Preliminary Findings of ICTSD’s Country Studies.ppt

《Preliminary Findings of ICTSD’s Country Studies.ppt》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《Preliminary Findings of ICTSD’s Country Studies.ppt（27页珍藏版）》请在三一办公上搜索。

1、,Identifying Special Products in Developing countries:Preliminary Findings of ICTSDs Country Studies,http:/,Special Products(SP)(para.41),.Developing countries will have the flexibility to designate an appropritate number of products as Special Products,based on criteria of food security,livelihood

2、security and rural development needs.These products will be eligible for more flexible treatment.The criteria and treatment of these products will be further specified during the negotiation phase and will recognise the fundamental importance of SP to developing countries.,http:/,The Rationale for S

3、pecial Products,Food security:combination of domestic production,importation and public stockholding.However some degree of self-sufficiency for basic foodstuffs remains a major objective for DC.Availability of foreign exchange is also a constraint on the import capacity of some DC.Livelihood securi

4、ty:Agriculture accounts for 70%of the employment in low-income countries and 30%in middle-income countries.Alternative avenues of employment are lacking.Rural Development:In DC,agriculture constitutes a big slice of the GDP.Since in the rural areas agriculture is the dominant economic activity,rural

5、 development can be sustained only by a vibrant and growing agricultural activity.Importance of looking at the three criteria together as opposed to individually,http:/,The Rationale for Special Products(cont.),As tariffs are removed,the livelihood of communities employed in import-competing sector

6、might be affected by lower prices and increased international competition.While this benefits urban consumers it might affect large rural populations who rely on agriculture but cannot compete with low prices on world market.Developing countries have limited access to domestic resources to cushion f

7、armers against adverse effects of imports;they essentially rely on border measures(tariffs),http:/,Source:Based on the Millennium Development Indicators Database(UNSD),http:/,Source:FAO,WTO Agreement on Agriculture:The Implementation Experience,FAO,Rome,2003.,http:/,Agricultural Employment in G33 Co

8、untries,Source:Earth Trends database(World Resources Institute),http:/,Share of Agriculture in GDP in G33 in Countries,Source:Earth Trends database(World Resources Institute),http:/,Source:FAO,LDCs and NFIDCs Agricultural Trade Evolution,http:/,Bound Tariff Structures in G33 Countries,http:/,Effect

9、of a 40%Reduction of Bound Tariffs on G33 Applied Tariff,http:/,Examples of Tariff Structure:Subgroup A,Source:The G-33:An Analysis of bound and Applied Tariffs on Agricultural Products Mario Jales,ICTSD,http:/,Examples of Tariff Structure:Subgroup B,Source:The G-33:An Analysis of bound and Applied

10、Tariffs on Agricultural Products Mario Jales,ICTSD,http:/,Examples of Tariff Structure:Subgroup C,Source:The G-33:An Analysis of bound and Applied Tariffs on Agricultural Products Mario Jales,ICTSD,http:/,Examples of Tariff Structure:Subgroup D,Source:The G-33:An Analysis of bound and Applied Tariff

11、s on Agricultural Products Mario Jales,ICTSD,http:/,Examples of Tariff Structure:Subgroup D,Source:The G-33:An Analysis of bound and Applied Tariffs on Agricultural Products Mario Jales,ICTSD,COTE DIVOIRE,0,1,0,2,0,3,0,4,0,5,0,6,0,7,0,01,02,02,04,04,05,07,07,07,08,08,09,09,09,11,11,12,12,14,15,15,16

12、,17,18,20,20,21,22,22,23,33,41,51,H,S,c,h,a,p,t,e,r,%,B,o,u,n,d,A,p,p,l,i,e,d,Sources:WTO(2004)and WITS(2002).,http:/,Country studies background,Field research component of a DFID funded project on SP-SSMTo take advantage of the strategic window of opportunity in July Framework to address food secur

13、ity,livelihood security and rural development needs in current agricultural negotiations Objective of country studies:Providing some empirical-based and“scientific”justification for the selection of SPsTest possible indicators of food/livelihood securtiy and rural development which could subsequentl

14、y be used by other countries in the preparation of their list,http:/,Formally associated with G 33Non LDCsFocus on Net Food-Importing Developing Countries(NFIDC),Low-Income Food-Deficit Countries(LIFDC),Small Island Developing States(SIDS)Geographical balanceFocus on subgroups B and CCountries with

15、proven domestic research capacityCommitment of national government to actively support and participate in the project,Countries Selection,http:/,Selected Countries:Barbados,Caribbean(SIDS)Honduras,Central America(LIFDC)Kenya,Africa(LIFDC),Methodology:Developing an analytical framework for the operat

16、ionalisation of food/livelihood securtiy and rural developmentTest it in the field and refine the methodologyA two track process GuidelinesStakeholder consultation,Pakistan,Asia(NFIDC)Peru,South America(NFIDC)Sri Lanka,Asia(LIFDC),Countries Selection(cont.),http:/,ICTSD country studies,Conceptual Fr

17、amework for the Identification of Special Products,Conceptual Framework for the Identification of Special Products,http:/,Step 1:Identification of intended beneficiaries,Focus on rural poor,small&subsitance farmers but also small comercial farmers,Assess economic and social importance of particular

18、products for specific regions,http:/,Step 2:Identification of products:Livelihood secutrity&rural development indicators,http:/,Step 3:Identification of products(cont.):Food Security indicators,http:/,Data Used for Estimating SP Indicators,Data Used for Estimating SP Indicators,http:/,ICTSD Country

19、Studies Findings in a Nutshell,http:/,Supplementary elements for the analysis,SubstitutesUnfair competitionVulnerability to import displacementCurrent level of protection,http:/,Implications for negotiating modalities on SP,Selection:Countries should be allowed to self-designate their SP within an a

20、greed limit(eg.15 20%of tariff lines).There might be a reference to an illustrative,non-exhaustive and non-prescriptive list of indicators,but a set of multilaterally agreed indicators including thresholds would not be practicle and not desirable from a sust.dev.perspectiveTreatment:regardless of th

21、e size of the lists,there is a case for tariff reduction exemption for at least a sub-set of SPs(e.g.7-8%of tarif lines).For remaining products calibrated treatment could be based on the tiered formula(e.g.0%reduction if product falls in the lowest tier,5%if it falls in the 2nd tier and 10%if it falls in 3rd or 4th tier),http:/,