The deal has been criticized by civil society groups for reducing tariff protection for smallholder farmers, an important source of income in developing countries, while allowing rich countries to continue subsidizing domestic agriculture. Sanitary and phytosanitary measures: By removing tariff barriers in agriculture, there was concern that non-tariff barriers, such as health and safety standards, would multiply. The SPS agreement allows a country to take measures “necessary for the protection of human beings, animals or plants or health”. The agreement establishes procedures and criteria for the assessment of health risks and the establishment of an adequate level of protection. It uses the international food safety standards of the Codex Alimentarius as a reference. Governments can claim higher national standards than international standards as long as they have a scientific basis for all the measures they have taken. Developing countries` proposals on export subsidies range from adequate regulation to abolition. Developing countries insist that the Ministerial Decision on MFIs be implemented by creating an inter-institutional refinancing fund to help CPDs and IFPOs charge for imports. In addition, food aid should take the form of subsidies. Kenya has also requested technical and financial assistance from developing countries to comply with spS rules, as well as an end to dumping of food exports that do not comply with SPS agreements.
The EU has called for negotiations to focus on export credits, food aid and state trading enterprises, as well as export subsidies. 44 It is therefore not surprising that the five countries and the EU are among the strongest opponents of further radical liberalisation of agricultural trade. The European Union`s position on future negotiations is less clear. Combating the growing power of ICTs: Transnational groups are a source of problems faced by developing countries in the context of agricultural liberalization. Although not fully documented in the report, ICTs clearly play a role in limiting developing countries` access to the export sector through their influence on the global market. The role of ICTs in global agriculture should be further studied. In particular, does the influence of the handful of TNC that dominate the market distort prices? How do the different players in the product chains benefit? Do consumers and small farmers benefit from a fair supply from intermediaries? CGM will develop specific research and campaign activities in three priority areas: competition policy, agriculture and services. However, its overall objective is to create knowledge and capacity within organizations that are developing and expanding their activities in the area of trade and the economy and addressing other related issues. The aim is to promote consumer involvement and participation in governance. 49 The first, put into circulation in March 2003, was prepared by Mr Harbinson, Chairman of the WTO Committee on Agriculture.
In mid-August 2003, the EU and the US jointly proposed a modal framework for further agricultural reforms. This proposal reflected a compromise between the previous American and European proposals . The joint proposal highlighted the reaction of other WTO members. The counter-proposal was submitted in September 2003 by 16 developing countries and received the support of the other four developing countries. On the other hand, a revised draft Cancun Ministerial Text of the WTO General Council was put into circulation before the end of August. 15 Although agriculture has always been covered by the GATT, many non-tariff restrictions have been applied to imports in practice. All this has been accompanied by an increase in barriers to agricultural trade, including import bans, import ceiling quotas, variable import levies and export subsidies. At the WTO meeting in Hong Kong in 2005, countries agreed to eliminate subsidy exports and equivalent payments by 2013. . .