WORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONG/AG/NG/W/140
22 March 2001
(01-1392)
Committee on Agriculture
Special SessionOriginal:  English
WTO AGRICULTURE NEGOTIATIONS
Proposal by Jordan
As a contribution to the negotiation process begun in March 2000, the Hashemite Kingdom of
Jordan hereby submits its ideas concerning the agenda under negotiations under Article 20 of the
Agreement on Agriculture.
1. Introduction
Jordan is a developing country with a relatively small economy (GDP = US$ 8.012 billion in
1999) a low per capita income and an unemployment rate of more that 20%. Jordan is also an open
economy as about 60% of the food consumed is imported and approximately 20% of the country's
agricultural production is exported. Agriculture in Jordan is natural disaster prone, mainly due to
cyclic droughts and unpredictable frosts.
Jordan is committed to the agricultural reform process and follows a strict economic
adjustment program leading to internal and external trade liberalization as well as shifting of public
sector responsibilities to the private sector. The country's average bound tariff is 30% as compared to
the much higher rates of 58% to 75% of trading partner countries.
Prior to the country's membership in the WT O, sensitive agricultural commodities such as
olive oil, sheep, poultry meat, tomato paste, citrus fruits and fresh milk were either directly or
indirectly protected from foreign competition. Under Jordan's terms of accession to the WTO, such
protection is no longer permitted. In the long run, Jordan expects competition to lead to more efficient
and higher quality production, increasing Jordan's exports. One of the reasons Jordan joined the WTO
was to take advantage of international trade opportunities. The policy challenge the country faces nowis how to help the domestic producers adjust to the competition from abroad.
However, almost one year after accession to the WTO, Jordan's agricultural sector, employing
7.5% of the total Jordanian work force and generating 29% of the GNP together with the agro-
industry, faces problems in adapting to the WTO disciplines of market access. This is mainly due tothe fact that Jordan was unable to use several prov isions in the Agreement of Agriculture (AoA), such
as the Special Safeguard provision and flexibility in setting tariffs. Consequently, as the applied tariff
rates in Jordan's case are much closer to the bound rates than in neighboring countries, these are in a
position to protect themselves easily from Jordanian imports.
Jordan therefore sees an urgent need to review the Ministerial Decision on Measures
Concerning the Possible Negative Effects of the Reform Program on Least-Developed and
Developing Countries in order to ensure its effective implementation.G/AG/NG/W/140
Page 2
2. Areas for negotiation
2.1 Market access
Jordan considers that market access is a key element of the agricultural reform process. At the
same time, it is thought that the reform must take into account all legitimate interests, including the
special needs of developing countries. These legitimate interests and special needs are – in the case of
Jordan - mainly the prevention of the negative side effects of the reform on farming and the protection
from unfair market intrusions by countries with less stringent WTO membership conditions. The
reform process and market access should also be fair as regards the difference between the bound and
applied tariffs rates in different countries. It is  not considered acceptable that a country can take
advantage of its high differences between applied and bound tariff rates or have the right to impose
special safeguard measures against a developing country, because it joined the WTO earlier and
therefore had better entry conditions than the newly acceded developing country.
In recognizing the long-term objectives to establish a fair and market oriented agricultural
trading system, Jordan proposes that a more uniform difference between bound and applied rate to be
adopted for developing countries. A formula to achieve convergence of the applied rates at the end of
the round, which guarantee a fair market access for agricultural products for both developed and
developing member countries, should be worked out and adopted by all countries.
Any tariff reduction formula should also take into consideration the stage of liberalization of
each member country. This requires defining a specific tariff rate target to be reached by developing
countries and another one for developed countries (e.g. weighted average). The rate of tariff reduction
should depend on the existing (applied) tariff level of each country and the targeted tariff level to be
reached over a fixed period.
Small developing economies should have appropriate differential commitments and
modalities, including the possibility of exemption from further tariff reductions, particularly in
circumstances where substantial liberalization has already been undertaken.
Given the special character of agriculture, Jordan believes that the Special Safeguard (SSG)
mechanism should be continued for the purpose of providing sufficient protection against suddenimport surges and price fluctuations. Newly acceding countries such as Jordan should be allowed to
use it. Jordan supports the Swiss proposal regarding the need for revision of the SSG mechanism.
Furthermore, Jordan supports the idea of having a separate safeguard mechanism on the lines
of the Special Safeguard provisions (Article 5 of AoA) along with a provision for imposition ofQuantitative Restrictions under specified circumstances. This should be made available to all
developing countries irrespective of tariffication, in the event of a surge in imports or a decline in
prices and to ensure the food and livelihood security of their people.
2.2 Export Competition
Jordan proposes that the WTO countries should eliminate all forms of export subsidies. Any
export subsidy should be bound to zero rates since it is the most distorting policy on trade.
Disciplines in export credits, export credit guarantee or insurance programs should be
developed, and the development of these disciplines should provide adequate flexibility for
developing countries.G/AG/NG/W/140
Page 3
Jordan proposes the prohibition of all export restrictions on agricultural products and the
binding of export subsidy at zero level.
2.3 Domestic Support
2.3.1 Green Box:
Should be maintained. However, the Green Box crit eria should be reviewed to ensure that all
such domestic support meets the fundamental requirements of no or at most minimal trade distorting
effects or effects on production.
2.3.2 Blue Box:
Domestic support under production limiting programs; which are exempt from the reduction
commitment, could be maintained since this can be useful in converting trade-distorting support to
less trade-distorting support; however, it should be subject to reduction commitments leading to their
elimination.
2.3.3 AMS
The adjustment of negative product specific support figures against positive non product-
specific AMS support figures should be allowed.
All measures taken by developing countries for poverty alleviation, rural development, rural
employment, desert reclamation and diversification of agriculture should be exempted from any
reduction commitments
Direct or indirect measures that are an integral part of the development programs of
developing countries, including investment and input subsidies, as identified in Article 6.2 of the
present Agreement, must remain exempt from reduction commitments during the next phase of the
reform program.
The existing de minimis concept and threshold must be continued to be applied only to
developing countries.
2.4 Special and Differential Treatment
Regarding market access, Jordan proposes the establishment of an export promotion program,
aiming to provide technical assistance to developing countries to increase their capacity andcapabilities in the market access fields.
It is also proposed to establish a trade policy impact-monitoring program to provide the
Committee on Agriculture with information on main indicators regarding the adoption of the AoA
provisions, and their effect on small farmer incomes as well as impacts on environment and foodsecurity.
2.5 Non-trade concerns
Most of the mountainous areas in Jordan are not suited for any other agricultural activity
except the growing of olive trees. These trees are native to the region, surviving and thriving on the
rocky, sandy soil found throughout Jordan. In these areas, there are no other crops that can be grown
or other agricultural activities that can be pursued. Olive trees are also environmentally friendly. They
have a low water demand and are rarely irrigated. That is a major advantage in one of the most waterG/AG/NG/W/140
Page 4
scarce countries on the planet. The olive trees also reduce soil erosion during the rainy season by
providing cover for parched soils, lessening the imp act of raindrops on fragile soils. Olive trees are
therefore one of the leading defenders against desertification of Jordan.
Olive oil – together with bread – provides the staple food for most of the population.There is a significant employment contribution made by olive farming. Olive tree farming
keeps the rural population employed and especially many of Jordan's poorest farmers produce olives.
The government has therefore encouraged widespread planting of olive trees. However, the costs of
production are comparatively high as compared to other Mediterranean countries. This is mainly due
to the use of manual labor in harvesting and special production characteristics of olive oil in Jordan
(mostly organic production method resulting in higher acidity than accepted for virgin oil; productionon slopes). On the other hand Jordan has to take into consideration the benefits of olive tree farming
on the economy as a whole, i.e. the positive value of the social and environmental impacts.
The rapid decrease of tariff rates for olive oil, and the absence of the possibility to apply a
Special Safeguard measures, could lead to the abandonment of a great number of farms, increasedesertification, create social unrest and considerable migration to towns.
Moreover, the abandonment of olive farming would change the inherited and traditional
landscape, olive tree plantations being highly valued recreational areas (in the almost total absence of
forests).
The case of olive oil in Jordan points out the importance of the trade-environment link and
broader development or social concerns that are tied into agricultural policy programs. At the present
state of development, Jordan is in need of means to support development and environmental goals
without budgetary expenditures. That may mean th e trade distorting effects ensuing from critical
domestic policy programs are inevitable under some special circumstances.
In this regard it is the Jordanian opinion that farmers in this sensitive sector should be
protected by a flexible tariff rate to allow the government to finance their contribution to environment
preservation and maintenance of the landscape, at least as long as marketing measures, such as
introducing Jordanian olive oil as organic olive oil to health markets of developed countries, and
structural adjustments must be made.
Keeping sheep in the Jordanian desert areas is a tradition from Old Testament times and
therefore a cultural heritage. The breeding of the local fat tail sheep varieties is a way of life for
Jordan's nomadic Bedouin population (consisting of an estimated 200,000 people). Most of these
nomads live in remote areas under harsh conditions and are threatened further by cyclic droughts.Jordan holds that the government is committed to su stain their existence by an ewe premium, as it is
applied in the EU, or other suitable measures.
__________