WTO S&D TALKS FOCUS ON PROCESS IN "POSITIVE" SESSION

The Committee on Trade and Development special (negotiating) session (CTD-SS) -- mandated to review all special and differential treatment (S&D) provisions for developing countries -- met on 28 October in an atmosphere described by a trade delegate as "positive and constructive". The group has missed three deadlines in recent years and has been characterised by polarised discussions and divergent perspectives not only in relation to concrete proposals, but also with respect to process. Chair Faizel Ismail suggested that something should be achieved by Christmas, if only to record progress, including on 28 specific proposals that were agreed before Cancun and on cross-cutting issues that could be addressed. He described areas of convergence that would lay the foundation for informal consultations until the next meeting. Some Members observed that the polarisation between developing and developed countries seemed to have subsided at the meeting.

Context

The CTD-SS was created in early 2002 by the Trade Negotiations Committee to be the body responsible for the Doha Round mandate on special and differential treatment (S&D) for developing countries. S&D is the name given to those parts of the WTO Agreements that attempt to ensure that the particular needs and characteristics of developing countries are supported by more favourable and different treatment for them as compared to other WTO Members. The approximately 155 S&D provisions in the WTO Agreements form the core of the 'development' dimension of the multilateral trading system. They have, however, been criticised as not providing enough flexibilities, and not being set in mandatory language that would be binding on all Members and could be defended in dispute settlement. As a result of these problems, WTO Members agreed in paragraph 44 of the Doha Declaration that S&D provisions "shall be reviewed with a view to strengthening them and making them more precise, effective and operational".

Agreement-specific proposals versus cross-cutting issues

At the meeting, CTD-SS Chair Faizel Ismail invited Members to consider the package of recommendations on 28 agreement-specific proposals on which they had agreed, in principle, prior to Cancun. He also proposed that Members initiate discussions on cross-cutting issues. Members have put forward 88 proposals to make reform of S&D a reality in specific agreements, and these have been informally divided into three categories. The first category includes proposals that were dealt with intensively before the Cancun ministerial, and includes the 28 proposals that have already been agreed upon in principle (category I). The second category includes another 38 proposals that were sent to the WTO bodies to which they refer (category II), and the third category includes 15 proposals on which delegates had the most difficulty finding consensus (category III). The third category has not yet been discussed.

Some developing countries have asked that the more immediate and concrete issues covered by the Agreement-specific proposals be dealt with first. Only then would Members turn to the so-called "cross-cutting issues." These include topics such as the principles and objectives of S&D -- i.e. whether such provisions are merely a way of integrating developing countries into the multilateral trading system under one set of rules or a way of harnessing trade to further development goals -- and the question of eligibility and differentiation, which questions whether all developing countries should receive the same treatment in trade rules.

At the meeting, the debate over the sequencing of negotiations continued, with developed countries such as Switzerland saying that the cross-cutting issues should be dealt with in parallel to the agreement-specific proposals and developing countries such as Colombia and Peru saying that the July mandate specifies that the agreement-specific proposals must be dealt with first.

Members convergence around steps on way forward

Speaking at the meeting, Kenya said there had been very intensive consultations on the category I proposals before Cancun and felt that the group was close to an agreement. The meeting decided that for both category I and III (though for III likely not until after Christmas) there was a need to address the underlying development challenges when discussing the proposals and find solutions. Switzerland also suggested that there was a need to address category I and III issues in a new way, by clustering the proposals around specific themes such as capacity constraints or technical assistance and then approaching the cross-cutting issues in a more focused manner so they can help one another.

Chair Ismail proposed to get in touch with the Chairs of the technical bodies to which proposals in category II have been referred to discuss the status and way forward. Canada mentioned that some positive results had been achieved in other bodies (for instance in sanitary and phytosanitary issues), and that Members should recognise these achievements even if they did not build precisely on the proposals that have been handed over to them. The meeting agreed to proceed with close monitoring of the different bodies to which the proposals had been referred and to attempt to coordinate work with these bodies.

"Real genuine effort"

Although the talks focused mainly on the process to adopt in the CTD Special Session, a number of Members felt that a substantive breakthrough was possible in ensuring that S&DT provisions, and development goals generally, were made more effective in the WTO if the prevailing pragmatic approach adopted at this meeting was maintained in the future. They called upon the Chair to organise more consultations and informal meetings to find solutions to the divergences among Members (not only developed-developing countries but also among developing countries). They described the meeting as a "real genuine effort" to find a common ground, but noted that it was up to the Chair to build upon this momentum and come back to the next meeting with a plan of action.

ICTSD reporting.