《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）》请在三一文库上搜索。
1、,Identifying Special Products in Developing countries: Preliminary Findings of ICTSDs Country Studies,http:/ 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 se
2、curity 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:/ Rationale for Spe
3、cial 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 sec
4、urity: 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 a
5、ctivity, rural 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:/ Rationale for Special Products (cont.),As tariffs are removed, the livelihood of communities employed in import-comp
6、eting sector 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 resourc
7、es to cushion farmers against adverse effects of imports; they essentially rely on border measures (tariffs),http:/ Based on the Millennium Development Indicators Database (UNSD),http:/ FAO, WTO Agreement on Agriculture: The Implementation Experience, FAO, Rome, 2003.,http:/ Employment in G33 Countr
8、ies,Source: Earth Trends database (World Resources Institute),http:/ of Agriculture in GDP in G33 in Countries,Source: Earth Trends database (World Resources Institute),http:/ FAO,LDCs and NFIDCs Agricultural Trade Evolution,http:/ Tariff Structures in G33 Countries,http:/ of a 40% Reduction of Boun
9、d Tariffs on G33 Applied Tariff,http:/ of Tariff Structure: Subgroup A,Source: The G-33: An Analysis of bound and Applied Tariffs on Agricultural Products Mario Jales, ICTSD,http:/ of Tariff Structure: Subgroup B,Source: The G-33: An Analysis of bound and Applied Tariffs on Agricultural Products Mar
10、io Jales, ICTSD,http:/ of Tariff Structure: Subgroup C,Source: The G-33: An Analysis of bound and Applied Tariffs on Agricultural Products Mario Jales, ICTSD,http:/ of Tariff Structure: Subgroup D,Source: The G-33: An Analysis of bound and Applied Tariffs on Agricultural Products Mario Jales, ICTSD,
11、http:/ of Tariff Structure: Subgroup D,Source: The G-33: An Analysis of bound and Applied Tariffs on Agricultural Products Mario Jales, ICTSD,COTE DIVOIRE,0,1,0,2,0,3,0,4,0,5,0,6,0,7,0,01,02,02,04,04,05,07,07,07,08,08,09,09,09,11,11,12,12,14,15,15,16,17,18,20,20,21,22,22,23,33,41,51,H,S,c,h,a,p,t,e,
12、r,%,B,o,u,n,d,A,p,p,l,i,e,d,Sources: WTO (2004) and WITS (2002).,http:/ studies background,Field research component of a DFID funded project on SP-SSM To take advantage of the strategic window of opportunity in July Framework to address food security, livelihood security and rural development needs
13、in current agricultural negotiations Objective of country studies: Providing some empirical-based and “scientific” justification for the selection of SPs Test possible indicators of food/livelihood securtiy and rural development which could subsequently be used by other countries in the preparation
14、of their list,http:/ associated with G 33 Non LDCs Focus on Net Food-Importing Developing Countries (NFIDC), Low-Income Food-Deficit Countries (LIFDC), Small Island Developing States (SIDS) Geographical balance Focus on subgroups B and C Countries with proven domestic research capacity Commitment of
15、 national government to actively support and participate in the project,Countries Selection,http:/ Countries: Barbados, Caribbean (SIDS) Honduras, Central America (LIFDC) Kenya, Africa (LIFDC),Methodology: Developing an analytical framework for the operationalisation of food/livelihood securtiy and
16、rural development Test it in the field and refine the methodology A two track process Guidelines Stakeholder consultation,Pakistan, Asia (NFIDC) Peru, South America (NFIDC) Sri Lanka, Asia (LIFDC),Countries Selection (cont.),http:/ country studies,Conceptual Framework for the Identification of Speci
17、al Products,Conceptual Framework for the Identification of Special Products,http:/ 1: Identification of intended beneficiaries,Focus on rural poor, small & subsitance farmers but also small comercial farmers,Assess economic and social importance of particular products for specific regions,http:/ 2:
18、Identification of products: Livelihood secutrity & rural development indicators,http:/ 3: Identification of products (cont.): Food Security indicators,http:/ Used for Estimating SP Indicators,Data Used for Estimating SP Indicators,http:/ Country Studies Findings in a Nutshell,http:/ elements for the
19、 analysis,Substitutes Unfair competition Vulnerability to import displacement Current level of protection,http:/ for negotiating modalities on SP,Selection: Countries should be allowed to self-designate their SP within an agreed limit (eg. 15 20 % of tariff lines). There might be a reference to an i
20、llustrative, 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. perspective Treatment: regardless of the 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:/