices
to recent extremes, which have seen energy prices rise and agricultural prices fall.
Agriculture
Food
The World Bank's index of nominal food prices has declined by one-third since the recent
high in 1997. In real terms, food prices are down by more than half since 1980 (see Figure 1). The
decline in real food prices reflects the combined im pact of countries' agricultural policies, improved
technology, and changes in demand, which, on balance, have caused food supplies to increase faster
                                                     
1 Prepared by the World Bank's Commodities Team of the Development Prospects Group as Annex 2
to  Global Economic Prospects 2001 .  Questions can be addressed to Donald Mitchell at 202-473-3854.
2 Real prices are obtained by deflating nominal prices by the unit value index in U.S. dollar terms of
manufactures (MUV) exported from the G-5 countries (France, Germany, Japan, the United Kingdom, and theUnited States) weighted proportionally to the countries' exports to the developing countries.G/AG/GEN/46
Page 19
than food demand and prices to decline relative to manufactures prices (MUV). Despite the price
declines, the FAO's index of world food production increased by 20 per cent from 1990 to 1999, and
per capita production increased by about 5.5 per cent. Our forecast is for real food prices to stabilize
over the decade following recent declines.
Grain prices are severely depressed, with nominal prices near the lows of the past decade and
real prices at all-time lows.3 Several factors account for current low prices.  Consumption growth has
slowed over the last few decades, from 2.7 per cent per year during the 1970s to 1.7 per cent growth
during the 1980s and 0.8 per cent growth during the 1990s4, and this has led to nearly stagnant world
trade since the late 1970s.  While consumption and trade have seen slow growth, world grain yields
have been increasing at 1.4 per cent per year over the last decade, and an even more rapid 1.7 per cent
when the countries of the former Soviet Union (FSU) and Eastern Europe are excluded.  The yield
increases have been rapid enough to meet global demand at declining real prices and still allow totalworld cropland devoted to grains to fall by 8 per cent since the peak in 1981.  Among major grain-
exporting countries
5, cropland planted to grain has declined 21 per cent since the peak. Much of this
idled cropland will not likely return to grain production, but it represents substantial capacity that
could return if prices rise enough to justify its use. Grain prices are not expected to rise in real terms
for any sustained period because of continued yield increases, the surplus production capacity inmajor exporting countries, and continued moderate demand growth. However, prices are projected to
increase over the next several years, as prices recover from current severely depressed levels.  This
                                                     
3 Grains account for 55 per cent of the world's food supplies (calories) and occupy nearly one-half of
the world's cultivated cropland (FAO). Grains prices are im portant as an indicator of overall food prices because
of the close substitutability of grains with other food crops in production and consumption. Sugar and vegetableoils account for about 10 per cent each of the world's total calorie supplies while animal products and fishaccount for about 16 per cent. The remaining roughly 10 per cent of world food supplies come from fruits, nuts,pulses, roots, tubers, and vegetables.
4 However, the growth during the 1990s was reduced by a 40 per cent decline in grain consumption in
the FSU countries and smaller declines in Eastern Eu rope. When these countries are excluded, world grain
consumption grew by 2.0 per cent per year during the 1990s. Growth rates in China and India, with 46 per centof developing country populations, has been 1.9 and 1.5 per cent, respectively, during the 1990s.
5 The five largest grain exporters are Argentina, Australia, Canada, EU and United States. Together,
these countries account for about 85 per cent of world exports.Figure 1.  Food Price Index
050100150200250300350400
1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
Real
NominalG/AG/GEN/46
Page 20
will likely be followed by further price declines beginning about mid-decade as production increases
exceed demand growth.
Vegetable oil prices remain depressed following the declines in 1999. Prices of major
vegetable oils, such as soy and palm, have declined by nearly one-half since their 1998 highs, whileprices of other oils, such as coconut and groundnut, have fallen by about one-quarter since their 1999
highs.  Unlike most other agricultural commodities, vegetable oil prices increased during the Asian
crisis, as Indonesia (a major exporter) imposed export taxes on palm oil in an effort to stabilize
domestic prices.  These taxes were gradually removed starting in 1999, as the crisis eased, and this
caused exports to increase and all vegetable oil prices to fall.  Global supplies of vegetable oils are
expected to increase 5.0 per cent in 2000, compared to the long-term average of 3.5 per cent, and this
could keep prices depressed for at least another year.  Palm oil production has grown by 7.5 per centper year over the past decade, compared to 5.5 per cent for soy oil, and this growth is expected to
continue as more Southeast Asian and Latin American producers expand palm oil production.  Palm
oil could displace soy oil as the dominant oil produced  within five years, and this would contribute to
long-term weakness in the entire vegetable oils complex as palm oil use displaces soy and other oils.
Palm oil is already the largest traded oil, with a 40 per cent market share while soy oil is second with
a 20 per cent share.  The index of nominal vegetable oil prices fell 8.6 per cent in calendar year 2000,
and is projected to rise 6.0 per cent in 2001.  By 2005, nominal prices are projected to increase 21.7
per cent from 2000 levels.  Real prices are projected to rise less than 2 per cent between 2000 and
2010.
Other food prices have been mixed, with beef a nd shrimp prices strong because of the rapid
global economic growth, while banana and citrus prices have remained weak because of large
supplies.  Sugar prices have recovered from 1999 lows despite large stocks resulting from five
consecutive seasons when global production has exceeded consumption.  Raw sugar prices averaged
17.6 cents per kilogram in the world market in 2000 compared to an average of 24.3 cents perkilogram during the decade ending in 1998.  World production and stocks are expected to fall in 2001,
and prices should continue to recover.  However, the price recovery is expected to take several years
with prices rising to about 20 cents per kilogram by 2005.  Real prices are projected to remain about
unchanged from 2000 by 2010.
Beverages
After falling sharply in 1998 and 1999, the index of nominal beverage prices is expected to
increase modestly in 2001 and more rapidly in 2002 (Figure 2).  The decline in prices began as the
Asian crisis weakened demand and followed several years of high prices in the mid-1990s, which had
stimulated global production.  The sharp drop in prices has not yet been reversed despite falling
beverage stocks and rising imports.  Currency devaluations in the major exporters:  Brazil (for coffee),Côte d'Ivoire (for cocoa), and Kenya (for tea) contributed to lower U.S. dollar export prices.
6  Weak
currencies in major importers, such as the European Union and the Russian Federation, also weakened
import demand. Beverage prices have historically been among the most volatile commodity prices,
and a supply disruption in a major producer could quickly reverse the recent price declines.  However,
barring such an event, prices are expected to be slow to recover because of new capacity added bymajor exporters.  The index of nominal beverage prices is expected to rise 2.9 per cent in 2001, and
9.7 per cent in 2002. Real prices are expected to increase about 20 per cent from 2000 to 2005 and
then decline as productivity increases allow supplies to meet demand with falling real prices.
                                                     
6 For example, the Brazilian Real depreciated 68 per cent from 1997 to 1999, the CFA Franc
depreciated 9 per cent and the Kenyan Shilling depreciated 16 per cent. (IFS, August 2000)G/AG/GEN/46
Page 21
Cocoa prices reached a three-decade low in February 2000, as production increased 6 per cent
in the 1999 season compared to a decade-long growth rate of 1.4 per cent.  Cocoa consumption rose inresponse to lower prices and increased global ec onomic growth, but not enough to keep stocks from
rising 12 per cent.  Prices are expected to begin to recover in 2001 as demand increases in major
markets accompanying projected strong economic growth.  By 2002, nominal cocoa prices are
projected to rise 22 per cent from 2000 levels.  The longer term outlook is for real prices to rebound
from current severely depressed lows.  By 2005, real prices are projected to rise 43 per cent from thelows of 2000 and then remain about unchanged at that level, but this would still leave real prices at
one-third of the 1980 level.  One of the factors that should keep prices from returning to previous
highs is the 20 per cent increase in world cocoa planted areas during the 1990s as low-cost producers
such as Côte d'Ivoire, Ghana, and Indonesia expanded production capacity.
Coffee prices declined sharply during 1999 and 2000, with arabica prices down 37 per cent
and robusta prices down 48 per cent.  Overproduction, the Brazilian currency devaluation in January1999, and weak demand in Europe and the United States all contributed to the price declines.
Vietnam emerged as the largest robusta producer and exporter, and became the second-largest overall
coffee exporter, following Brazil.  This contributed to the greater decline in robusta prices compared
to arabica prices but also contributed to overall weakness in all coffee prices.  In response to low
prices, Brazil and Colombia, the two largest arabica producers and dominant members of theAssociation of Coffee Producing Countries (ACPC), agreed to an export retention scheme to withhold
4.5 million bags of production from export during 2000 and 2001.  This could support arabica prices
and would be more effective if other ACPC coun tries joined the scheme.  However, this will not
change the longer-term issues of weak demand growth, excess production capacity, and large stocks,
which has been with the industry for many years.  Barring a weather-related supply disruption, pricesare expected to be slow to recover, with arabica prices increasing only 11.7 per cent by 2002 and
robusta prices increasing 16.2 per cent. Real prices are projected to rise over the next 10 years (from
current extremely depressed levels), with arabica prices up 10 per cent by 2010 compared to 2000,
and robusta prices up 54 per cent.
Tea prices have remained the strongest of the three major beverages, with a 10 per cent
decline in 1999 compared to 1998 and a 2.8 per cent increase in 2000.  The strength was largely due
to poor weather–related growing conditions in India and Kenya, which reduced exports, and the
recovery of demand in countries that benefited from increased crude oil prices.  Many of the major oil
exporters of the Middle East as well as the Russian Federation are also major tea buyers.  The returnFigure 2.  Beverage Price Index
0100200300400500600
1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
Real
NominalG/AG/GEN/46
Page 22
of Iraq as a tea importer, following the lifting of U.N. sanctions on food imports, contributed to the
overall price strength. However, supplies are now increasing in major exporters, and nominal prices
are not projected to increase significantly over the next several years.  Tea yields in Sri Lanka, a
major exporter, increased 48 per cent from 1990–92 to 1996–98 in response to tea estate privatization
in the early 1990s, which led to increased investment and improved management of the tea estates.Nominal prices are expected to rise about 11 per cent by 2010 relative to 2000, while real tea prices
are expected to fall about 14 per cent.  There is some prospect that rapid consumption growth in major
producing countries, such as India and China, could offset weak demand in industrial countries and
provide a firmer price outlook.
Agricultural Raw Materials
The index of nominal agricultural raw materials prices rose by 35 per cent during the first half
of the 1990s as the global economy boomed and then fell sharply by 35 per cent in response to the
Asian crisis.  Prices are now set to recover from the lows of 1998 and have increased about 5 per cent
during 1999 and 2000 (Figure 3).  We project a further increase of 4.2 per cent in 2001 and 5 per cent
in 2002.  By 2010, real prices are projected to increase 22 per cent relative to the 1998 lows, whichwould still leave the index well below the cyclical highs of the mid-1990s.  However, raw materials
prices are responsive to global economic conditions and would likely rise further if the global
recovery exceeds current forecasts.
Cotton prices have remained around 150 cents per kilogram (nominal) for the past two
decades, and there is no reason to think this will change soon.  Prices rose 66 per cent from 1993 to1995, from 128 to 213 cents per kilogram, and then fell back to 117 cents per kilogram in 1999.
Global consumption rose sharply during the 1980s as  clothing fashions favored cotton.  However
those trends have changed and global consumption stagnated during the 1990s.  Global production has
been very erratic in response to wide swings in prices and policy changes in major producers such as
China and the United States.  Consequently, cotton prices have been volatile, but without a cleartrend, since about 1980.  Prices have begun to recover from the recent lows, with nominal prices up
about 9.2 per cent in 2000 and projected to rise about 6.9 per cent in 2001.  By 2005, nominal prices
are projected to rise to 159 cents per kilogram, and by 2010, prices are expected to reach 181 cents per
kilogram.  In real terms, prices are forecast to rise 22.8 per cent relative to the 1999 lows by 2010.Figure 3.  Agricultural Raw Materials Price Index
050100150200250
1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
Real
NominalG/AG/GEN/46
Page 23
Rubber prices were severely depressed in 1999 because Indonesia, Malaysia, and Thailand
(which account for 70 per cent of rubber exports) devalued their currencies as a result of the Asian
crisis.  The price of rubber in U.S. dollars tumbled to a 24-year low in 1999—down 60 per cent from
the 1995 high.  Prices have stopped falling, but the recovery has been modest as record production,
weak demand, and high stocks have kept prices near the low reached in 1999.  The InternationalNatural Rubber Organization, which was the last U.N.-backed commodity price stabilization body,
was formally dissolved in October 1999 after the withdrawal of key members in the wake of the
rubber price collapse and currency devaluations.  Buffer stocks held by the organization (amounting
to 2.5 per cent of annual trade) are yet to be liquidated, but they will eventually find their way into the
market.  Prices are expected to recover slowly and are unlikely to reach the highs seen in the mid-
1990s.  Our near-term forecast is for nominal prices to rise about 6 per cent per year in both 2001 and
2002, following the 12 per cent increase in 2000.  Real prices are projected to rise 9.4 per cent from2000 by 2010.
Asian tropical timber has been one of the few commodities that has seen rising real prices
over the past two decades.  However, prices fell following the Asian crisis as demand weakened
dramatically.  Prices of Malaysian logs have since risen 24 per cent from the 1998 lows, and therecovery in Asian economies will likely support further price increases.  Malaysian log prices are
expected to increase 17.5 per cent, in real terms, from 2000 to 2010.  African tropical timber is mostly
imported into Europe, and prices did not decline as sharply as Asian timber following the Asian crisis.
The improving growth prospects in Europe suggest prices of African timber could rise over the next
several years as tropical timber becomes scarcer, environmental regulations becomes tighter, anddemand continues to increase.  However, real price increases will also be moderated by improved
production techniques that allow better use of timber.  Real prices of Cameroon log are projected to
increase 8.9 per cent from 2000 to 2010.
Fertilizer
Fertilizer prices, like the prices of many other commodities, have followed very divergent
paths over the past several years.  Nitrogen fertilizer prices declined from more than $200 a ton to
near $60 a ton (for bulk urea), while phosphate fertilizer prices declined only 20 per cent (for triple
super phosphate (TSP)), and potash fertilizer (MOP) prices continued to rise.  The differences in price
behavior was due to the different impact that the economic collapse of the former Soviet Union (FSU)
had on fertilizer markets, the different industry market structures, and different export firm behavior.The FSU was both a major producer and a major consumer of fertilizer prior to 1990.  When these
countries faced severe economic crisis in the 1990s, domestic fertilizer consumption declined along
with grain demand, and firms directed their fertilizer production to the export market.  This led to
aggressive price-cutting and competition for market share in the nitrogen fertilizer market, especially
by the Russian Federation and Ukraine.  The competition was less intense in the phosphate and potashmarkets because the FSU countries had smaller market shares and because other major phosphate and
potash producers responded to increased exports from the FSU by cutting production rather than by
lowering prices and competing for market share.  Other factors also contributed to the different price
behavior, including the decision by China (the major nitrogen fertilizer importer) to ban nitrogen
imports in 1997.
Nitrogen fertilizer prices have increased nearly 45 per cent in 2000 compared to 1999 as
major producers in Europe and the U.S. cut production.  However, the price recovery is expected to
slow as the industry faces large excess capacity and continued aggressive export competition.  Weak
grain prices contribute to weak demand and further delay a significant price recovery, since more than50 per cent of nitrogen fertilizer is used for grain production.  Real urea prices are projected to rise 54
per cent by 2010 compared to 1999 lows, but still remain 30 per cent below the highs of 1996.
Phosphate prices fell less, and will likely reach new highs sooner, than nitrogen fertilizer
prices.  The industry is faced with surplus capacity, but demand has been strong, as many developingG/AG/GEN/46
Page 24
countries have increased imports of phosphate in order to improve the balance of fertilizer
applications.  After falling 19 per cent from 1998 to 2000, TSP prices are projected to increase 7 per
cent in 2001.  Nominal prices are expected to increase an additional 7 per cent by 2005 as
improvements in world grain prices boost fertilizer demand.  By 2010, real prices are expected to
decrease as new capacity comes onstream, causing real prices to fall 5 per cent from 2000 levels.
Potash prices have increased about 5 per cent since 1998, while most other commodity prices
fell.  This was possible because of strong import demand from developing countries and the
willingness of major producers to close production capacity rather than see prices fall.  These industry
trends are expected to continue and should lead to gradually increasing muriate of potash (MOP)
prices.  At some point, enough new capacity may be developed to threaten this price stability, but this
probably will not occur for several more years.  Nominal MOP prices are projected to increase about1 per cent per year until 2005 and then remain about unchanged for the balance of the decade.  In real
terms, prices will decline, as nominal price increases will not be large enough to offset overall
inflation.  By 2010, real MOP prices are projected to fall about 19 per cent from the 2000 level.G/AG/GEN/46
Page 25
Table A1:  Commodity Prices and Price Projections in Current Dollars
Actual Projections
Commodity Unit 1970 1980 1990 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2005 2010
Energy
Coal, US $/mt n.a. 43.10 41.67 34.38 33.17 33.00 33.00 33.50 35.00 37.50
Crude oil, avg, spo t $/bbl 1.21 36.87 22.88 13.07 18.07 28.00 25.00 21.00 18.00 19.00
Natural gas, Europe $/mmbtun . a . 3.40 2.55 2.42 2.13 3.80 3.75 3.20 2.75 2.75
Natural gas, US $/mmbtu 0.17 1.55 1.70 2.09 2.27 4.00 4.00 3.50 2.75 3.00
Non-Energy Commo dities
Agriculture
Beverages
Cocoa c /kg 67.5 260.4 126.7 167.6 113.5 90.0 95.0 110.0 150.0 170.0
Coffee, o ther mildsc /kg 114.7 346.6 197.2 298.1 229.1 187.4 191.8 209.4 253.5 265.0
Coffee, ro bustac /kg 91.4 324.3 118.2 182.3 148.9 94.8 97.0 110.2 149.9 187.4
Tea, auc tions (3) average c /kg 83.5 165.9 205.8 204.6 183.9 189.0 192.0 192.0 195.0 210.0
Food
Fats and oils
Coconu t oil $/mt 397.2 673.8 336.5 657.9 737.1 444.0 500.0 540.0 620.0 650.0
Copra $/mt 224.8 452.7 230.7 411.1 461.5 310.0 425.0 435.0 460.0 483.0
Groundnut oil $/mt 378.6 858.8 963.7 909.4 787.7 700.0 740.0 775.0 820.0 850.0
Palm oil $/mt 260.1 583.7 289.8 671.1 436.0 322.0 340.0 360.0 400.0 450.0
Soybean mea l $/mt 102.6 262.4 200.2 170.3 152.2 185.0 195.0 200.0 215.0 226.0
Soybean o il $/mt 286.3 597.6 447.3 625.9 427.3 340.0 360.0 380.0 430.0 460.0
Soybeans $/mt 116.9 296.2 246.8 243.3 201.67 210.0 220.0 230.0 250.0 270.0
Grains
Maize $/mt 58.4 125.3 109.3 102.0 90.2 86.0 95.0 110.0 125.0 130.0
Rice, Thai, 5% $/mt 126.3 410.7 270.9 304.2 248.4 202.0 215.0 235.0 275.0 300.0
Sorghum $/mt 51.8 128.9 103.9 98.0 84.4 85.0 88.0 100.0 120.0 125.0
Wheat, US, HRW $/mt 54.9 172.7 135.5 126.1 112.0 112.0 120.0 130.0 160.0 170.0
Other food
Bananas, US, new ser ies$/mt 166.1 377.3 540.9 489.5 373.8 430.5 465.2 490.5 529.1 567.7
Beef, US c/kg 130.4 276.0 256.3 172.6 184.3 194.0 198.4 202.8 209.4 225.0
Oranges $/mt 168.0 400.2 531.1 442.4 438.2 365.0 400.0 500.0 565.0 600.0
Shrimp, Mexican c /kgn . a . 1,152 1,069 1,579 1,461 1,503 1,515 1,530 1,550 1,590
Sugar, wor ld c/kg 8.2 63.16 27.67 19.67 13.81 17.60 18.10 18.10 20.00 24.00
Agricultural raw ma terials
Timber
Logs, Cameroon $/cum 43.0 251.7 343.5 286.4 269.3 275.0 285.0 300.0 330.0 385.0
Logs, Malaysia $/cum 43.1 195.5 177.2 162.4 187.1 192.0 198.0 210.0 245.0 290.0
Sawnwoo d, Malaysia $/cum 175.0 396.0 533.0 484.2 600.8 600.0 620.0 655.0 750.0 900.0
Other raw ma terials
Cotton c /kg 67.6 206.2 181.9 144.5 117.1 127.9 136.7 141.1 158.7 180.8
Rubber, RSS1 , Malaysiac/kg 40.7 142.5 86.5 72.2 62.9 70.6 75.0 79.4 88.2 99.2
Tobacco $/mt 1,076 2,276 3,392 3,336 3,041 2,985 3,000 3,100 3,250 3,300
Fertilizers
DAP $/mt 54.0 222.2 171.4 203.4 177.8 155.0 165.0 175.0 195.0 205.0
Phosphate roc k $/mt 11.00 46.71 40.50 43.00 44.00 44.00 44.00 44.00 44.00 46.00
Potasium c hloride $/mt 32.0 115.7 98.1 116.9 121.6 122.5 124.0 124.0 125.0 127.0
TSP $/mt 43.0 180.3 131.8 173.1 154.5 140.0 150.0 155.0 160.0 170.0
Urea, E. Europe, bagge d $/mt 48.0 222.1 130.7 103.1 77.8 112.0 120.0 130.0 140.0 150.0
Metals and minera ls
Aluminum $/mt 556 1,456 1,639 1,357 1,361 1,575 1,600 1,650 1,800 1,900
Copper $/mt 1,416 2,182 2,661 1,654 1,573 1,825 1,975 2,050 2,200 2,400
Gold $/toz 36.0 607.9 383.5 294.2 278.8 280.0 280.0 275.0 275.0 300.0
Iron ore, Carajas c /dmtu 9.84 28.09 32.50 31.00 27.59 29.00 29.50 30.25 32.00 33.00
Lead c/kg 30.3 90.6 81.1 52.9 50.3 46.0 50.0 55.0 60.0 64.0
Nickel $/mt 2,846 6,519 8,864 4,630 6,011 8,600 7,500 7,000 6,000 6,800
Silver c /toz 177.0 2,064 482.0 553.4 525.0 505.0 500.0 510.0 525.0 550.0
Tinc /kg 367.3 1,677 608.5 554.0 540.4 545.0 550.0 560.0 590.0 610.0
Zinc c /kg 29.6 76.1 151.4 102.5 107.6 114.0 116.0 117.0 120.0 125.0
n.a. = Not available.
Note: Projections as of October 24, 2000Source:  World Bank, Development Economics , Development Prospects Group.G/AG/GEN/46
Page 26
Table A2:  Commodity Prices and Price Projections in Constant 1990 Dollars
Actual Projections
Commodity Unit 1970 1980 1990 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2005 2010
Energy
Coal, US $/mt n.a. 59.86 41.67 32.40 32.10 32.70 31.57 30.94 29.86 28.90
Crude oil, avg, spo t $/bbl 4.82 51.21 22.88 12.31 17.49 27.74 23.91 19.40 15.36 14.64
Natural gas, Europe $/mmbtun . a . 4.72 2.55 2.28 2.06 3.76 3.59 2.96 2.35 2.12
Natural gas, US $/mmbtu 0.68 2.15 1.70 1.97 2.19 3.96 3.83 3.23 2.35 2.31
Non-Energy Commo dities
Agriculture
Beverages
Cocoa c /kg 268.9 361.6 126.7 157.9 109.9 89.2 90.9 101.6 128.0 131.0
Coffee, o ther mildsc /kg 456.8 481.4 197.2 280.9 221.7 185.7 183.5 193.4 216.3 204.2
Coffee, ro bustac /kg 364.0 450.5 118.2 171.7 144.1 93.9 92.8 101.8 127.9 144.4
Tea, auc tions (3) average c /kg 332.7 230.5 205.8 192.8 178.0 187.3 183.7 177.3 166.4 161.8
Food
Fats and oils
Coconu t oil $/mt 1582 .4 935.9 336.5 619.9 713.5 439.9 478.3 498.8 529.0 500.9
Copra $/mt 895.8 628.8 230.7 387.3 446.7 307.1 406.5 401.8 392.5 372.2
Groundnut oil $/mt 1508 .2 1192 .7 963.7 856.8 762.4 693.6 707.9 715.8 699.7 655.0
Palm oil $/mt 1036 .0 810.7 289.8 632.3 422.0 319.0 325.2 332.5 341.3 346.8
Soybean mea l $/mt 408.7 364.5 200.2 160.5 147.3 183.3 186.5 184.7 183.5 174.2
Soybean o il $/mt 1140 .8 830.0 447.3 589.7 413.6 336.9 344.4 351.0 366.9 354.5
Soybeans $/mt 465.8 411.4 246.8 229.2 195.2 208.1 210.5 212.4 213.3 208.1
Grains
Maize $/mt 232.7 174.0 109.3 96.1 87.3 85.2 90.9 101.6 106.7 100.2
Rice, Thai, 5% $/mt 503.2 570.5 270.9 286.6 240.5 200.1 205.7 217.1 234.6 231.2
Sorghum $/mt 206.4 179.0 103.9 92.4 81.7 84.2 84.2 92.4 102.4 96.3
Wheat, US, HRW $/mt 218.7 239.9 135.5 118.8 108.5 111.0 114.8 120.1 136.5 131.0
Other food
Bananas $/mt 661.7 524.0 540.9 461.2 361.9 426.5 445.0 453.1 451.5 437.5
Beef, US c/kg 519.6 383.3 256.3 162.6 178.4 192.2 189.8 187.3 178.7 173.4
Oranges $/mt 669.5 555.8 531.1 416.8 424.2 361.6 382.6 461.8 482.1 462.4
Shrimp, Mexican c /kg. . 1,600 1,069 1,488 1,414 1,489 1,449 1,413 1,323 1,225
Sugar, wor ld c/kg 32.8 87.7 27.7 18.5 13.4 17.4 17.3 16.7 17.1 18.5
Agricultural raw ma terials
Timber
Logs, Cameroon $/cum 171.3 349.6 343.5 269.8 260.7 272.5 272.6 277.1 281.6 296.7
Logs, Malaysia $/cum 171.8 271.6 177.2 153.0 181.1 190.2 189.4 194.0 209.0 223.5
Sawnwoo d, Malaysia $/cum 697.2 550.0 533.0 456.1 581.6 594.5 593.1 605.0 639.9 693.5
Other raw ma terials
Cotton c /kg 269.4 286.4 181.9 136.1 113.4 126.7 130.8 130.3 135.4 139.3
Rubber, RSS1 , Malaysiac/kg 162.2 197.9 86.5 68.0 60.8 69.9 71.7 73.3 75.2 76.5
Tobacco $/mt 4,287 3,161 3,392 3,143 2,944 2,958 2,870 2,863 2,773 2,543
Fertilizers
DAP $/mt 215.1 308.6 171.4 191.7 172.1 153.6 157.8 161.6 166.4 158.0
Phosphate roc k $/mt 43.8 64.9 40.5 40.5 42.6 43.6 42.1 40.6 37.5 35.5
Potasium c hloride $/mt 127.5 160.7 98.1 110.1 117.8 121.4 118.6 114.5 106.7 97.9
TSP $/mt 171.3 250.4 131.8 163.0 149.5 138.7 143.5 143.2 136.5 131.0
Urea, E. Europe, bagge d $/mt 191.2 308.5 130.7 97.1 75.3 111.0 114.8 120.1 119.5 115.6
Metals and minera ls
Aluminum $/mt 2,215 2,022 1,639 1,279 1,317 1,560 1,531 1,524 1,536 1,464
Copper $/mt 5,640 3,031 2,661 1,558 1,522 1,808 1,889 1,893 1,877 1,849
Gold $/toz 143.2 844.3 383.5 277.1 269.8 277.4 267.8 254.0 234.6 231.2
Iron ore c /dmtu 39.2 39.0 32.5 29.2 26.7 28.7 28.2 27.9 27.3 25.4
Lead c/kg 120.7 125.8 81.1 49.8 48.7 45.6 47.8 50.8 51.2 49.3
Nickel $/mt 11,339 9,054 8,864 4,362 5,819 8,521 7,174 6,465 5,119 5,240
Silver c /toz 705.2 2866 .1 482.0 521.4 508.1 500.4 478.3 471.0 448.0 423.8
Tinc /kg 1463 .5 2329 .8 608.5 522.0 523.1 540.0 526.1 517.2 503.4 470.1
Zinc c /kg 117.9 105.7 151.4 96.5 104.2 113.0 111.0 108.1 102.4 96.3
n.a. = Not available.
Note: Projections as of October 24, 2000
Source:  World Bank, Development Economics , Development Prospects Group.G/AG/GEN/46
Page 27
Table A3. Weighted Indices of Commodity Prices and Inflation
Actual Projections a/
Index 1970 1980 1990 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2005 2010
Current dollars
Petroleum 5.3 161.2 100.0 57.1 79.0 122.4 109.3 91.8 78.7 83.0
Non-energy commo dities b/ 43.8 125.5 100.0 99.1 88.0 87.6 90.8 95.4 106.5 116.0
Agriculture 45.8 138.1 100.0 107.8 92.8 88.4 92.1 97.9 111.7 122.7
Beverages 56.9 181.4 100.0 140.6 107.7 87.4 89.9 98.6 121.7 132.9
Food 46.7 139.3 100.0 104.9 87.6 86.3 90.7 95.4 104.9 111.1
Fats and oils 64.4 148.7 100.0 132.8 105.0 96.0 101.8 106.4 116.8 125.7Grains 46.7 134.3 100.0 101.3 86.4 78.3 84.1 93.2 110.1 117.4Other food 32.2 134.3 100.0 84.1 74.0 82.8 85.2 87.6 92.3 95.6
Raw ma terials 36.4 104.6 100.0 87.3 88.5 91.8 95.7 100.5 113.0 130.3
Timber 31.8 79.0 100.0 90.9 111.8 112.0 115.7 122.3 140.4 168.2
Other Raw Materials 39.6 122.0 100.0 84.8 72.7 78.1 82.1 85.6 94.3 104.4
Fertilizers 30.4 128.9 100.0 122.1 114.1 107.1 111.9 114.3 116.7 123.3
Metals and minerals 40.4 94.2 100.0 75.5 73.7 83.8 85.6 87.6 92.7 98.6
Constant 1990 dollars c/
Petroleum 21.1 223.8 100.0 53.8 76.5 121.3 104.5 84.8 67.1 64.0
Non-energy commo dities 174.7 174.3 100.0 93.4 85.2 86.8 86.9 88.1 90.8 89.4
Agriculture 182.4 191.8 100.0 101.6 89.8 87.6 88.1 90.4 95.3 94.6
Beverages 226.6 252.0 100.0 132.4 104.2 86.6 86.0 91.1 103.9 102.4
Food 186.0 193.4 100.0 98.9 84.8 85.5 86.7 88.1 89.5 85.6
Fats and oils 256.4 206.5 100.0 125.2 101.7 95.1 97.4 98.3 99.6 96.9
Grains 186.1 186.5 100.0 95.4 83.6 77.5 80.4 86.1 93.9 90.5Other food 128.4 186.6 100.0 79.3 71.6 82.0 81.5 80.9 78.7 73.6
Raw ma terials 145.1 145.2 100.0 82.3 85.7 91.0 91.6 92.8 96.4 100.4
Timber 126.6 109.7 100.0 85.7 108.2 111.0 110.7 113.0 119.8 129.6Other Raw Materials 157.7 169.4 100.0 79.9 70.3 77.3 78.5 79.0 80.5 80.5
Fertilizers 121.1 179.0 100.0 115.0 110.4 106.1 107.0 105.6 99.6 95.0
Metals and minerals 160.8 130.8 100.0 71.1 71.3 83.0 81.9 80.9 79.1 76.0
Inflation indices, 1990=100 d/
MUV index e/ 25.10 72.00 100.00 106.14 103.31 100.93 104.54 108.27 117.20 129.77
% change per annum 11.11 3.34 0.75 -2.67 -2.30 3.58 3.57 2.68 2.06
US GDP deflator 33.59 65.93 100.00 119.32 121.11 123.89 126.87 129.91 138.54 152.96
% change per annum 6.98 4.25 2.23 1.50 2.30 2.40 2.40 2.17 2.00
a/   Commodity price projections as of October 24, 2000
b/   The World Bank primary commodity price indices are computed based on 1987-89 export values in US dollars for low- and
      middle-income economies, rebased to 1990.  Weights for the sub-group indices expressed as ratios to the non-energy index       are as follows in percent:  agriculture 69.1, fertilizers 2.7, metals and minerals 28.2; beverages 16.9, food 29.4, raw m aterials 22.8;
      fats and oils 10.1, grains 6.9, other food 12.4; timber 9.3 and other raw mterials 13.6.
c/   Computed from unrounded data and deflated by the MUV index
d/   Inflation indices for 2000-2010 are projections as of October 20, 2000.  MUV for 1999 is an estimate.  Growth rates for ye ars 1980, 
      1990, 1998, 2005 and 2010 refer to compound annual rate of change between adjacent end-point years; all others are annual  growth
      rates from the previous year.
e/   Unit value index in US dollar terms of manufactures exported from the G-5 countries (France, Germany, Japan, UK, and US) w eighted
      proportionally to the countries' exports to the developing countries
Source: World Bank, Development Prospects Group. Historical US GDP deflator: US Department of Commerce.
October 24, 2000G/AG/GEN/46
Page 28
Table A6. Weighted Indices of Commodity Prices and Inflation
Actual Projections a/
Index 1970 1980 1990 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2005 2010
Current dollars
Petroleum 5.3 161.2 100.0 57.1 79.0 113.6 100.5 91.8 78.7 83.0
Non-energy commo dities b/ 43.8 125.5 100.0 99.1 88.0 89.9 92.9 97.2 107.2 116.4
Agriculture 45.8 138.1 100.0 107.8 92.8 91.7 95.3 100.6 112.7 123.3
Beverages 56.9 181.4 100.0 140.6 107.7 98.2 99.6 108.4 123.1 132.9
Food 46.7 139.3 100.0 104.9 87.6 86.2 90.7 95.4 106.0 112.5
Fats and oils 64.4 148.7 100.0 132.8 105.0 96.6 102.1 107.7 118.7 126.5Grains 46.7 134.3 100.0 101.3 86.4 81.2 89.2 96.4 114.0 122.1
Other food 32.2 134.3 100.0 84.1 74.0 80.6 82.3 84.7 91.1 95.6
Raw ma terials 36.4 104.6 100.0 87.3 88.5 94.0 98.0 101.6 113.6 130.3
Timber 31.8 79.0 100.0 90.9 111.8 117.9 122.7 126.7 141.9 168.2
Other Raw Materials 39.6 122.0 100.0 84.8 72.7 77.7 81.1 84.5 94.3 104.4
Fertilizers 30.4 128.9 100.0 122.1 114.1 107.1 111.9 114.3 116.7 123.3
Metals and minerals 40.4 94.2 100.0 75.5 73.7 83.9 85.2 87.1 92.7 98.6
Constant 1990 dollars c/
Petroleum 21.1 223.8 100.0 54.8 76.3 107.1 92.4 82.2 65.8 61.5
Non-energy commo dities 174.7 174.3 100.0 95.1 85.0 84.7 85.4 87.0 89.7 86.1
Agriculture 182.4 191.8 100.0 103.5 89.6 86.4 87.6 90.1 94.3 91.3
Beverages 226.7 252.0 100.0 134.9 104.0 92.6 91.5 97.1 103.0 98.4
Food 186.0 193.4 100.0 100.7 84.6 81.3 83.4 85.4 88.7 83.2
Fats and oils 256.4 206.5 100.0 127.5 101.4 91.0 93.8 96.4 99.3 93.6Grains 186.1 186.5 100.0 97.2 83.4 76.5 82.0 86.3 95.4 90.4
Other food 128.4 186.6 100.0 80.8 71.4 75.9 75.7 75.9 76.2 70.7
Raw ma terials 145.1 145.2 100.0 83.8 85.5 88.6 90.1 91.0 95.1 96.4
Timber 126.6 109.7 100.0 87.3 107.9 111.1 112.7 113.5 118.8 124.5
Other Raw Materials 157.7 169.5 100.0 81.4 70.2 73.2 74.6 75.7 78.9 77.3
Fertilizers 121.1 179.0 100.0 117.2 110.1 100.9 102.9 102.4 97.7 91.3
Metals and minerals 160.8 130.8 100.0 72.4 71.2 79.0 78.3 78.0 77.5 73.0
Inflation indices, 1990=100 d/
MUV index e/ 25.08 71.98 100.00 104.19 103.56 106.15 108.80 111.63 119.51 135.09
% change per annum 11.12 3.34 0.51 -0.60 2.50 2.50 2.60 2.30 2.48
US GDP deflator 33.59 65.93 100.00 119.19 120.92 122.74 124.95 127.44 135.78 150.50
% change per annum 6.98 4.25 2.22 1.45 1.50 1.80 2.00 2.13 2.08
a/   Commodity price projections as of July 20, 2000
b/   The World Bank primary commodity price indices are co mputed based on 1987-89 export values in US dollars for low- and
      middle-income economies, rebased to 1990.  Weights for the sub-group indices expressed as  ratios to the non-energy index 
      are as follows in percent:  agriculture 69.1, fertili zers 2.7, metals and minerals 28.2;  beverages 16.9, food 29.4, raw m aterials 22.8;
      fats and oils 10.1, grains 6.9, other food 12.4; timber 9.3 and other raw mterials 13.6.
c/   Computed from unrounded data and deflated by the MUV index
d/   Inflation indices for 2000-2010 are projections as of Marc h 3, 2000.  MUV for 1998 is a preliminary estimate and 1999 a pr ojection.
      Growth rates for years 1980, 1990, 1998, 2005 and 2010 refer to compound annual rate of change between adjacent end-point
      years; all others are annual gr owth rates from the previous year.
e/   Unit value index in US dollar terms of manufactures expor ted from the G-5 countries (France, Germany, Japan, UK, and US) w eighted
      proportionally to the countri es' exports to the developing countries
Source: World Bank, Development Prospects Group. Histor ical US GDP deflator: US Department of Commerce.
July 20, 2000G/AG/GEN/46
Page 29
ANNEX 2
Agriculture and the New Trade Agenda in the WTO Negotiations:
A Capacity Building Project on Agricultural Trade Strategy and Policy7
Progress Report for the period October 1999 – September 2000
Project Objectives
The project was launched in May 1999. It has the following objectives:  First,  This project
aims to advance the process and implementation of international trade and agricultural policy reforms
affecting agriculture in developing countries and strengthen the capacity of these countries toparticipate in the next WTO round of multilateral trade negotiations.  It seeks to achieve these
objectives through an integrated programme of research, policy analyses/advice, and capacity building
in developing countries;  Second , to support developing countries in evaluating their interests and
policy options in the WTO negotiations in agriculture;  Third,  to evaluate approaches, strategies, and
multilateral rules to achieve an enabling policy and institutional framework for trade anddevelopment;  Fourth,  to provide country specific technical assistance, on trade and international
agricultural policy in the context of WTO rules and development objectives.
Completed Outputs of the Project  (May 1999 – to date)
Phase 1:  (May 99-Oct 99) Completed Identification of  Issues and Preparatory Background
analyses:  Several thematic issues papers under the built-in agenda in the URAA were completed in
phase 1 of the project (May 99-October 99).  An overview and synthesis of major recommendations
was prepared in November and disseminated to key clients in 120 countries during preparations toSeattle and Post-Seattle activities to launch the negotiations.  The key clients included country trade
negotiators in Geneva, policy makers from Ministries of Agriculture, Ministries of Trade in capitals,
international organizations, and NGOs.  The initial findings of background research explored the
economics of the major policy issues of interests to developing countries on the agenda taken up in
the negotiations.
• August, 1999:  Launched the Project Web-Site  linked to Bank and WTO web-sites for
dissemination and discussion forums. Address is as follows:
http://wbln0018.worldbank.org/trade/decagridoc.nsf
• October 1, 1999:  Completed  initial preparatory background research and analyses
on thematic issues taken up in Seattle.  The initial findings were distributed to over
120 countries.
• October 1, 1999: First drafts of  initial preparatory regional studies : stocktaking of
current Policies; evaluation of implementation of Uruguay Round Commitments andinitial identification of issues, interests and options.  Initial data gathering on
domestic and trade policies in agriculture, which are not available in the WTO
country notifications.  The research were carried out by experts from respective
developing country regions/countries as follows:
                                                     
7 For questions regarding the objectives and structure of the project, please contact the Principal Project
Manager, Dr. Merlinda D. Ingco mingco@worldbank.org;G/AG/GEN/46
Page 30
Preparatory background region-specific issues papers by region.  Issues papers were completed as
follows:
1. Developed countries—by Stefan Tang ermann  (University of Gottingen)
2. South Asia- by Prema Chandra Athukorala (S ri Lankan, Australian National University)
3. Latin America and Caribbean—by Alberto Vald es (World Bank) and Julio Paz Cafferata
(FAO)
4. Eastern and Central Europe—by Natalija Kazluzkeine and William Meyers (FAO
5. East Asia—by Malcolm Bale (World Bank)
6. Africa – by Ademola Oyejide  (African Economics Research Consortium)
Phase 2: Dissemination:  Global Conference and  Regional Workshops in Africa :  The initial
findings from phase 1 were widely disseminated to over 120 countries through the Geneva
delegations.  The papers were also presented in a hi gh-profile Global Policy Conference in Geneva in
October 1999 leading up to the WTO Seattle ministerial meeting.  A number of the initial region
specific analyses  were also presented in a series of regional workshops, dissemination activities in
South Asia and Africa.  A series of recommendations derived from the first phase were publicizedthrough a press release and press conference.  An overview paper was prepared in November
distributed to developing countries before and during the Seattle Ministerial.
Specific outputs during the second phase of the programme include:
• High-level Global Policy Conference, in the lead up to Seattle, October 1-2, 1999, Geneva.
• Regional workshop in Africa and South Asia, in cooperation with WBI/DEC, IPC,
(October-Dec. 1999)
• Preparation of an overview research report and synthesis of main research findings and
specific recommendations on the interests of developing countries on various issues;
• Dissemination of initial findings in preparati on for Seattle and during Seattle Ministerial
• Initial Reviews of papers from phase 1 and Geneva conference papers
• Knowledge dissemination through a High-Profile Global conference, regional workshop in
South Asia, and Africa, and training for Bank operational staff and Policy makers indeveloping countries
• October 1-2, 1999, The 1999 Global Conference  on "Agriculture and New Trade Agenda
from A Development Perspective: Intere sts and Options in a New Millenium Round" ,
held at WTO, October 1-2, 1999.  Thirty papers with initial analyses of key issues
were presented. Attended by over 300 participants including senior policy makers,
trade negotiators, from developed and developing countries; Very positive feedback
received from WTO Directors and Secretariat, WTO Committee on Agriculture andWTO delegations and policy makers from capitals (Ministries of Agriculture) from
developed and developing countries.  (See Annex 1 for conference programme)
• October 1, 1999: Joint World Bank-WTO Press Conference  (Alex McCalla World
Bank, and Richard Eglin, WTO Director on Trade and Finance; held at the WTO
• October 14-15, 1999: Conference "Africa's Future Role in World Agricultural Trade"
Elephant Hills, Victoria Falls, Zimbabwe , African analysts sponsored by the project
arried out initial country case analyses and presented  their initial findings;  the
meeting brought together over 75 African policy makers and international experts.
• December 20-21, 1999:  South Asia Regional Workshop on "South Asia and the
WTO" ,  Delhi, India .  South Asian developing country analysts  presented theirG/AG/GEN/46
Page 31
initial findings on country specific analyses at the workshop to South Asian policy
makers and policy practitioners, Country Specific Papers Financed by the Agriculture
Project and Contributed to the Dissemination Activities of  the WTO 2000 Projects in
South Asia, December 20-21, 1999, India (see Annex 2).
• January 00-May, 00 :  Several Presentations in WTO Meetings of the Committee on
Agriculture; Consultation Meetings in FAO, UNCTAD;  Completed Reviews,updates  and revisions of phase 1 papers for a series of  publications in 2000-2001.
• Bangladesh,  May 16, 2000 . Dissemination of Bangladesh country paper on "Agriculture
and WTO 2000 Negotiations: Economic Analysis of Interests and Options for
Bangladesh" , In  cooperation with the Bangladesh International Institute of Strategic
Studies.
• July 25-27, 2000: Presentation at the Came roon national workshop on the WTO 2000
negotiations.   It involved the Ministry of Industrial and Commercial Development
(MINDIC), especially the inter-ministerial committee on WTO, and the United
Nations Economic Commission for Africa's (UNECA) Central Africa Sub-regional
Development Center.  The AERC, the UNECA and the World Bank jointly funded
the workshop. Discussions were based on research completed in these threeinstitutions.  Focussing on the main purpose of the workshop, this was the first
opportunity to bring such a variety of stakeholders to discuss the WTO issues and
their likely implications for the country. It would be difficult to claim that the
workshop allowed the emergence of a country position for the negotiations, since we
started from a low level of knowledge.  The most important aspect of the workshop isprobably the fact that it created a momentum for the preparation of the country
position.  It was also clear that such a position should have a heavy involvement of a
wide range of stakeholders.  The Minister of Higher education, who presided over the
opening ceremony, explicitly requested for a workshop report that would be given to
the Prime Minister's office and discussed at a forthcoming meeting of the cabinet.  Healso indicated that earlier cabinet discussions led to a request to MINDIC to organize
a workshop on the negotiations.  The government was therefore very appreciative for
the initiative.
• October 2-6, 2000,  Regional Workshop on Capacity Building on Agricultural Trade
for Central and West Africa, Dakar, Senegal .  Background analyses on impact of
implementation of the Uruguay Round for three African countries (Niger, Cameroon
and RCA) were completed.  The workshop was organized in partnerships with the
following:
Le Ministre Fédéral Allemand de la Coopération économique et du
Développement (BMZ);
La Fondation Allemande pour le Développement International et le Centre de
Développement pour l'Alimentation et l'Agriculture (DSE/ZEL) ;
Le Centre Technique de Coopération Agricole et Rurale (CTA) ;
La Conférence des Ministres de l'Agriculture de l'Afrique de l'Ouest et du
Centre (CMA/AOC ).G/AG/GEN/46
Page 32ANNEX 3
World Bank agricultural projects least-developed and net-food importing developing countries, 1999-2000
Agricultural Sector, 1999-2000
Project
NameCountry Sector Name Fiscal
yearIBRD
Amt.
($m)IDA
Amt.
($m)Loan
Amt.
($m)Description
AGRIC
SECTOR
PEPMozambique Agricultural
Credit1999  0  30  30The Agricultural Sector Expenditure Program (PROAGRI) aims at improving public expenditure,securing a sustainable and equitable growth in the rural sector, reducing poverty and improving foodsecurity, while protecting the environment. The program's components are grouped into three
subprograms: 1) the institutional development will focus on an analysis of the structure of the
Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries (MAP), its decision-making, and restructuring. Included is an
assessment of its human resources, in accordance with the civil service reform. Strengthening MPA,at both the central and provincial levels, will im prove its management, monitoring and evaluation,
among other areas. The development of an agriculture information system is included, as well as the
potentiality for MAP to formulate policy analysis and 2) the agricultural support services willinclude agricultural research in farming systems' technologies, increasing farmers participation, aswell as developing partnerships in extension services.
AGR.SRCV
ES&PROD.
ORGSSenegal Research 1999  0  27  27
ICB-
PAMSUUganda Forestry 1999  0  12  12
TN-
WATER
SECTOR
INVESTME
NT
PROJECTTunisia Irrigation &
Drainag2000  103  0  103 The Water Sector Investment Project for Tunisia aims to promote effective integrated water resourcemanagement; and to promote water resources conservation and environmental protection. Projectcomponents include assistance in creating small, tubewell-based, irrigation perimeters; modernizingand rehabilitating existing perimeters; draining in stallations on irrigated perimeters; electrifying
water sources and tubewells for potable water and/or irrigation in order to reduce energy and
maintenance costs; creating water points in the southern arid zone; and working towards flood watermanagement. The project helps drill exploratory we lls and piezometers, protects and rehabilitates
existing ones; develops infrastructure for artificial groundwater recharge from available surface
water; and pilots participatory ma nagement approaches. In addition, the project monitors the quality
and quantity of water resources; and protects the water resource base and soils.
AGRIC.
SVCS. IICote d'Ivoire Agriculture Adj. 1999  0  50  50
SOHAG
RURAL
DEV.Egypt, Arab
RepAgriculture Adj. 1999  0  25  25
P. S.
REHAB. IIIEgypt, Arab
RepIrrigation &
Drainag1999  120  0  120
RURAL
INFRASTR
UCTUREMali Irrigation &
Drainag2000  0  115  115G/AG/GEN/46
Page 33Agricultural Sector, 1999-2000
Project
NameCountry Sector Name Fiscal
yearIBRD
Amt.
($m)IDA
Amt.
($m)Loan
Amt.
($m)Description
INTEG
DEV PROG
FOR IMauritania Irrigation &
Drainag2000  0  38  38The objective of the Integrated Development Pr oject for Irrigated Agriculture (first phase) in
Mauritania, is to lay the foundation for a sustainable development of irrigated agriculture in
technical, financial, environmental, and socioeconomic terms. The project conforms to the Country
Assistance Strategy (CAS) objectives, in support of the government's long-term strategy for therehabilitation, and sustainable development of irrigated agriculture, and, in the construction of basicrural infrastructures in the Senegal River Va lley. To accomplish these objectives, the main
components will: 1) create the policy, legal, and, institutional frameworks to ease the development of
irrigated agriculture; 2) develop basic public and private infrastructures. Research and developmentwill be supported under this component; 3) improve management and organizational skills withinfarmers, as well as farmer associations and 4) strengthen the traditional irrigated agriculture sub-
sector, supporting traditional crop production.
AG.EXT.&
RES.
SUPPORTCameroon Research 1999  0  15  15
EG-
NATIONA
L
DRAINAG
E IIEgypt, Arab
RepIrrigation &
Drainag2000  50  0  50The Second National Drainage Project will increase agricultural productivity through drainage
improvement, thus raising rural incomes based on the diversified, and sustainable productionresulting from appropriate uses of land, and water resources. The components will: 1) provide
surface drainage in the old cultivated lands, as well as in reclaimed lands, including trench-less drain
land; 2) renew, and/or rehabilitate existing surface  drainage systems; 3) remodel open surface drains
in most of the project areas, and provide operation, and maintenance equipment for open and sub-surface drains, materials during the transition peri od, and pumping stations for emergency centers
and 4) support management, and institutional building through technical assistance, and training
provision, to establish pilot schemes for integrating irrigation, and drainage user's associations in twoGovernorates, and in support of the Environmental Management Plan. Farmers outreach, andparticipatory activities will be supported.
RES. &
EXTENSIO
NPeru Research 2000  10  0  10Within the strategic context, the Agricultural Research and Extension Project will strongly supportthe government's efforts for poverty reduction, by improving agricultural technology systems, thusincreasing agricultural productivity, and farmer incomes, and further expanding agricultural
marketing, and processing industries. The project components call for: a) the development of
program and policy coordination to manage technology systems, and coordinating public sectorsupport for agricultural research, and extension, in ad dition to facilitating institutional reforms; b) the
establishment of an agricultural technology fund, to co-finance adaptive research, and extension
projects, based on competitive bases to be selected regionally. Farmers and research/extension
institutions, - private sector par ticipants, government technical in stitutions, or non-governmental
organizations - will co-finance projects to be im plemented at regional, and community levels.G/AG/GEN/46
Page 34Agricultural Sector, 1999-2000
Project
NameCountry Sector Name Fiscal
yearIBRD
Amt.
($m)IDA
Amt.
($m)Loan
Amt.
($m)Description
PILOT
FISHERIES
DEV.Morocco Fisheries &
Aquacult1999  5  0  5The Pilot Fisheries Development Project will support the objectives of the Country AssistanceStrategy (CAS), encouraging private sector development, through the promotion and
competitiveness increase of the fisheries sector. Further objectives call for public sector reform,
which the project will address through decentralization and private sector initiatives. Social and ruraldevelopment strengthening will be reinforced through expansion of small-scale and coastal fisheriesdevelopment. The project components will include strengthening the institutional capacity of the
Ministry of Marine Fisheries (MOMF) to manage and develop the fisheries sector. This component
includes institutional reforms, supporting d ecentralization and organizational restructuring, in
addition to an administrative reorganization. The decentralization process will improve with theinclusion of an integrated management information systems, providing computer equipment and
technical assistance.
PRVT
SECT.&
AG. DEV.Egypt, Arab
RepAgricultural
Credit1999  225  75  300 The Private Sector and Agriculture Development Project seeks to support the Government of Egypt's
continuing policies of encouraging broad-based private-sector-led growth in order to meet the need
for increased employment opportunities and income. Specifically, the PSADP aims to promote rural
economic development, and strengthen financial and institutional viability of the Principal Bank forDevelopment and Agricultural Credit (PBDAC), the main institution providing financial services in
rural Egypt. The project components include financing a line of credit covering all categories ofagricultural and rural investment, including investme nt in such activities as transportation, storage,
and trading of agricultural inputs or products, irrigation investments, small industry and commerce.
Permanent working capital is eligible for funding when included as part of the costs of implementingthe investment sub-project. Institution building, improves the accounting and auditing function.
LAKHDAR
WATERSH
ED MGMorocco Research 1999  4  0  4
AGRICULT
URAL
AND
RURAL
MARKET
DEVELOP
MT.Rwanda Agriculture Adj. 2000  0  5  5The Agricultural and Rural Market Development Project's main objective is to contribute to therevitalization of Rwanda's agricultural and rural economy by successfully identifying policies andinstitutional mechanisms to promote efficient, private-sector based, local agricultural inputdistribution and output marketing systems in order to raise modern farm input use among farmers;
and so thereby, the productivity of labor; and hen ce, the level of incomes in the rural sector. The
project components are promotion of input use and distribution systems, including farmer access toseasonal credit for modern farm inputs; advisory services for the adoption of modern farm inputs;and access to credit, multiplication, and distribution of improved seeds. In addition, support to local
agricultural marketing systems will be provided, comprising of crop conservation, processing, and
marketing technologies; strengthening of rural agricultural marketing poles; and support to privatetrader investment in marketing services.G/AG/GEN/46
Page 35Agricultural Sector, 1999-2000
Project
NameCountry Sector Name Fiscal
yearIBRD
Amt.
($m)IDA
Amt.
($m)Loan
Amt.
($m)Description
North-East
Irrigated
Agriculture
ProjectSri Lanka Irrigation &
Drainag2000  0  27  27The North-East Irrigated Agriculture Project aims to help conflict-affected communities to re-establish at least a subsistence level of production and basic community services, through assistance
with "jump-starting" agricultural and small-scale re construction activities, and to build their capacity
for sustainable social and economic reintegration. The project components include the rehabilitationof irrigation schemes such as refilling breached sections of embankments, raising low spots onembankments, repairing or replacing sluices, fixing leaking and improving inadequate spillways;
repairing scheme access roads, and cleaning and desalting main canals. It will also finance
community capacity building, provide support for social mobilization by nongovernmentalorganizations, repaire rural roads and drinking water facilities, fund small-scale micro-enterprisecredit schemes, and provide technical assistance. Financing will also be provided for feasibility
studies.
Agricultural
Serv.
Innovation
& ReformBangladesh Agricultural
Extens.2000  0  5  5The Agricultural Services Innovation and Reform Project will support the Government of
Bangladesh in accelerating agricultural growth and rural development, and, improve people's
livelihood in poor rural areas. Specifically, dissemination of agricultural technology will be
improved, and the diversification for higher value commodities will be promoted, with good externalmarket prospects, including the use of Non Governmental Organizations (NGOs), and contractmodels. The components will include: 1) Strengthening institutional capacity, providing support tothe Horticultural Export Development Foundation (HORTEX) to pioneer horticultural production
and export activities. The component will provide support to farmers, and private sector
development will further increase HORTEX clients in this field and 2) The implementation capacityof the New Agricultural Extension Policy (NAEP) will be strengthened, through partnershipagreements, and grants, with the Department of  Agricultural Extension (DAE), and from NGOs.
Agro-
pastoral
Export
Promotion
ProjectNiger Agro-
Indus.&Market.2000  0  10  10The Agro-Pastoral Export Promotion Project for Niger aims to make producers and exporters
efficient in supplying the agro-pastoral export market, reacting to market changes, and seizingopportunities. The project components include suppor t of a cluster of activities that promote trade
and information services including product and market identification and development, trade
information services, specialized support servi ces on procedures, product quality and packaging,
applied research, promotional activities abroad, and a project website. In addition it will provideinstitutional support to producer and exporter or ganizations which will include legal advice, and
assistance for internal organization and financial and administrative management. Support will be
provided through project specialis ts, consultants, seminars, and other training fora. It will also
encourage the formation of savings and credit services.
AGRIC.RE
S & TRNG.
IIUganda Other
Agriculture1999  0  26  26The Second Agricultural Research and Training Project (ARTP II) seeks to a) increase the efficiencyand productivity of the dominant crop, livestock, fisheries, and forestry farming systems of Uganda;b) increase farm household income and improve family welfare; and c) enhance the management ofnatural resources for the protection of the environment. The main project components include: 1)
Technology development and adaptation to finance: adaptive research and development activities to
address specific production constraints and oppo rtunities; new priorities to respond to serious
emerging problems identified in subsequent annual assessment; and establishment of an AgriculturalResearch and Development Fund to support a co mpetitive research grants scheme. 2) Outreach,
extension, and technology dissemination, which will gi ve priority to the development and transfer of
technology that address actual constraints of the dominant production systems of Uganda.G/AG/GEN/46
Page 36Agricultural Sector, 1999-2000
Project
NameCountry Sector Name Fiscal
yearIBRD
Amt.
($m)IDA
Amt.
($m)Loan
Amt.
($m)Description
Forest
Concession
Mgt and
Control
PilotCambodia Forestry 2000  0  5  5The Forest Concession Management and Control Pilot Project, will improve forest management,through effective operational guidelines, and control procedures in forest concession areas, and will
establish forest crime monitoring and prevention capabilities. The components will: 1) support the
Department of Forestry and Wildlife (DFW), providing guidance, and quality control overconcessionaire preparations in forest management  plans. Field surveys, and inventories will be
conducted, including assessment of management constraints, bio-diversity, and social issues, and
risks of timber theft. Financing will be available to acquire satellite imagery, aerial photography,
training, and technical assistance; and 2) strengthen the capacity of the Forest Management Office ofthe DFW, to oversee operations, and ensure compliance with conditions established under the firstcomponent. Civil works, equipment, training, and technical assistance will be financed under this
component.
RIVER
BANK
PROT SUPBangladesh Agricultural
Extens.1999  0  45  45
COASTAL
EMBANK
MENT SBangladesh Agricultural
Extens.1999  0  17  17
Fourth
FisheriesBangladesh Fisheries &
Aquacult2000  0  28  28
__________