Growing evidence suggests that 'green box' farm subsidies may in fact affect production and trade, harm farmers in developing countries and cause environmental damage. This book brings together new research and analysis examining the relationship between green box subsidies and sustainable development goals, and explores options for future reform.

The Agreement on Agriculture (AoA) was adopted to eliminate the illegitimate use of trade distorting agricultural subsidies and, thereby, reduce and avoid the negative effects subsidies have on global agricultural trade. However, the AoA has been fashioned in a way that is enabling developed countries to continue high levels of protectionism through subsidization, whilst many developing countries are facing severe and often damaging competition from imports artificially cheapened through subsidies. The regulation of subsidies by the World Trade Organisation (WTO) has been a highly sensitive issue. This is mainly due to the fear of compromising on food security, especially by developed countries. Developing countries have suffered negatively from the subsidy programmes of developed countries, which continue to subsidize their agricultural sector. This position of developing countries in the global trade system, which has been described as weak, has drawn criticism of the WTO, namely that it does not protect the interests of the weak developing nations, but rather strengthens the interests of the strong developed nations. The green box provisions which are specifically designed to regulate payments that are considered trade neutral or minimally trade distorting have grossly been manipulated by developed countries at the mercy of the AoA. Developed countries continue to provide trade distorting subsidies under the guise of green box support. This is defeating the aims and objectives of the AoA. The study examines the regulation of WTO agricultural subsidies from the developing countries’ perspective. It looks at the problems WTO member states face with trade distorting subsidies, but focuses more on the impact these have on developing states. It scrutinizes the AoA’s provisions regulating subsidies by adopting a perspective to identify any loopholes or shortcomings which undermine the interests and aspirations of developing countries. This is against the background that some of the provisions of the AoA are lenient towards the needs of developed countries at the expense of developing countries.

This book provides background regarding the vulnerability of U.S. agricultural support programs to potential WTO dispute settlement challenges. It does not predict which WTO members might challenge U.S. commodity subsidies, nor will the likelihood that such challenges be brought. Instead, this book reviews the general criteria for successfully challenging a farm subsidy program, and then uses available data and published economic analyses to weigh U.S. farm programs against these criteria.

Farm support is contentious in international negotiations. This in-depth assessment of the legal compliance and economic evaluation issues raised by the WTO Agreement on Agriculture presents consistent support data and forward-looking projections for eight developed and developing countries (EU, US, Japan, Norway, Brazil, China, India, Philippines), using original estimates where official notifications are not available. Variations over time in notified support in some cases reflect real policy changes; others merely reflect shifts in how countries represent their measures. The stalled Doha negotiations presage significantly tighter constraints for developed countries that provide the highest support, but loopholes will persist. Developing countries face fewer constraints and their trade-distorting farm support can rise. Pressure points and key remaining issues if a Doha agreement is reached are evaluated. Vigilant monitoring for compliance of farm support with WTO commitments will be required to lessen its negative consequences whether or not the Doha Round is concluded.

This conference addresses current developments in multilateral negotiations and the WTO cases on agriculture, and analyzing their impact on the future of the world agricultural market. [source unknown].

Grain Subsidies in Ukraine is the first attempt to examine impact of international trade law on Ukrainian policies in the cereals sector. The author focuses on instruments of state support for agricultural producers. Those are examined in their compliance with Ukraine’s WTO commitments. The other central component of the book is the effect of the EU-Ukraine Association Agreement on the the country’s policy space. The treaty contains legal approximation provisions, which may have a farreaching impact on Ukrainian agricultural regulation. In this regard, the agreement is compared to other free trade agreements signed by Ukraine. Another focal point is the question to what extent Ukraine could make use of the EU agricultural aid practice. Although certain EU experience is found to be useful, the book generally advocates reducing distortive policies in Ukraine by substituting subsidies with market-based instruments.

Public support mechanisms for agriculture in many cases hinder the transformation towards healthier, more sustainable, equitable, and efficient food systems, thus actively steering us away from meeting the Sustainable Development Goals and targets of the Paris Agreement. This report sets out the compelling case for repurposing harmful agricultural producer support to reverse this situation, by optimizing the use of scarce public resources, strengthening economic recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic, and ultimately driving a food systems transformation that can support global sustainable development commitments. The report provides policymakers with an updated estimate of past and current agricultural producer support for 88 countries, projected up until 2030. The trends emerging from the analysis are a clear call for action at country, regional and global levels to phase out the most distortive, environmentally and socially harmful support, such as price incentives and coupled subsidies, and redirecting it towards investments in public goods and services for agriculture, such as research and development and infrastructure, as well as decoupled fiscal subsidies. Overall, the analysis highlights that, while removing and/or reducing harmful agricultural support is necessary, repurposing initiatives that include measures to minimize policy trade-offs will be needed to ensure a beneficial outcome overall. The report confirms that, while a few countries have started repurposing and reforming agricultural support, broader, deeper, and faster reforms are needed for food systems transformation. Thus, it provides guidance (in six steps) on how governments can repurpose agricultural producer support – and the reforms this will take.