 
 WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  RESTRICTED 
TN/AG/R/12 
28 May 2004 
 
 (04-2289) 
Committee on Agriculture 
Special Session  
 
 
 
SUMMARY REPORT ON THE TWENTY-SECOND MEETING  
OF THE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE SPECIAL SESSION  
HELD ON 20 AND 23 APRIL 2004 
 
Note by the Secretariat1 
 
 
1. The Special Session of the Committee on Agricu lture, which was established by the General 
Council (WT/GC/M/53), is pursuing negotiations under paragraphs 13, 14 and other relevant 
provisions of the Doha Ministerial Declaration.   The twenty-second meeting was held on 20 and 
23 April 2004 under the chairmanship of Am bassador Tim Groser of New Zealand.   
2. The agenda as contained in WTO/AIR/2291 was adopted. 
ITEM A (i):  STATEMENT BY CHAIR  
3. The statement by the Chairman was made in informal mode.2 
ITEM A (ii):  STATEMENTS BY PARTICIPANTS  
4. Three country groupings took the floor:  the African Group;  the G-10;  and the G-33. 
5. On behalf of the African Group, the representa tive of Mauritius stated that, as in March 2004, 
the Group had been operating at two levels: at the Afri can Group level, as well as part of the G-90.  
Mauritius recalled that members of the African Gr oup were also members of various other groups, 
such as the African-Cari bbean-Pacific Group (ACP), the G-33, the G-20, the G-10, and the Cairns 
Group.  In the course of the "Agricultural Week", the African Group had met with the United States, 
the G-33, and the Cairns Group, while the G-90 ha d met with the G-10, the European Communities 
(EC), and the Cairns Group.  Finally, the ACP had also met with the G-33. 
6. Mauritius noted that the approach followed by the African Group in such meetings had been 
premised on the Chair's recommendation to move fr om a listening mode to a problem-solving mode 
as well as the Chair's advice to focus on the mark et access pillar.  While putting across the key 
concerns of their respective constituencies, the Group also had an opportunity to  ask other participants 
to clarify the nature of their expectations from African countries, and to raise specific issues and 
concerns relating to other pillars, in particular the application of the concept of parallelism in respect 
of S&D in the export competition area. 
7. Mauritius observed that, notwithstanding the high ly interesting nature of many of the 
discussions that took place, the participants invariably  ran short of time, and it was generally felt that 
a difficult and contentious area such as market access  required longer and more in-depth discussions.  
                                                      
1 This document has been prepared under the Secret ariat's own responsibility and is without prejudice 
to the positions of Members or to their rights or obligations under the WTO. 
2 Copies of the statement by the Chairman ar e available upon request from the Secretariat. TN/AG/R/12 
Page 2  
 
 During the course of the week, the African Group had al so realized that several other groups had been 
meeting each other, and there was a feeling that  some Members could come up with proposals on a 
framework agreement.  Emphasizing the importance of  ownership of a text, Mauritius requested that 
the African Group be invited to examine any propo sal with sufficient prior notice given the tight 
schedule before Members.  Finally, Mauritius recalle d that the objective of the African Group was to 
have effective and meaningful S&D provisions feat uring prominently, and in detail, in any framework 
agreement.  In this context, the African Group would be shortly submitting a paper on S&D. 
8. Turning to specific aspects of  these negotiations, the African Group felt that there was a 
greater understanding on the numerous components of  S&D among the participants.  An agreement 
on the language, and on the placing of such language  in a framework text, was now needed.  The 
importance of trade preferences, and the need to fi nd a solution for preference erosion, were equally 
gaining ground.  The African Group held that the issue of erosion of preferences should be directly and appropriately addressed in the framework agreemen t.  That issue should not only be left for the 
IMF and the World Bank, which in the Group's view we re not geared for this task, to tackle.  The 
assessment by the African Group was that there was greater understanding and acceptance of the 
concepts of Special Products (SP) and Special Safe guard Mechanism (SSM);  the exemption of LDCs 
from any reduction commitments;  as well as parallelism for meaningful S&D for NFIDCs and LDCs in the field of export competition.  However, the granting of duty- and quota-free access had not been 
endorsed by all the delegations.  In the course of the discussions on the export competition pillar, the 
African Group had introduced some proposals on export credits, STEs and food aid. 
9. The African Group suggested that delegations s hould have more intensive meetings in the 
future, possibly with a greater involvement on the part of the Chairman. 
10. On behalf of the G-10, the representative of Switzerland reported that discussions were held 
with many delegations, and with all groups.  Th e G-10 had continued the useful dialogue which 
started in March, and in some cases, had discussed new ideas.  Although it was not always possible to 
narrow down differences, a number of groups had ac knowledged that a "one-size-fits-all" approach 
would not lead to a successful result.  The G-10 indi cated that they were on the right track and that 
they were looking forward to further exploring a mutually acceptable solution in an open and 
transparent process.  That solution should cont ain the necessary flexib ility to accommodate the 
fundamental interests of all Members in a balanced way.   
11. In response to the Chairman's call, discussions had focused on market access, an area which, 
according to the G-10, was indeed the most sensitive for many participants.  Referring specifically to 
the development dimension, the G-10 reported that th ey had not heard of any operational response to 
the problem of erosion of tariff preferences. 
12. While supporting a formula common to all Memb ers, including adequate S&D treatment, the 
G-10 emphasized that the blended formula was not an acquis  and reiterated its preference for the 
Uruguay Round formula.  The G-10 also reiterated th at should a blended formula be used, then the 
Uruguay Round component would have to be its main  element, with no cap on tariffs nor mandatory 
expansion of tariff quotas (TN/AG/R/11 refers).  The G-10 considered that such rigid features would 
fail to respond to the diverse nature of Member 's agricultural systems and non trade concerns.   
13. The G-10 indicated its readiness to explore any alternative approach to the blended formula 
that would accommodate such concerns.  In this re gard, the G-10 wished to thank the G-20 and the 
Cairns Group for presenting, during the Agricultural Week, a so-called "tiered approach" to tariff 
reduction.  The G-10 pointed out that they would carefully study that proposal, taking account of their 
respective trade structures, and provided it would not be "a twin" of the Harbinson formula.  Should a 
reasonable deal be concluded in the market access area, with non trade concerns being taken account  TN/AG/R/12 
 Page 3 
 
 
 of, the G-10 would then undertake greater efforts to address the most trade-distorting measures, 
including all forms of export subsidies.   
14. The G-10 recalled the importance of achieving predictability and legal security to undertake 
policy reforms towards less distorting measures.  In  the G-10's view, this implied adequate rules and 
disciplines which would give Members sufficient secur ity on the difficult road to trade liberalization, 
and which did not preclude government intervention.   The G-10 observed that this was a normal and 
necessary complement to trade liberalization includi ng the continuation and e xpansion of the special 
safeguard.  The G-10 stressed that when Members wi ll negotiate the modalities, they should not forget 
that the rules were an integral part thereof and needed to be reflected in any framework text.   
15. The G-10 considered that it was generally cons tructive that small groups start to narrow down 
differences and indicated the G-10's readiness to partic ipate in such endeavour.  In this regard, the G-
10 wished to flag that proposals submitted by small groups should be op en enough to allow the 
integration of all Members' concerns and come early enough to allow their multilateralization.  
16. Without prejudice to the individual position of  any of the delegations, Indonesia submitted a 
report on the consultations held by G-33.  As a group representing 42 developing countries, the G-33 
had found the meetings particularly useful.  In line with the Chairman's recommendation, discussions 
centred on the market access pillar, although not exclusively. 
17. The G-33 noted that there was a general accep tance among Members of the concepts of SP 
and SSM for developing countries, as an integral S&D component of the framework agreement.  The 
G-33 reiterated that, in order for the SP concept to become an effective instrument, it must have the 
following key characteristics (TN/AG/R/11 refers).  Fi rst, it should be a stand-alone provision, not to 
be linked to any aspect of the tariff reduction formul a.  No SP should be subject to tariff reduction, or 
to new tariff quota commitments.  All SP designa ted products should have access to the SSM.  SP 
status must be decided by each devel oping country through a simple procedure. 
18. The G-33 was aware that many Members viewed the tariff reduction formula as central to the 
market access pillar.  For the G-33 however, the SP and SSM concepts were as important as the tariff 
reduction formula, and were needed to address food and livelihood security, and rural development.  
These issues should therefore be addressed in paralle l.  The G-33 had noted that the proponents of the 
blended formula had finally become more sensit ive to the problems faced by many developing 
countries.  During the consultations, the proponent s of the blended formula had indicated their 
readiness to modify the formula in order to accommoda te developing countries' concerns.  To this 
end, the G-33 had indicated that, the tariff reduction formula should meet the following criteria:  it 
should not undermine the concept of S&D for devel oping countries;  it should be fair, taking account 
of different tariff structures among the membership ;  Members' reduction commitments must fully 
reflect the difference between devel oped and developing countries.   
ITEM B:  OTHER BUSINESS  
Dates of the next Special Session 
19. The Chairman informed the Committee that the ne xt meeting of the Special Session will take 
place on 2-4 June 2004. 
 
__________ 
 
 