RESTRICTEDWORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONG/AG/NG/R/1
18 April 2000
(00-1579)
Committee on Agriculture
Special Session
SUMMARY REPORT ON THE MEETING OF THE SPECIAL SESSION
HELD ON 23-24 MARCH 2000
Note by the Secretariat
1. The  Special Session of the Committee on Agriculture, which was established by the General
Council to conduct the negotiations for continuing the reform process under Article 20 of the
Agreement on Agriculture (WT/GC/M/53, paragraph 39 refers), held its first meeting on
23-24 March 2000 on the basis of the agenda as set out in the convening airgram WTO/AIR/1264.
2. The present report provides a detailed summary of the Committee's discussions on substantive
matters under the relevant agenda item and should be read in conjunction with the short factual report
to the General Council on the meeting as a wh ole by the interim Chairman (G/AG/NG/1, copy
attached).
ITEM A :   N EGOTIATIONS UNDER ARTICLE 20 OF THE AGREEMENT ON AGRICULTURE : STATEMENT BY
THE CHAIRMAN
3. Under this agenda item the Chairman noted that the Special Sessions are meetings of the
Committee on Agriculture and as such the Committee's Rules of Procedure (G/L/142) and WorkingProcedures (G/AG/1) will be applicable as appropriate.  In other respects the Special Session, as a
negotiating forum, would decide matters as the need arises, on a case-by-case basis and by consensus.
4. In line with the Committee's Rules of Proced ure, the Secretariat would produce summary
reports on each Special Session.  In this regard the Chairman noted that these reports would, as
appropriate, provide detailed summaries of delegations' statements and interventions on thesubstantive matters under consideration and that, if delegations so requested, their statements could be
circulated as working documents.
5. With regard to the decision that progress in the negotiations be reported directly to the
General Council (WT/GC/M/53, paragraph 3.1 refers), the interim Chairman's suggestion was that a
short report under the responsibility of the Chairperson should be made on each meeting, and thatthese reports should be short factual summaries, recording such matters as the dates of the meeting,
the work done in terms of agenda items considered, documents circulated and any decisions taken.
The interim Chairperson indicated that on this occasion he would submit a short factual report to the
General Council along these lines but that the matter was one on which a decision could be taken once
a regular Chairperson had been appointed and had had an opportunity to consult as appropriate.
I
TEM B:  O RGANIZATION OF FUTURE WORK – STATEMENTS BY DELEGATIONS
6. The Chairman opened the floor for general comments from delegations noting that the basic
task given to the Special Sessions by the General Council was to conduct the negotiations mandated
under Article 20 of the Agreement on Agriculture on continuing the process of reform of trade in
agriculture. In outlining his suggested focus for discussion the Chairman noted that the SpecialG/AG/NG/R/1
Page 2
Sessions would be able to draw on the work already undertaken in the process of Analysis and
Information Exchange and the review of implementation conducted in the Committee on Agriculture.
In practical terms this meant establishing a solid foundation over the next year for subsequent phases
of the negotiations and he suggested an immediate focus on the following items:
(a) discussion on elements within the ambit of Article 20 and any associated technical
work;
(b) a timeframe for tabling of proposals;  and
(c) an appropriate schedule of meetings for the first phase of negotiations.
7. The representative of Australia pointed out that Article 20 called for the continuation of
reform and that this commitment was part of the Uruguay Round and not contingent upon progress in
other areas.  He suggested that proposals should be made well before the end of 2000 although they
were prepared to be flexible on the question of a deadline.  Future Special Sessions should be held
back-to-back with the regular meetings of the Committee on Agriculture with an additional meeting
early in 2001 to consider the proposals.  Participants' proposals should concentrate on the four areas
of market access, domestic support, export competition and on rules and disciplines.  The full text of
the Australian statement is contained in G/AG/NG/W/2.
8. While noting that a broad round of trade negotiations would give a better scope for successful
agriculture negotiations the European Communities  suggested that the work programme for the
Special Sessions should concentrate on paragraphs (a) to (d) of Article 20.  He suggested that the
proposals should concentrate on market access, domestic support, export competition, special and
differential treatment and non-trade concerns and hoped that the EC would be in a position to submit
its proposal before the end of the year.  The meetings should, he suggested, follow the schedule
already set out for the regular meetings of the Committee in June, September and November.  The fulltext of the EC statement has been circulated as document G/AG/NG/W/3.
9. The representative of Hungary stressed the importance of the negotiations and noted that all
areas covered by Article 20 were subject to negotiations and the negotiations would be more likely to
achieve a positive result if they were part of a broader negotiating agenda within the WTO.  The
difficulties some countries faced as a result of the process of transition to market economies needed tobe taken into account and Hungary would contribute to the process with work on their experience
with implementation and the effects of the reform programme.  He suggested that the Secretariat
could provide analytical papers on the scope offered by existing Green Box measures to pursue their
objectives and the effects of inflation on commitments.  The full text of the Hungarian statement is
contained in G/AG/NG/W/4.
10. The representative of Bolivia noted the importance of agriculture to her country.  Bolivia has
had a very open trade policy with no subsidies for production or export.  She suggested that the
negotiations should be independent of progress in other areas and that it was necessary to establish a
framework for these negotiations that would allow progress to be made.  The Special Sessions should
be held back-to-back with the regular meetings of the Committee in 2000 with the flexibility of
having additional meetings in January and April 2001.  The negotiations should cover the areas of
market access, domestic support, export subsidies and special and differential treatment and takinginto account non-trade concerns (such as food security, eradication of poverty and rural development)
and the interests of net food-importing countries.  Proposals should be submitted during the course of
2000 with the possibility of fine tuning them at the January 2001 meeting.  She suggested that the
Secretariat could provide a table showing comparisons between different proposals as well as the
background technical and analytical papers suggested by other delegations.G/AG/NG/R/1
Page 3
11. It was noted by New Zealand that the preparatory process for the Seattle Ministerial
Conference and the process of Analysis and Information Exchange under the Committee on
Agriculture had given everyone a clear idea of each country's basic position.  New Zealand's position
was set out in the Cairns Group vision statement.  They felt that the negotiations should take account
of the work done for Seattle and in the AIE process in order to establish some momentum towards
making progress.  Comprehensive proposals should be made as soon as possible and certainly notlater than December although Members should have the chance to make presentations on proposals
submitted earlier and other participants should have the opportunity to give initial reactions.  This
process should be completed by the time of a Special Session in March 2001.  In addition there should
be meetings held in June, September and November 2000 with the possibility of an additional meeting
in January 2001.  As well as tabling and discussing comprehensive proposals it was suggested that the
Special Sessions should be devoted to result orientated discussions based on papers submitted by
Members.
12. Japan noted that the negotiations were to be based on Article 20 and should take account of
the diverse nature of agriculture in different regions, the importance of multifunctionality and the
balance of rights and obligations between exporting and importing countries as well as the needs of
developing countries.  On the dates for submission of proposals it was noted that deadlines must be
realistic and give Members time to consult with domestic stakeholders.  The end of 2000 wassuggested.  The Special Sessions should focus on the experience of implementation and the effects of
commitments on world trade in agriculture taking into account the needs of developing countries.
The full text of the Japanese statement is contained in G/AG/NG/W/5.
13. Uruguay supported the statement made by Australia on behalf of the Cairns Group and
highlighted two aspects: firstly that the negotiations were part of the continuation of the reformprocess and that the final objective should be to br ing agriculture fully within the general rules of the
WTO; and secondly that much preparatory work had already been undertaken in the process of
Analysis and Information Exchange.  It was suggested that the work done in the AIE process should
not be repeated but rather it should be drawn upon to assist the negotiations.  Proposals to, and
discussions in, the Special Sessions should focus on the four areas of market access, domestic support,export competition and special and differential treatment for developing countries.  Non-trade
concerns could be taken into account when considering proposals based on these four areas.  As
regards the calendar of Special Sessions June, September and November with the possibility of an
additional meeting in December were suggested.  In March 2001, a Special Session could be held to
analyse the proposals and start intensive negotiations.
14. The representative of Colombia stated that as an agricultural exporting country Colombia
attached great importance to the negotiations.  Export opportunities at the moment were restricted by
the world agriculture situation and the negotiations should result in fundamental reform of the
disciplines and rules of the WTO affecting trade in agricultural products with the elimination of
export subsidies and production distorting domestic supports.  The objective of the negotiations
should be to establish a fair and market oriented agriculture trading system as set out in Article 20.  It
was noted that Article 20 states that the negotiations must take account of special and differentialtreatment for developing countries and the objectives set out in the Preamble to the Agreement.  These
objectives include the liberalization of trade in tropical products which would contribute to reducing
some of the problems Colombia was currently facing with certain cultivation practices.  The
negotiations should also take into account the need for flexibility for developing countries, rules and
disciplines, market access, domestic support and export competition.  As regards the work programmeColombia supported Australia's suggestion.
15. It was noted by Chile that Article 20 of the Agreement on Agriculture required negotiations to
start on 1 January 2000 and that after three years of the AIE process all Members should be ready for
them.  The Special Sessions should be held back-to-back with the Committee on Agriculture meetings
with the flexibility to have additional Special Sessions if necessary.  At these Sessions MembersG/AG/NG/R/1
Page 4
should be able to submit and discuss general or specific proposals.  The objective should be to
conclude this preliminary phase by December 2000 with a meeting in January 2001 to have a first
discussion of the proposals.  Another Special Session in March 2001 could discuss any additional
proposals and give Members another opportunity to discuss earlier proposals.  The Secretariat could
then compile a list of all submissions.  The next phase of negotiations could then begin with a meeting
in April 2001.  It would also be useful if the Secretariat could update a number of papers prepared forthe AIE process, particularly on export subsidies and market access.  In addition the Secretariat should
compile a table summarizing the extent to which Members had used their export subsidy and domestic
support commitments and another table listing tariff and other market access barriers used by
Members.  It was hoped that the negotiations would be as efficient and transparent as possible with
the full participation of developing countries.
16. The Czech Republic expressed its commitment to the negotiations on continuing reform and
underlined the need for the negotiations to be con ducted in a balanced and transparent manner with all
Members participating and all views being taken in to account.  While the overall objective set out in
Article 20 was accepted it was stressed that the outcome of the negotiations should give enough
flexibility to Members to allow different models of agricultural production by balancing trade and
non-trade concerns.  In the negotiations and in the te chnical work it would be necessary to take into
account Members' experience in implementing their reduction commitments and the effect of thesecommitments on world trade.  For the Czech Republic, and other transition countries, this would
include their experience in completely restructuring th eir agricultural sectors.  The negotiations would
also have to take into account the important concept of non-trade concerns.  The technical work by the
Secretariat should include the effect of inflation on commitments and on the scope of existing Green
Box measures to give flexibility to pursue specific objectives relating to agriculture as well asexperience and effects of reduction commitments.  Procedural aspects, such as the number of
meetings and benchmarks, should be the subject of consultations by the Chairperson and should take
account of delegations' views and other issues relevant to the built-in agenda.
17. Egypt stated that the Uruguay Round Agreement on Agriculture was the first step towards
liberalization, the general objective of which was to bring trade in agriculture under general WTOrules.  The agenda for the negotiations was clearly set out in Article 20 of the Agreement on
Agriculture as the progressive reduction in support and protection while taking into account special
and differential treatment for developing countries, non-trade concerns and the general objective of a
fair and market oriented agricultural trading system.  It was stressed that the negotiations also needed
to discuss and make more operational the Marrakesh Decision on Measures Concerning the PossibleNegative Effects of the Reform Programme on L east-Developed and Net Food-Importing Developing
Countries.  Egypt supported the suggestion that the Sp ecial Sessions should be held back-to-back with
the Committee on Agriculture meetings and suggested that no Sessions should be held without the
approval of Members.   Proposals should be submitted by the end of 2000 and an additional Special
Session in March 2001 would be needed to start the negotiations.  Secretariat assistance would be
useful in assisting Members' understanding of other countries' proposals.
18. Switzerland noted that the negotiations were to be based on all the relevant provisions of both
Article 20 and the Preamble to the Agreement on Agriculture.  In addition, the Preamble of the
Marrakesh Agreement, including the provisions relating to sustainable development, had to be taken
into account.  The work by the Committee on Agriculture on implementation and in the AIE process
in preparation for the negotiations and the outcome of relevant dispute settlement cases should all be
taken into account in the negotiations and the work undertaken by other international organizationscould also be a valuable contribution.  As a net-food importer Switzerland was interested in ensuring
that the negotiations resulted in an outcome that balanced the rights and obligations of both net-
exporters and importers.  On multifunctionality, it was pointed out that this concept was a tool for
aiding understanding of the different situations which might justify state intervention in agriculture.
These situations could include issues concerni ng the environment, rural development and food
security and Switzerland would be making sugges tions on how these concerns could be taken intoG/AG/NG/R/1
Page 5
account.  On special and differential treatmen t Switzerland looked forward to hearing from
developing countries, particularly those that could not afford subsidies, as to how their special needs
could be taken into account and as for least-developed countries hoped that agreement could soon be
reached on duty-free access for imports from them.  While supporting a general round of trade
negotiations it was pointed out that the agriculture negotiations would need to take account of other
sectors such as intellectual property and technical barriers to trade.  The Special Sessions in 2000should take place back-to-back with the regular meetings of the Committee on Agriculture and
proposals should be submitted before the end of the year, although some flexibility might be
necessary for some countries.
19. Norway welcomed the start of negotiations but regretted the failure to get a broad round
started and hoped that this would happen in the near  future.  While noting that the long-term objective
of the negotiations was to achieve substantial progressive reductions in support and protection this
would have to take into account special and differential treatment of developing countries and non-trade concerns.  In Norway's opinion, agriculture tr ade would continue to require separate treatment in
the multilateral trade agreements.  The Secretariat could do a number of background papers based on
Article 20 as well as related matters.  The full text of the statement by the representative of Norway is
contained in G/AG/NG/W/6.
20. While noting the need for practical arrangements for conducting the Special Sessions Canada
stressed that the preparatory work was now over, negotiations had started and Canada supported the
Cairns Group's vision statement of 1998.  The first task of the negotiations should be to focus on
giving participants the opportunity to explain th eir objectives and how they hoped to achieve them.
The Special Sessions should be conducted back-to-back with the regular meetings of the Committee
on Agriculture although there should also be the flexibility to hold additional Sessions if necessary.Proposals should be submitted by the end of the year and a systematic discussion of issues should then
take place in 2001.  The importance of the negotiations to Canada was stressed as Canada was a major
exporter and importer of agricultural products but was unable to match other countries' subsidies and
that these subsidies depressed Canadian farmers' incomes.  Developing countries' needs had to be
addressed.  Food security and sustainable development would be improved by reducing tradedistorting subsidies which would contribute towards improving development.
21. The United States noted that Article 20 of the Agreement on Agriculture required Members to
undertake negotiations with the objective of establishing a fair and market orientated trading system
through the substantial progressive reductions in support and protection.  The AIE process had helped
Members and the background papers provided to this process should be updated, and new onesprepared, as necessary.  The suggestion was made that proposals should be made before the end of the
year although the first part of 2001 could be used to elaborate or amend them.  A stock taking Session
at the end of 2000 or early in 2001 would also be useful.  While the United States would like to see
deadlines into 2001 for submission of offers they recognized that other Members might have
difficulties.  The full text of the statement by the United States is contained in G/AG/NG/W/7.
22. While stressing the great importance of the agriculture reform process, Poland noted that the
AIE process had shown that there was a wide difference of views on many issues arising from thedifferent models of agriculture in different countries.  It was also pointed out that Poland, in common
with many other Members, had hoped to be able to participate in a more general round of trade
negotiations as it was felt that this would have a greater chance of achieving a balanced outcome
acceptable to all Members.  The agriculture negotiations would now be based on Article 20 of the
Agreement on Agriculture and this meant non-trade concerns, including those arising from themultifunctional role of agriculture, would have to be taken into account.  Among the non-trade
concerns raised by Poland were the economic and so cial aspects of rural employment, development of
rural areas, environmentally suitable farming and food security.  As concerns the schedule of
meetings they agreed that the Special Sessions should be held back-to-back with the regularG/AG/NG/R/1
Page 6
Committee meetings and that the end of 2000 was a suitable deadline for submission of proposals
although there should be some flexibility for additional papers to be submitted until March 2001.
23. The representative of Brazil supported the points made by Australia on behalf of the Cairns
Group and stated that although Brazil had hoped fo r a more ambitious work programme they could
accept holding Special Sessions back-to-back with the regular Committee meetings and a deadline of
September 2000 for the submission of proposals.  He noted that Article 20 of the Agreement onAgriculture, which required that negotiations on continuing the reform process should start in 2000,
was part of the Marrakesh Agreements and part of the balance of commitments made at that time.  He
also expressed the hope that the results of the negotiations would be trade, and not non-trade,
orientated.
24. Korea noted the importance and sensitivity of the agriculture negotiations and regretted that
they were not part of a wider framework of trade negotiations.  It was emphasized that the
negotiations were now proceeding on the basis of Article 20 of the Agreement on Agriculture andthey should try to achieve a balance between the needs of different countries, and between importing
and exporting countries.   On the timeframe for the negotiations, it was suggested that at this stage it
was only realistic to establish a timeframe for the first phase and it was noted that this would have to
take into account the different circumstances facing different Members and some flexibility should be
given beyond the end of 2000 for the submission of proposals.  Substantive negotiations could startafter proposals had been submitted.  The Special Sessions should be held back-to-back with the
regular Committee on Agriculture meetings in 2000 and the Chairman should give Members the
opportunity to examine his report to the General Council.  On technical work the proposal that the
Secretariat should update existing papers was supported and Korea suggested that, as set out in
Article 20, this should concentrate on the experience of implementation, the effects of the reductioncommitments on world trade and on non-trade concerns including food security and rural
development.
25. Costa Rica stressed the importance of agriculture to its economy and agreed that the objective
of the negotiations should be to put trade in agriculture on the same basis as trade in other products.
As a member of the Cairns Group Costa Rica supported the Australian position.  Special Sessionsshould be held back-to-back with the Committee on Agriculture meetings and the Chairperson should
have the flexibility to call additional formal and informal Special Sessions if necessary.
26. As a small developing country Jamaica stressed the economic and social importance of
agriculture.  While the structure of the negotiations was set out in Article 20 Jamaica placed special
emphasis on the needs of developing countries particularly those of small developing economies andthe least-developed countries and suggested that the work done in this regard in the AIE process and
in the preparations for the Seattle Ministerial Conference was still valid.  It was stated that the
agriculture negotiations were linked in some ways to  other items of the built-in agenda, such as some
aspects of the TRIPs review, as well as to the SPS and TBT Agreements.  Finally, in considering the
timetable and work programme, consideration should be shown for small countries with small
delegations so that all Members would be able to participate fully in the negotiations.
27. Guatemala, as a member of the Cairns Group, supported the Australian statement pointing out
that agriculture was vital to its economy and that great importance was attached to improving market
access for exports.  While the continuation of the reform process should result in negotiations on the
main areas of market access, domestic support and export assistance special and differential treatment
for developing countries would have to be taken into account in each area.  The Special Sessions
should be held back-to-back with the regular Committee meetings although there should be someflexibility for additional Special Sessions as well, especially after the deadline for submission of
proposals had been reached.  The Secretariat would have to assist some delegations in preparing their
proposals by, amongst other things, updating the work done for the AIE process.G/AG/NG/R/1
Page 7
28. While being committed to the negotiations under Article 20, Slovenia stated that it supported
the concept of multifunctionality and this modified the normal market mechanism that applied in most
other economic sectors.  The issues of export subsidies and the special agriculture safeguard should be
dealt with during the negotiations as it was felt that all Members should have the right to use these
measures to the same extent as some developed countries.
29. Paraguay expressed the hope that the negotiations would achieve their objectives.  Agriculture
was vitally important to Paraguay's economy and trade liberalization would help it to achieve its
potential.  The Uruguay Round of negotiations did not  really result in a significant degree of trade
liberalization but the objectives for the current negotiations were set out in the Preamble and in
Article 20 of the Agreement on Agriculture.  This objective should mean putting trade in agricultural
products on the same basis in the WTO as trade in other products.  For Paraguay, special and
differential treatment would be an integral part of the negotiations as it was necessary to give
developing countries a chance to enhance their development.
30. Thailand supported the suggestion that the Special Sessions should be held back-to-back with
the regular meetings of the Committee on Agriculture  with the flexibility for the Chairperson to call
more Special Sessions if necessary.  As a member of the Cairns Group Thailand supported the
statement made by Australia.  The deadline for proposals should be the end of the year although it
should be open to Members to submit them earlier if they wanted and the objective should be tocommence the next stage of negotiations in March 2001.  Updating the work done in the AIE process
would be useful.  Members' sensitivities in different areas had to be taken into account and this should
be achieved through discussion on market access, domestic support, export competition and special
and differential treatment.
31. Mauritius noted that agriculture systems differed from one country to another and this had to
be taken into account in the negotiations.  As Mauritius is a small island developing state, agriculture
plays a very important multifunctional role.  It was suggested that Article 20 could be seen as having
two sections.  The first required that paragraphs (a) to (c) of Article 20 had to be assessed and only
after this had been done could paragraph (d) on further commitments be addressed.  In assessing
paragraphs (a) to (c) the Secretariat would have an important role.  In addition relevant work had been
done in the AIE process, in Secretariat papers on  Article 18.5 and on the development of world trade
and by the WTO and FAO Secretariats on Article 15 on special and differential treatment and
Article 16 on steps taken on the Net Food-Impor ting Developing Countries' Decision.  Small
delegations had limited resources and needed time to consider and develop proposals.  For this reason
it was difficult for Mauritius to accept a deadline for proposals.  The Special Sessions should be heldas often as was required and these Sessions should be back-to-back with the regular Committee
meetings.
32. Morocco expressed the hope that the negotiations would be successful and hoped to see a
balanced and equitable result.  For Morocco, and possibly for other Mediterranean countries, the
negotiations highlighted a paradox.  On the one hand, a large part of the population depended on
agriculture but were not very competitive with structural and climatic difficulties holding back
development, while on the other hand, some parts of th e agricultural sector exported their output and
were facing market access difficulties.  Some of the concepts of the Agreement on Agriculture might
need reconsideration, such as making the Green Box more oriented towards developing countries and
making the provisions on special and differential treatment more useful.  At the moment, special and
differential treatment concentrated on lower comm itments and longer timeframes for implementation.
However, improved market access for their exports might be more useful for developing countriesgenerally and should not be confined only to least-developed countries.  Other factors that should be
taken into account in the negotiations included food security and the under-development of rural
areas.  While agreeing that the Special Sessions should be back-to-back with the regular Committee
meetings Morocco felt that the Special Sessions shou ld only be held when conditions were right and
that it was better to proceed slowly but surely.G/AG/NG/R/1
Page 8
33. Mexico stated that it would have preferred to have a broad round of trade negotiations as this
increased the negotiating possibilities and improved the chances of reaching a successful result.
However, now that the agriculture negotiations were under way it was time to think in those terms and
the objective set out in Article 20 and the Preamble clearly established the direction the negotiations
should take.  The negotiations should be based on the areas of market access, domestic support and
export competition and in each of these areas the factors that Article 20 required to be taken intoaccount could be considered.  Furthermore, if a participant was interested in any of these factors it
was up to them to make their points and to show how it should be taken into account.  Mexico was not
in favour of having a specific deadline for proposals and noted that it was more important to fix a date
for a stocktaking session of proposals.  The Special Sessions should be held back-to-back with the
regular Committee meetings and it was up to Members to decide if they needed more Special
Sessions.
34. Argentina stressed the importance of achiev ing a positive result from the negotiations for
Argentinean farmers and supported the Cairns Group vision statement and, along with other members
of the Cairns Group, they would be making specific proposals.  Special and differential treatment for
developing countries should include opening agricultural markets and restricting the use of trade
distorting policies and the concept of non-trade concerns should not allow protectionism and should
not result in harm to other countries.  A number of suggestions concerning technical work for theSecretariat were made which are contained in the full text of Argentina's statement in G/AG/NG/W/1.
35. Honduras, on behalf of El Salvador, the Dominican Republic, Honduras and Cuba, stated that
they welcomed the start of the agriculture negotiations.  They supported the suggestion of having four
Special Sessions in 2000 back-to-back with the regular Committee on Agriculture meetings, of having
a deadline of March 2001 for submission of proposals and that the Chairperson of the Committeeshould be responsible for making a report on progress to the General Council.  This report should be
short and factual.  The work done by the Secretariat during the AIE process was noted and this work,
plus the submissions made by Members during the AIE process, should be taken into account during
the negotiations.  The negotiations should concentrate on the areas of market access, domestic
support, export subsidies and, especially, special and differential treatment for developing countriesand should follow the objectives set out in the Preamble and in Article 20 to the Agreement on
Agriculture with the aim of achieving a better ba lance of rights and obligations between different
Members.
36. The representative of South Africa stated that South Africa was prepared to enter into the
negotiations and that following extensive consultations with representatives of the agriculture sectorthey had a clear idea of their position.  While she was encouraged by the improved atmosphere of this
first Special Session of the Committee on Agriculture she hoped that the non-trade concerns of other
countries would not become South Africa's trade concerns.  For South Africa the main non-trade
concern was the wide income disparity that existed in rural areas but it was suggested that this
underlined rather than diminished the need for fair trade.  On other matters South Africa, as a member
of the Cairns Group, supported the statement made by Australia.
37. The Slovak Republic hoped that all Members would have the opportunity to fully participate
in the negotiations.  They supported the suggestion that the deadline for the submission of proposals
should be the end of 2000 and they were flexible on the number of Special Sessions that should be
held.  The basis for the agriculture negotiations should be the five areas of market access, domestic
supports, export assistance, non-trade concerns and special and differential treatment for developing
countries.  To these another point should be added, notably the difficulties facing some countriesarising from the transition from state planned to more market orientated economies.  Non-trade
concerns should also be taken into account and in this, as in some other areas, the Slovak Republic did
not hold a dissimilar position to that of the EC.  The work done by the Secretariat during the AIE
process had been useful and more analysis was needed, in particular on the relationship between highG/AG/NG/R/1
Page 9
rates of inflation and the implementation of commitments, the scope of Green Box measures and on
the effects of implementing reduction commitments.
38. In welcoming the start of the negotiations Venezuela stated that further liberalization should
improve the participation of developing countries in world trade although there were concerns that the
benefits of liberalization were being eroded by problems with market access.  A broad ranging
discussion was needed, for example, on special and differential treatment for developing countries.  Itwas necessary that developing countries have the flexibility to successfully develop their agriculture
and food sectors.  It was also necessary in the discussions to consider the effects of export subsidies
on developing countries and on price volatility as well as the different mechanisms for protection that
could be legitimately used.  It was essential that the negotiations be conducted in a transparent manner
and that small delegations should have the opportunity to consider and prepare proposals. Special
Sessions should be held three more times in 2000 and again in March 2001 with flexibility for the
Chairperson to call informal meetings if necessary.
39. India noted that the objective of the Uruguay Round had been to bring some disciplines to a
very distorted agricultural trading system by controlling the use of subsidies and non-tariff measures.
The current negotiations would have to take account of the emphasis developing countries had to
place on food security and rural employment.  For many families in developing countries their own
food production was their main source of nutrition.  It  was India's view that a purely market approach
would not achieve the desired developmental objectiv es and that in their proposal India would make
suggestions in the areas of domestic support, particularly on the use of the Green Box.  The proposal
would also include suggestions on making special and differential treatment more effective and
operational taking into account the experience and situation of developing countries and role of
agriculture in their economies.  The Committee on Agriculture should meet in Special Session back-to-back with the regular meetings  of the Committee and that the end of 2000 should be the deadline
for proposals although delegations should have the flexibility to elaborate or strengthen their
proposals up to March 2001.  The Secretariat would have important work to do assisting small
delegations but the resource constraints facing the Secretariat were noted.  It was suggested that the
Chairman of the Special Session should consult with the Director-General with a view to ensuring thatthe Secretariat had sufficient resources for the work it had to do.
40. Malaysia supported the Australian statement and added that Malaysia would concentrate on
market access and special and differential treatment for developing countries.  It was also stated that
the non-trade concerns of developed and developing countries would have to be treated differently
with the concept of multifunctionality being compared to the idea of special and differential treatmentfor rich countries.
41. Indonesia stated that special and differential treatment for developing countries, including the
least-developed countries and the small island developing states was an integral part of the
negotiations.  In the negotiations Indonesia aimed to support the development needs of developing
countries.  The special and differential treatment measures needed to support this aim included market
access for exports, including tropical products, food security and rural development.
42. As a member of the Cairns Group the Philippines supported the Australian statement and the
points raised about developing countries on special and differential treatment, which was considered
to be one of the pillars of Article 20.  Specific timeframes were needed to help the negotiations, and
the aim should be to complete the negotiations in three years.  The Philippines has been modernising
its agricultural systems in order to improve competitiveness and food security but they faced
numerous market access difficulties including what appeared to be arbitrary health and safetystandards.
43. The representative of Fiji stated that he would submit a written statement after the meeting.
This statement has been circulated as document G/AG/NG/W/8.G/AG/NG/R/1
Page 10
44. The Chairman noted that there were differences in views but also convergence in many areas,
especially in terms of organizational questions, including deadlines for proposals and schedules of
Special Sessions.  He noted also the importance of giving all Members the opportunity to take part in
the negotiations and he observed that delegations had spoken for themselves when stating their
positions on trade and non-trade concerns, special and differential treatment and the situation of the
least-developed countries.  On these issues no decision was required at this meeting.  What wasneeded was agreement on technical and procedural matters.  The Secretariat would have to assist the
process, within the limits of its resources, a timetable for the initial phase of negotiations was required
and the issue of the schedule of Special Sessions of the Committee on Agriculture had to be agreed.
The Chair read out his proposals for the submission of proposals, technical work and the dates for the
Special Sessions of the Committee on Agriculture.  A number of drafting amendments were suggested
and clarifications sought by Members before the final version, that is reflected in the attached
Chairman's report, was agreed.
45. India noted that the work to be undertaken by the Secretariat should be on the basis of
suggestions made by Members.  Malaysia sought and received confirmation that the suggestion of
work under Article 20(b) on the development of world trade would include work required under
Article 18.5.  Mexico asked for and received clarification that in its technical work the Secretariat
would base its work on notifications although the United States pointed out that the Secretariat mighthave to request additional information from Members to supplement data in notifications and
Members should be prepared to respond.  Mauritius noted that, in their opinion, technical work on
paragraph (d) of Article 20 should be undertaken after work on paragraphs (a) to (c) of Article 20,
although interested delegations would, of course, be free to submit proposals covering all relevant
provisions.  Egypt requested that after the June meeting the Secretariat prepare a technical paper onfood-aid deliveries, which Brazil suggested should cover food aid to non-member countries.
Switzerland asked for a paper on non-trade concerns and the United States noted that they would be
making some suggestions at the June meeting.
ITEM C:  O THER BUSINESS
46. The Committee agreed to meet again in Special Session on 29–30 June 2000, following the
regular Committee meeting.
47. In conclusion the Chairman stated that in maki ng his report to the General Council he would
bear in mind the statements made by all Members, that the report would be short and entirely factual,
the essence of which would be the decision reached by the Committee.  Keeping in mind the interests
of all Members the report would be circulated to all Members and if a factual error was discovered anamendment would be issued.G/AG/NG/R/1
Page 11
ANNEX
FIRST SPECIAL SESSION OF THE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE
(G/AG/NG/1)
Report by the Chairperson to the General Council
1. The Special Session of the Committee on Agriculture, which was established by the General
Council to conduct the negotiations for continuing the reform process under Article 20 of the
Agreement on Agriculture (WT/GC/M/53, paragraph 39 refers), held its first meeting on
23-24 March 2000.
2. As agreed by the General Council on 23 March 2000, this first Special Session was chaired by
the Chairman of the Council for Trade in Goods, Ambassador Roger Farrell, of New Zealand.
3. The Committee adopted the agenda as set out in WTO/AIR/1264.
4. With respect to the requirement that progress in  the negotiations be reported directly to the
General Council on a regular basis, it was agreed that on this occasion a short factual report would be
made to the General Council on the responsibility of the Chairperson.  This was on the understandingthat the report, once circulated, could if necessary be amended to correct any errors of a factual
nature.
5. A number of general statements were made in which participants outlined, inter alia , their
respective positions regarding the negotiations for the continuation of the reform process.  The
statements made and the related discussion will be fully reflected as appropriate in the detailedsummary report of the meeting to be prepared by the Secretariat.  It was noted that participants are
able to request that the full text of their statements be circulated as working documents.  (Such
statements are to be distributed in the document series:  G/AG/NG/W/-.)
6. In the light of the suggestions made in this regard and the ensuing discussion, the following
programme and arrangements for the first phase of the negotiations under Article 20 of the Agreementon Agriculture were agreed:
(a) that work within the framework of paragraphs (a), (b), (c) and (d) of Article 20 would
be based on technical papers and submissions to be contributed by interested
participants, as well as on the basis of information and data to be prepared by the
Secretariat at the request of the Committee;
(b) that negotiating proposals would be submitted by participants by the end of
December 2000, on the understanding that there would be flexibility for the
submission of further or more detailed proposals thereafter, provided that such
submissions are tabled sufficiently in advance of a stock-taking exercise, covering all
proposals submitted, to be undertaken at a March 2001 meeting of the Special
Session;
(c) that appropriate provision would be made in the agendas of each of the Special
Session meetings for the discussion of technical papers submitted and proposals
made;
(d) that the Special Session meetings would be held back-to-back with the regular
meetings of the Committee on Agriculture in June, September and November 2000,
with the possibility of an additional Specia l Session meeting being held in the intervalG/AG/NG/R/1
Page 12
prior to the March 2001 stock-taking meeting on the first phase of the negotiations.
The timing of such a meeting, provisionally in the last week of January 2001, would
be decided by the Chairperson in the light of consultations as appropriate.
7. Various suggestions were made by participants for background technical papers by the
Secretariat.  Taking account of these suggestions as appropriate, including experience to date in
implementing commitments, the following background papers would be made available in advance of
the next meeting of the Special Session in June:
(a) revised and updated background papers based on notifications on tariff quotas,
domestic support, and export subsidies, as well as a table showing Members' usage of
domestic support categories, export subsidies and export credits in a common
currency;
(b) an updated background paper on the agricultural trade performance of developing
countries;
(c) a background paper in the context of Article 20(b);
(d) a background paper on implementation of the least-developed and net food-importing
developing countries' Decision.
8. As requested by the participants concerned, the following statements made at the meeting are
being circulated (in the series G/AG/NG/W/-):  Argentina (W/1);  Australia (W/2);  EEC (W/3);Hungary (W/4);  Japan (W/5);  Norway (W/6);  United States (W/7).
9. The next Special Session is to be held on 29-30 June 2000, following on from the regular
meeting of the Committee on Agriculture which is to meet on Wednesday, 28 June.
__________