==========
From: "cuts" <cutsjpr@jp1.dot.net.in>
to: StopWTORound@onelist.com
subj: Southern Agenda for the WTO: A Civil Society Perspective
no/date: C.88(2)/1999.08.23
from: cutsjpr@jp1.dot.net.in <Bipul Chatterjee>
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
KINDLY QUOTE OUR REF. NO. & DT. IN YOUR RESPONSE.
IT HELPS US IN LOCATING THE RIGHT FILE QUICKLY.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Sorry for X-posting
Dear All,
CUTS Centre for International Trade, Economics & Environment
organised an international conference, "Southern Agenda for the
Next Millennium: Role of the Civil Society" at Bangalore, India
on 18-19 AUgust, 1999.
The Conference was held close to the G-15 Trade/Commerce
Ministers meeting. The objective of the Conference was to
deliberate on the current international trade policy issues from
the civil society's perspective so as to evolve a synergistic
position, and take forward well-argued viewpoints and concerns on
sustainable development in the South to the Seattle Ministerial
Conference of the WTO.
The Conference was attended by over 60 people from
representatives of civil society, media, academia, governments
(from G-15 group of countries), inter-governmental organisations.
The declaration is also available in our web site <www.cuts-
india.org>.
While looking forward to your valued response, I remain,
With warm regards,
Bipul
-------------------------------------------------------------
Bipul Chatterjee,
Consumer Unity & Trust Society,
CUTS Centre for International Trade, Economics & Environment,
D-218, Bhaskar Marg, Bani Park,
Jaipur 302 016, Rajasthan, India.
Ph: 91.141.20 2940/20 5802/20 0155 (H)
Fx: 91.141.20 2968
E-mail: cutsjpr@jp1.dot.net.in
[jp1 (one)]
Web Site: www.cuts-india.org
[KINDLY MENTION THE REFERENCE NUMBER AND DATE IN YOUR REPLY]
-------------------------------------------------------------
Mission: Pursuing economic equity and social justice within and
across borders for over 16 years.
=================================================================
SOUTHERN AGENDA FOR WTO: A CIVIL SOCIETY PERSPECTIVE
This Summary provides the highlights of the deliberations at the
International Conference on "Southern Agenda for the Next
Millenium: Role of the Civil Society" organized in Bangalore by
the CUTS Centre for International Trade, Economics and
Environment, on August 18 and 19, 1999. This conference brought
together over 50 delegates from several NGOs and research
institutions of the G-15 and other developing countries to
discuss the contribution that civil society organizations could
make to the Seattle Round deliberations, so as to safeguard the
interests of citizens in these, and other developing countries.
A Vision for the World Order
The world trade order should accord a high priority to the
autonomy of developing countries in designing and implementing
development strategies. It should accept the fact that many
instruments used by these countries to achieve development
objectives are in contradiction to the theoretical concept of
free trade. Provisions made in the world trade system to account
for the special needs and problems of developing countries should
not be stated as mere expressions of interest by the developed
world. The system must enforce measures designed to provide
special and differential treatment to the developing countries.
No world order can succeed in its objectives if it does not
accommodate diversity. To do this, the WTO process needs to bring
back to centre stage a balance between the basic responsibility
and accountability of governments towards their people and the
requirements of an international system. It should respect the
different priorities of countries at various stages of
development.
The acceptance of divergent development strategies is crucial,
because development cannot be viewed in simple terms of per
capita income. It is a multi-dimensional process, and each
country should have the autonomy and flexibility to decide how it
prioritizes these dimensions.
* A vision of the world order that gives countries the space to
implement their own strategies of sustainable, multi-dimensional
development, while respecting the priorities of other countries,
is the starting point of this agenda.
Strategic Coordination
There is general agreement that the WTO in its current form is
far from serving the best interests of the citizens of developing
countries. This perception is equally true for the common
citizens of the developed world. Based on the theoretical
foundation that free trade benefits all those who participate in
it, the reality of the system since it was initiated five years
ago suggests that countries who advocate free trade rarely
practice it. More so, instead of evolving into an organization
based on principles, it had become one in which every agreement
was the result of intense conflict between countries or groups of
countries, which eventually concluded on the basis of the
superior bargaining power of developed countries. In fact, this
is a process, which has put the developing countries as a group
at an inherent disadvantage.
There are grave doubts about the merits of holding a new round of
trade negotiations while this unequal bargaining situation
prevails. From the South's perspective, the benefits of
continuing negotiations in the WTO framework lie in using them
for detailed reviews of existing agreements, and implementation
of remedial action achieving balance and equity in the system.
The best way to go about this is by a process of strategic
coordination between developing countries. It is for developing
countries to seek out their common interests and stand firm as a
group to assert those interests in the new round. To make
strategic coordination effective, an effort needs to be made at
two levels. The governments of these countries should work
together with clear perception of national interest in mind. This
would need to be complemented by active collaboration with civil
society organizations, which would assert the priority of issues
relating to equity and social justice. This combination would
then be in a position to formulate a strategic positive agenda
that could be put forward at the Seattle meeting of the WTO.
* The primary objective of continuing negotiations is a full
review of the implementation and impact of existing agreements.
* Southern countries must strategically coordinate to identify
their common interests, and collectively negotiate to advance
them.
* Civil Society must ensure that equity and social justice are
given high priority in the negotiating positions of these
countries. The rights and interests of consumers, rural and urban
workers, small farmers and enterprises, and vulnerable social
groups must be protected.
* This process also requires that southern governments encourage,
support and collaborate with civil society organizations in their
own countries. Strategic co-ordination cannot be effective in
promoting joint objectives unless this broad range of resources
is effectively used.
* With respect to continuing negotiations, new issues, such as
investment policy, competition policy, government procurement,
trade facilitation, e-commerce, information technology, social
and environmental clauses et al should not be put onto the
agenda.
The Structure of WTO
The WTO has four main functions: rule-making, policy orientation
and monitoring, negotiations and dispute settlement. All these
functions have been shaped by the unequal bargaining power
between the developed and developing world. For the WTO to have
any chance of advancing southern interests, concerted action by
the southern governments and civil society organizations is
essential. The immediate task is to develop a common agenda for
the Seattle negotiations.
It must be emphasized that the WTO does not operate in isolation.
It is a part of a broader arrangement of multilateral financial
and regulatory institutions, many of which also reflect the same
inequalities.
* Given the diversity of needs, interests, resources and
approaches to development among southern countries, a fair,
equitable and transparent rule-based system is necessary.
* A multilateral trade and financial system that is resistant to
the unequal bargaining power between South and North cannot
emerge without collective action by southern countries.
Agriculture and Food Security
The experience with the Agreement on Agriculture has been in
virtual contradiction to the expectations of southern
signatories. The pressure to reduce subsidies and increase market
access to the northern producers has been intense.
Simultaneously, the degree of support received by the latter from
their governments has been increasing. The subsidies typically
provided by southern governments have been classified as
violating the Agreement. On the other hand, the bulk of subsidies
provided by northern governments have been placed in the "non-
actionable" category. Even as the north continues to artificially
enhance the competitiveness of its agricultural products, the
south is constrained to reducing or freezing its quantum of
subsidies to this sector. The same asymmetry prevails with
respect to market access. Both tariff and non-tariff barriers
have been used by the north to restrict the south's access to
their markets. Genuine competitiveness, which is the underpinning
of free trade is clearly not being given an opportunity in this
sector.
Closely related to the issue of market access is that of food
security. The existing agreement can conceivably put a country
which is not self-sufficient in food at the mercy of global
traders to meet its basic needs. Guaranteeing the availability of
food to its citizens is a sovereign responsibility of any nation.
This cannot be subordinated to the requirements of any world
trading regime. One way of doing this is to take domestic
production for domestic consumption outside the ambit of the
agreement.
* The reality of the Agreement on Agriculture is far from the
expectations of the southern countries. It has, in effect, forced
them to stop supporting their own farmers, while opening up their
markets to the heavily subsidized producers from the north. This
is of particular concern for countries threatened with food
shortages, because food aid programmes are declining in
significance.
* Opening up trade in agriculture, under whatever conditions,
cannot be given precedence over the sovereign responsibility of
governments to ensure food security.
* Another objective is to protect the livelihoods of groups
traditionally involved in food production, such as small farmers
and fisherpersons.
Linkage Issues
Environmental and Social Issues
Environment and social issues are increasingly being pushed onto
the trade agenda. It is recognized that solutions to
environmental and social problems are a fundamental part of any
vision of sustainable development. These are not issues that need
to be imposed on southern economies in any way. There are
existing national and international mechanisms designed to
address these problems. A trade regime is neither an appropriate
nor an effective device to achieve these objectives. Firstly,
there is every danger that it can be used by countries to raise
non-tariff barriers. Secondly, the bulk of environmental and
social problems are related to domestic economic activity,
whereas the WTO can only influence export-related activities.
* Environmental and Social Issues are an integral part of any
vision of sustainable development. Trade restrictive measures are
neither appropriate nor effective mechanism to address these
problems. They need to be advanced through independent policy
routes supported by international cooperation.
Inconsistency between Instruments
Conflict between TRIPs and CBD
The south is at a great disadvantage with respect to its
biological resources, because of the inherent conflicts between
the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and the Agreement
on Trade Related Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS). The former
is a scheme, which gives countries a great deal of control over
their indigenous resources; not just at the governmental level,
but devolving to the communities that have traditionally used
these resources. The latter seeks to commercialize traditional
knowledge; it fails to recognize the relationships between
communities and biological resources. It is structured so as to
give an unequal advantage to commercial interests of the north.
The conflict between the two agreements could be resolved in
favour of the affected southern communities by taking full
advantage of the scope of sui generis legislation, which would
protect the interests of the groups involved in southern
countries.
* The CBD acknowledges sovereignty and the rights of communities
to share in the benefits of biological diversity, neither of
which are acknowledged by TRIPs. The forthcoming review must
amend TRIPs to bring it in line with CBD.
=================================================================
This Summary has been endorsed by the following participating
organisations at the Conference, and it is open for supporting
sign-ons from others.
1. Focus on the Global South, Bangkok, Thailand, and Bombay,
India
2. International South Group Network, Harare, Zimbabwe
3. Consumers International, Penang, Malaysia
4. Yayasan Lembaga Konsumen Indonesia, Jakarta, Indonesia
5. Africa Centre for Technology Studies, Nairobi, Kenya
6. Era Consumer, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
7. DESCO, Lima, Peru
8. Law & Society Trust, Colombo, Sri Lanka
9. Council on International and Public Affairs, New York, USA
10. ZERO, Harare, Zimbabwe
11. ACIM, Port Louis, Mauritius
12. FEDCOT, Chennai, India
13. Gene Campaign, New Delhi, India
14. Council for Social Development, New Delhi, India
15. Consumer Guidance Society of India, Bombay, India
16. Citizen, Consumer and Civic Group, Madras, India
17. CREAT, Bangalore, India
18. Consumer Education Centre, Bangalore, India
19. Indian Institute for Consumer Studies, Bangalore, India
20. Consumer Guidance Society, Vijayawada, India
21. CUTS, Jaipur, India
Ronald Nigh
Dana, A.C.
Mexico, D.F. & San Cristóbal de Las Casas, Chiapas
Tel. y FAX 525-666-73-66 (DF)
529-678-72-15 (Chiapas)
danamex@mail.internet.com.mx
To Unsubscribe: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg". If you receive the digest format, use the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg-digest".
To Subscribe to Digest: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"subscribe sanet-mg-digest".
All messages to sanet-mg are archived at:
http://www.sare.org/htdocs/hypermail