Uruguay Round

The Uruguay Round was the eighth conducted under the GATT trade round. It began in 1986 and ended in 1994 with the Marrakesh Final Act of the results of multilateral trade negotiations ( the so-called Marrakech Agreement). In this round of negotiations, the industrialized countries shifted their focus for the first time from the liberalization of trade in goods on the so-called " trade in services " and the protection of intellectual property. As developing country, who are the majority of the participating countries, called for better market access for their products, especially textiles and agricultural products in the developed countries. In addition, for the first time was the call for a cut in trade- distorting agricultural subsidies in developed countries, particularly the U.S. and the EU discussed.

Another issue in the Uruguay Round were institutional reforms which had the creation of the World Trade Organization ( WTO) result. The demands of the industrial countries were met mainly by the GATS (General Agreement on Trade in Services ) and TRIPS (trade -related aspects of intellectual property). In addition, further tariff reductions, a gradual opening up of agricultural markets as well as a reduction of agricultural subsidies were agreed. Especially in the agricultural sector, however, continued the industrialized countries their pledges not to, so this point on further rounds of negotiations, the WTO has been controversial over again. The conditions imposed by some developed countries social standards were rejected by developing countries as a covert protectionism.

Expiration

As with all trading rounds, the definition of the negotiating mandate in the run was already moot and employed the Contracting Parties to the GATT for several years. Point of contention were especially new topics services and intellectual property; as a compromise the services negotiations were strictly separated from the negotiations in other subject areas. Since the results of the Uruguay Round ( Marrakesh Agreement) could be adopted by individual states but as a package, the industrialized countries ultimately prevailed with their demand for a fixed link to the rules for trade in goods and trade in services.

The actual negotiations in 1986 with a ministerial conference in Punta del Este, Uruguay, started. They should be initially completed within four years. In 1988, in Montreal instead of a conference that should hold the interim results, on the still massive differences in the positions of the states involved were visible but. The Ministerial Conference 1990 in Brussels, which was supposed to conclude the round, failed due to continuing differences. It was only after three years there have been the end of 1993 an agreement on all major issues, so that the Marrakech Agreement signed in 1994 and the establishment of the WTO came into force on 1 January 1995.

Agreement on Agriculture - AoA

During the Uruguay Round Agreement on Agriculture, the so-called agreed (1994 in Marrakech). It sets the rules for agricultural trade for all WTO members. Implementation will be for developing countries in ten years (1995-2005) and for industrialized countries in five years (1995-2000). Some of the rules of this Agreement are summarized in the so-called "boxes":

Yellow Box ( Amber Box)

Payments to producers and other domestic subsidies to be reduced under the provisions of the Agreement on Agriculture of the Uruguay Round, but not eliminated. Expenditure included in the yellow box are subject to reductions based on the Aggregate Measure of Support ( " Aggregate Measurement of Support ", AMS). The AMS is an imputed variable, which includes government support for agricultural producers. The only exceptions are those expenses that are exempt in the other articles of the Convention. All agricultural expenditure, the government should be in the yellow box, unless they meet the criteria of the other boxes ( Blue or Green Box). In the EU, for example, falls market price support in the penalty box.

Blue box

With the Blair House Agreement between the EU and the U.S. succeeded in 1992 the "breakthrough" in the agricultural negotiations in the Uruguay Round, the so-called Blue Box was created. The article 6.5. the AoA states that the Blue Box countries unlimited spending on direct payments to farmers allowed if these payments are linked to " produktionsbeschränkende programs ". Payments here are based on fixed areas and fields or calculated per livestock. In the EU, these are the faces and animal premiums and the set-aside premiums.

Green box

This box is referred to as the Agreement on Agriculture Annex 2 of the AoA. There is a list of direct payments that are exempt from the AMS calculations ( yellow box).

  • Section 2: General Services, for example, Research, consultancy, inspection services, etc.
  • Section 3: Public stockholding for food security
  • Section 4: Domestic food aid ( current market price )
  • Section 5: Direct payments to producers
  • Section 6: Decoupled income support
  • Paragraph 7: Government financial participation in income insurance and income safety-net programs
  • Section 8: Payments for relief from natural disasters
  • Section 9: Structural adjustment assistance in the form of retirement programs for producers
  • Section 10: Structural adjustment assistance in the form of programs to resource retirement
  • Section 11: Structural adjustment assistance provided through investment aids
  • Section 12: Payments under environmental programs
  • Section 13: payments under regional assistance programs

Direct payments to producers are bound to nothing more than a solid, historical " base period " (so-called decoupled payments ).

Red box

Measures that are " outlawed " by the Agreement on Agriculture, ie are prohibited. These include, for example, non-tariff measures, such as variable levies. This term is rarely used. As the " General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade - GATT " (General Tariffs and Trade) was developed with the founding in 1947 in different rounds and a growing number of developing countries signed the agreement, established by Member States in the 60 years the principle that the developing countries greater flexibility should be granted, as the industrialized countries. With SDT, the disadvantages of developing countries are recognized in the world trading system. The initial conditions for the participation of the poorest countries in world trade are far worse due to their limited capacity. This recognition is called special and differential treatment ( = Special and Differential Treatment, SDT, SND ). Although in many agreements, as well as the AoA, the proposed SDT are considered by some to be insufficient, the WTO uses the term further SDT.

Agricultural subsidy Multi Fibre Arrangement
34980
de