Improving the International Governance of Food Security ... · PDF file... (FAO) in 1945 and the food ... food security cycle, all of the initiatives ... Governance of Food Security

By Manzoor Ahmad Former Ambassador of Pakistan to the WTO Former Director of the FAO Liaison Office in Geneva

Issue Paper No. 38

ICTSD Programme on Agricultural Trade and Sustainable DevelopmentSeptember 2011

Improving the InternationalGovernance of Food Security and Trade

l ICTSD Programme on Agricultural Trade and Sustainable Development

By Manzoor Ahmad Former Ambassador of Pakistan to the WTO FormerDirectoroftheFAOLiaisonOfficeinGeneva

Improving the International Governance of Food Security and Trade

Issue Paper No. 38

September 2011

ii M.Ahmad-ImprovingtheInternationalGovernanceofFoodSecurityandTrade

Published by

InternationalCentreforTradeandSustainableDevelopment(ICTSD)InternationalEnvironmentHouse27ChemindeBalexert,1219Geneva,SwitzerlandTel:+41229178492 Fax:+41229178093E-mail:[email protected] Internet:www.ictsd.org

PublisherandDirector: RicardoMeléndez-Ortiz ProgrammesDirector: ChristopheBellmann ProgrammeTeam: JonathanHepburn,AmmadBahalim

Acknowledgments

This paper was produced under the ICTSD Programme onAgricultural Trade and SustainableDevelopment.ICTSDisgratefulforthesupportofICTSD’scoreandthematicdonorsincludingtheUKDepartmentforInternationalDevelopment(DFID),theSwedishInternationalDevelopmentCooperationAgency(SIDA);theNetherlandsDirectorate-GeneralofDevelopmentCooperation(DGIS); the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark, Danida; the Ministry for Foreign Affairsof Finland; theMinistry of ForeignAffairs of Norway;Australia’sAusAID; the InterAmericanDevelopmentBank(IADB);andOxfamNovib.

For more information about ICTSD’s, and also on our Programme Agricultural Trade andSustainableDevelopment,visitourwebsite:www.ictsd.org

ICTSD welcomes feedback on this document. These can be forwarded Ammad Bahalim, [email protected]

Citation:Ahmad,Manzoor;(2011); Improving the International Governance of Food Security and Trade; ICTSD Programme Agricultural Trade and Sustainable Development; Issue Paper No. 38;InternationalCentreforTradeandSustainableDevelopment,Geneva,Switzerland,www.ictsd.org.

Copyright© ICTSD,2011.Readersareencouragedtoquotethismaterial foreducationalandnonprofitpurposes,providedthesourceisacknowledged.

Thiswork is licensedunder theCreativeCommonsAttribution-Non-commercial-No-DerivativeWorks3.0License.Toviewacopyofthislicense,visithttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/orsendalettertoCreativeCommons,171SecondStreet,Suite300,SanFrancisco,California,94105,USA.

Front cover: “Uniplanetarisches System in memoriam Galileo Galilei” by Alex Flemming.Photo courtesy of the World Trade Organization Public Forum 2010. Geneva, Switzerland. http://www.flickr.com/photos/world_trade_organization/4995368396/

TheviewsexpressedinthispublicationarethoseoftheauthoranddonotnecessarilyreflecttheviewsICTSDoritsfundinginstitutions.

ISSN1817356X

iiiICTSD Programme on Agricultural Trade and Sustainable Development

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS iv

FOREWORD v

1. INTRODUCTION 1

2. A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF RECENT INITIATIVES 2

3. ThE INSTITUTIONAL CONTExT OF POLICYMAkING ON TRADE AND FOOD SECURITY 5

4. ThE WAY FORWARD 7

5. CONCLUSION 9

ENDNOTES 10

iv M.Ahmad-ImprovingtheInternationalGovernanceofFoodSecurityandTrade

LIST ABBrEvIATIONS ANd ACrONymS

AoA UruguayRoundAgreementonAgriculture

CFS CommitteeonWorldFoodSecurity

CFA UNHLTFComprehensiveFrameworkforAction

CGIAR ConsultativeGrouponInternationalAgriculturalResearch

CoA WTOCommitteeonAgriculture

ECOSOC UnitedNationsEconomicandSocialCouncil

FAO UnitedNationsFoodandAgricultureOrganization

G8 Agroupofleadingdevelopedeconomies

G20 Agroupofleadingdevelopedanddevelopingeconomies

GAFSP GlobalAgricultureandFoodSecurityProgram

IBRD InternationalBankforReconstructionandDevelopment

IDA InternationalDevelopmentAssociation

IFAD InternationalFundforAgriculturalDevelopment

IFC InternationalFinanceCorporation

IMF InternationalMonetaryFund

GFSC GlobalFoodSecurityCluster

GSF GlobalStrategicFrameworkoftheCommitteeonWorldFoodSecurity

LDC LeastDevelopedCountry

NFIDC NetFoodImportingDevelopingCountry

OECD OrganizationforEconomicCooperationandDevelopment

TRIPS AgreementonTradeRelatedAspectsofIntellectualPropertyRights

UNHLTF UnitedNationsHighLevelTaskForceontheGlobalFoodSecurityCrisis

WFP UnitedNationsWorldFoodProgramme

WTO WorldTradeOrganization

vICTSD Programme on Agricultural Trade and Sustainable Development

RicardoMeléndez-Ortiz ChiefExecutive,ICTSD

Tradepoliciesandtraderulesimpactuponfoodsecurityinthedevelopingworldinanumberofimportantways.However,ifpoliciesontradeandfoodsecurityaretobesuccessfulinpromotingpublicpolicygoals, the institutionsandgovernanceframework fordeliveringthemneedstobefunctional,effectiveandcoherent.Thereisgrowingrecognitionamongstgovernments,civilsocietyorganisations and other stakeholders that the current international architecture for deliveringthesegoalsisinneedofsignificantimprovement.

Inthetradepolicysphere,thereisrelativelywiderecognitionthateffectivemultilateralinstitutionsandrulemakingarenecessaryforensuringequitableprocessesandoutcomes.Whilethismaybetruefortrade,itisarguablyalsoimportantinotherareasaffectingtheachievementofsustainabledevelopmentgoals.

Intheaftermathofthe2007/8foodpricespiketheinternationalcommunityrespondedwithaflurryofactiontoaddressthechallengesofgovernance.TheUNSecretaryGenerallaunchedtheHighLevelTaskForceontheGlobalFoodSecurityCrisistoimprovecoordinationandcommunicationamong the many international agencies working on food security. The G8, a group of leadingeconomies, committed to improving funding for agriculture and subsequently theUN Food andAgricultureOrganizationsetabouttoreformtheCommitteeonWorldFoodSecurity.Consideringall the changes that have beenmade in the last few years the scourge hunger has yet to beeliminatedwhilewehavewitnessedyetanotherfoodpricespikethisyear.

InthepaperthatfollowsAmbassadorManzoorAhmadspellsoutclearlytheextenttowhichthecurrent governance framework for food security and trademay be hindering the achievementoffoodsecuritygoals.Heexaminestheinstitutionalcontextofpolicymakingontradeandfoodsecurity, looking in particular at the role of the WTO and the Rome based institutions, andmakes suggestions forways inwhich thesebodiescouldmoreeffectivelyaddress food securityconcerns.

AnefficientandtargetedsystemofgovernanceisessentialfortheattainmentoffoodsecurityandwehopethatyoufindAmbassadorAhmad’scontributionconstructivetothisdebate.

FOrEWOrd

1 M.Ahmad-ImprovingtheInternationalGovernanceofFoodSecurityandTrade

1. INTrOdUCTION

Over thepastcentury,manyhavetried,withlimited success, to reform the internationalgovernanceoffoodandagriculture.Shortagesresulting from World War II led to theestablishmentoftheUNFoodandAgricultureOrganization(FAO)in1945andthefoodpricespikesoftheearly1970sresultedinthecreationof the International Fund for AgriculturalDevelopment (IFAD) and the Committee onWorld Food Security (CFS).While there is noappetitetocreateyetanotherorganizationtomeetthischallenge,manyseeanopportunitytoaddresstherootcausesoffood insecurity.These include a 30-year trend of fallinginvestment in agriculture, lack of coherencein the existing global system of governance

of food security, distortions in trade anddisjointedagriculturalpoliciesat thenationaland international levels. Good progress hasbeenmadeover the last threeyears in someoftheseareas,buttheglobalcommunitywillhavetokeepupthispaceinallareastotrulytacklehunger.

Thispapercriticallyexaminestherecentglobalinitiatives to improve various elements of theinternational governance of food security andthe institutional context of policymaking ontradeandfoodsecurityaswellasmakingsomesuggestions for ways in which policymakingbodies could more effectively address foodsecurityconcerns.

2ICTSD Programme on Agricultural Trade and Sustainable Development

2. A CrITICAL ANALySIS OF rECENT INITIATIvES

While a number of initiatives have beenlaunched over the past three years toimprovetheinternationalgovernanceoffoodsecurity,forthepurposeofthisanalysistheyare discussed in the context of three globalinstitutions that have played a leading rolein promoting them: the United Nations; theRome-based agencies; and the World Bank.Theydonotcovertheentirespectrumofthefoodsecuritycycle,alloftheinitiativestakenatthecountrylevelorthoseledbytheprivatesectorbutrefermostlytotheinitiativesthathave been taken at the intergovernmentallevel. Most of these efforts are interlinkedwith the variousactorsparticipating ineachother’s work through formal and informalmeasures. In this context, the role of theWorld Trade Organization on trade relatedfoodsecurityissuesisalsoassessed.

One of the earliest and most importantinitiatives in response to food price spikes attheintergovernmentallevelcameinApril2008when a High Level Task Force on the GlobalFood Security Crisis (UNHLTF) was set up.HeadedbytheUNSecretary-General,withFAO’sDirectorGeneralas itsVice-Chair,theUNHLTFincludesheadsoftheUnitedNationsspecializedagencies, funds, programmes, UN secretariatdepartments,theWorldTradeOrganization,theWorldBank,theInternationalMonetaryFundandtheOrganizationforEconomicCooperationandDevelopment.Itsmainobjectivesare:advocacyfor improving foodsecurity;mobilizing funds;imporving accountability of the internationalsystem;andimprovingeffectivenessatcountrylevel.1 These objectives were to be achievedwithout building any bureaucratic structureor intergovernmental layers and mostlythrough better coordination at internationaland country level. The Task Forcewas askedto produce an action plan describing how torespondtothefoodcrisisintheshortandlongtermina“coherentandcoordinatedway”andtomonitoritsimplementation.

In the three years since it was setup, theTask Force has been able to achieve some

worthwhile goals. Within three months ofits establishment, it was able to produce aComprehensive Framework for Action (CFA).2 Eventhoughitwasatop-downmanualandnota “bottom-up” negotiated document, it waswell accepted by the international system asa basic framework for tackling the crisis. Itstwin-track approach, based on FAO’s Anti-HungerProgramof2003,forrespondingtotheimmediate needs of vulnerable populationsand building longer-term resilience have laidthefoundationforotherschemesdevisedsincethen. The document itself has evolved overtime. An Updated CFA in 2010 attempted tostrengthenpreviousanalysisandengageotheractors, such as civil society, creating buy-infromawiderangeofstake-holdersonfoodandnutritionsecurity.

When the Task Force was set up, the Rome-basedagenciesunderstoodittobeashort-termmechanism for raisingawareness and resourcesfor thecrisiswhile improvingcollaborationandefficiency.Theagenciessupporteditbysecondingsome of their own staff and providing othermaterial assistance. However, when it becameclearthattheTaskForcemaynotbeasshortterm(forconsistencywithearlierusage)anentity,thelevel of cooperation started dwindling. SincecoordinationwasthebasicpurposeoftheTaskForce, itwasessential that ithavefull supportof FAO, IFAD and the WFP. Another problemwhichmayhavegivenrisetothissituationisthatwhentheUNHLTFwascreated,itwasintendedas an entity which would act on behalf of itsaffiliatedmemberssothattheymightcarryouttheir own mandates more effectively. Instead,it seemed to take on the role of an agent ofchange.WithoutthefullsupportofkeyRome-basedagenciesandhavingnoinfrastructureofits own the UNHLTF is unlikely to be able tocarryoutitsfunctionsinthelongrun.ItwouldbeworthwhileexaminingwhetheritshouldbesubsumedintothenewlyreformedCommitteeonWorldFoodSecurity(CFS).

Countless internal and external evaluationsof the three Rome-based agencies have


recommendedthatsincetheyservethesameoverall purpose, better collaboration at theglobal,regionalandcountrylevelswouldmakethemmoreeffective.3TheFAO,WFPandIFADhave historically cooperated largely aroundhumanitariancrises,possiblybecauseresourcemobilization is easier when dealing with thesymptoms of food insecurity rather than itsrootcauses.4TherenewedemphasisbytheG8-G20ongreatercooperationamongtheplayersand organizations working to fight hungerandtheformationofaGlobalPartnershipforAgricultureandFoodSecurityhasencouragedthe Rome-based agencies to increase theircooperation. Other areas of collaborationfor the FAO and WFP, such as the GlobalInformationEarlyWarningSystemonfoodandagriculture,arecertainlynoteworthyfortheirimpactonpreventingcrises.Withthisrenewedcooperationandtheradicalreformsthattheyhaveundergone,theyarenowinmuchbetterposition to meet the task ahead of them.

InAugust2009,thethreeagenciesdevelopeda joint plan that listed four pillars ofcooperation.5 These include collaborationon policy advice, knowledge and monitoring,operations, advocacy and communicationand administrative collaboration. They alsoagreedtotakejointactionatglobal,regional,nationalandlocallevels.6 One concrete project resultingfromthisnewspiritofcooperationisthe establishment of an FAO andWFP co-ledGlobalFoodSecurityCluster(GFSC).7

Another significant change is the relativelyquick restructuring and reforming of theCommitteeonWorldFoodandSecurity(CFS).The Committee was established in 1974 tosupport the World Food Council by servingas a forum in the United Nations system forreview and follow-up of policies concerningworld food security.8 It was also tasked tocoordinateaglobalapproachtofoodsecurityand promote policy convergence. However, itbecame difficult for the CFS to live up to itsintendedroleaftertheCouncilwasdisbandedintheearly1990s.9

Buildingon theG8proposal for anewGlobalPartnership for Agriculture and Food Security

thatshouldincludeallrelevantactors,theFAOspearheadedtheprocessofreformingtheCFSandwithinayearhadareformedCFSworkingin its new role. Its first goal is to agreeon aGlobal Strategic Framework (GSF) for foodsecurityandnutrition:thisisbeingbuiltontheCFAdevelopedbytheUNHLTFwhileaddressingthepoliticalneedsofmemberstates.LiketheUNHLTF,itincludesinternationalorganizationsworkingonfoodsecurityinanadvisorycapacity.AreformedCFSshouldbemoreeffectiveasitincludesawidergroupofstakeholdersandthusit should be in a better position to promotepolicesthatreducefoodinsecurity.

Furthermore, its twelve-member executivearm should enable it to attend to emergencyissuesefficientlyandquickly.Theinclusionofan independent High Level Panel of Experts(HLPE)shouldlanditlegitimacyandcredibility,asitwouldmakepolicyrecommendationsbasedon sound technical criteria. It has been wellreceived inmostquartersasan improvementonexistinggovernancestructures.

While having a diverse composition has itsadvantages, at the same time it is likely tocreate difficulties in developing commonpositionsonpolicyissues.Asyetitsmandateisunclearanditisnotcertainifithasthefundingorauthority toacton sensitive subjects suchascriticalreviewsofmemberpolicies,exportrestrictions, large scale land acquisitions andothersimilarissues.UnlessthemandateoftheCFS is clearly defined and expanded to allowfor binding action, its role as an effectiveforumforaddressingseriouspolicyissuesmaybechallenged.Moreover,sincepastreformoffoodsecuritygovernancehas leftmuchtobedesired,withoutclearoutcomestheCFSrisksbecoming yet another committee uncertainaboutitsbureaucraticnatureandobjectivity.

The third and perhaps the most important clusterofmanagingfoodsecuritymechanismsis developing around the World Bank. TheBank is an international financial institutionthatprovidesloanstodevelopingcountriesforvariousprogrammesandwouldnotbeanobviouscandidate for a discussion on food securitygovernance. However, since the onset of the


foodprice spikes, it hasplayeda veryactiveroleinimprovingfoodsecurity.Itisgraduallyreturningtotheroleitplayedduringthe1980swhenitwasthemajordonorandcoordinatorforagriculture and rural development. Followingthe G8 promise of $20 billion for sustainableagriculture in L’Aquila, the Bank created anagriculturetrust fund,pledging$1.5billionofitsownresources.ThisGlobalAgricultureandFoodSecurityProgram(GAFSP),oneofseveralWorld Bank led instruments for investmentin agriculture and food security, has alreadyreceived pledges of over $1 billion from 6donors including Australia, Canada, SouthKorea,SpainandtheUnitedStates.TheFundisalsoattractingprivateinvestments.TheGatesFoundationisoneofthekeycontributorsandothersmayfollow.TheBank’snewAgricultureActionPlan(FY2010–2012)projectsanincreasein support (from IDA, IBRD, and IFC) toagricultureandrelatedsectorsfromabaselineaveragesupportinFY2006–2008of$4.1billionannually to between $6.2 and $8.3 billionannuallyoverthenextthreeyears.10

Thereisnodoubtthatwithitsamplefunding,slimmer bureaucracy, country level presenceand strong links with the usually politicallypowerful ministries of finance, the Bankwill remain the prime source of funding foragriculture related assistance. Although theRome-basedagenciesemploythevastmajorityof specialized staffworking on food security,they often lack the agility and financialresources necessary for innovative work atthe country level. TheWorld Bank, by takingadvantageofthisdisparity,islikelytoexercisean disproportionally large influence on policymakingatthenationalandinternationallevel.

Although theBank’s technical expertisepalesincomparisontothatofstaffbasedinRome,it has access to the required resources. It isafoundingmemberoftheConsultativeGrouponInternationalAgriculturalResearch(CGIAR)andisoneoftheGroup’sfourco-sponsors.TheCGIAR owes its existence to the concerns ofthe1960sandearly1970sthatrapidpopulationgrowth would result in wide spread famine.With generous funding from the Bank andother donors, such as the Rockefeller andFordfoundations,theCGIARwasinstrumentalin developing new varieties of cereal stapleswhich were a major factor in achieving theGreen Revolution. Unfortunately, reductionsincontributionsforagriculturefromtheWorldBankandothermajordonorsinthe1990shadamajor impactontheworkingof theCGIAR.The situation has now changed. The BankandCGIARarenowworkingonseveral result-orientedprojects.Theseincludeprojectssuchas the Global Agriculture and Food SecurityProgram and the “small holder productivityand resilience” program. The CGIAR receiveda major boost when the Gates Foundationbecame a member in December 2009.11 With its recent reforms, the CGIAR seems to haveregaineddonortrustandimproveditsabilitytomeetthetaskaheadofit.IftheGroupmeetsexpectations it couldprovide amuchneededboost to agricultural productivity. Critically,gains in productivity have averaged 2.3 percent per year since 1961. Estimates from theFAO project growth of 1.5 per cent betweennowand2030.However,thisfigurefallsto0.9per cent between 2030 and 2050.12 If currentpopulation growth trends continue, moreefficient use of limited agricultural resourceswillbecrucialforrealizingfoodsecurity.13


3. ThE INSTITUTIONAL CONTExT OF pOLICymAkINg ON TrAdE ANd FOOd SECUrITy

Renewedemphasisoninvestmentinagricultureandgreatercoherenceamongtheinternationalorganizationsdealingwithfoodandagriculturewouldgosomewaytowardsalleviatingglobalfood insecurity. In many ways the situationmayreturntowhatitwasinthe1970s,1980sand1990s.Theglobalcommunitymaycontinuetoproduceenoughfoodtomeettheneedsoftherisingpopulationintheforeseeablefuturebut inadequate access and distribution maycontinuetoleavemanyhungry.Therecentsurgeinpricesmayalso startdeclining in responsetoincreasedoutputastheydidin2008/9andhave in cycles past. Productivity gains andinvestmentalone,however,maynottranslateintofoodsecurityforeveryone.Tacklingfoodsecurityrequiresimprovinglivelihoodssothatbothaccessandavailabilityaresimultaneouslyaddressed.Unfortunately, reducinghunger isnotassimpleasgrowingmorefood.Further,thestepstakenbyintergovernmentalagenciesthusfarmaynotpreventarepeatofthefoodprice spikes of 2007/08. The price spikes of2010/11area stunning reminderof theworkyettobedone.

One of the most intractable areas for foodsecurity international trade rules relatingto agriculture. Developed countries freelymake use of policies such as trade-distortingdomesticsupport,keepingdomesticconsumerpriceshighwhileunderbiddingoninternationalmarkets. In the not so distant past, manydumped surplus food on internationalmarketsordistributed itas food-aid, therebyundermininglocalproductionandincentivestoinvestinagriculture.Mostdevelopingcountriesdonothavetheresourcestopayhighsubsidiesor follow such policies. However, many ofthem were responsible for exacerbating therecent food price spikes by imposing exportrestrictions or imposing export tariffs on keycommodities,suchaswheatandrice.

Another serious problem is the high levelof protection on agriculture products. Notonlyare therehigh tariffs- four timeshigher

than industrial tariffs - but there are alsonon-tariff barriers. Through these policies,domesticmarketsarekeptrelativelyisolatedfrom international markets. When unusualevents take place, such as environmentaldisasters, these countries canmake pressingdemandsonmarketswhereonlyafractionofproductionistradedinternationally.14Inmanycasesthismayleadtovolatilityinthepricesof agricultural commodities as witnessed in2007/8and2010/11.

Furthermore,thereareno internationaldisci-plinesrelatingtomarketdistortingbiofuels.Attheheightofthefoodcrisis,majordevelopedeconomies deprived the international marketof essential commodities by diverting aconsiderable portion of their products forbiofuels. The prices of food crops are nowinextricablylinkedtothepriceofoil.Themorethepriceofoilincreases,themoreprofitableit is toconvert foodcrops intobiofuels.Evenatthecurrentprices,morethanonequarterofUSgrainproductionisbeingusedforethanol.More specifically in 2010, the United Statesproduced400million tonsof grains,ofwhich126million tons was used for the productionof ethanol (up from 16million tons in 2000).What if thepriceofoil increasedto$150perbarrelormore?ItisnotjusttheUSbutothermajor producers of food crops that are alsofollowingthesameroute.TheEuropeanUnionisaimingtoget10percentofitsenergyneedsfrom renewables,mostlybiofuels,by2020bydivertinglandawayfromfoodcrops.15

Unfortunately past attempts to negotiatemeaningful rules on agriculture have notbeen very productive. Until the early 1990s,agriculturewastreatedasanexceptiontotheGATT rules. The Agreement on Agriculture,negotiatedasapartoftheUruguayRound,wasagoodfirststepbutdidnotseriouslyaddressthe elimination of trade distorting subsidies.AnOECDstudyconductedin2000showedthatactual border protection became higher in1996, during the implementation of Uruguay


Round commitments, compared to 1994 inalmostallOECDcountriesexceptAustraliaandNew Zealand. As for agricultural subsidies,while there has been a significant shift frommoretradedistorting (amberbox) tominimaldistorting(greenbox),thedollarvalueofPSEfor developed countries has not fallen sincetheUruguayRoundnegotiationsbeganin1986.Similarly progress has been made on someof the most controversial practices, such asexport subsidies, developed country spendingon agriculture often continues to prioritizesub-optimaloutcomesat theexpenseof foodsecurity. Although some disciplines alreadyexist, it is essential that the Agreement onAgriculture is renegotiated to improveworldagriculturaltradebycorrectingandpreventingrestrictionsanddistortions.Tillsuchtimethatthe Agreement is not renegotiated, theWTOCommittee on Agriculture could initiate adiscussionandpeerreviewofexistingworkinthefollowingthreecategories:

a) furtherreform–reductionsincurrentboundlevelsofsupportandprotection;

b) expanding scope –creatingnewdisciplinestorespondtocurrentchallenges;

c) clarifyingdisciplines– lookingovercurrentrules to see if they are uniformly anduniversally applied as intended during the

UruguayRound,andmakingclarificationsofaninterpretivenaturewheredesired.

Moreover,thecurrentdiscourseonfoodpricevolatility emphasizes trade policy action onbiofuels, stocks, export restrictions and riskmanagementmeasures.16AlthoughfoodsecurityconcernsarewithinthebroadermandateoftheDohaDevelopmentAgenda,earlynegotiatorsoftheRounddidnotforeseethecurrentscenarioof high prices and focused their efforts ontheworriesofaworldexperiencingaseculardeclineincommodityprices.

For the last 10 years, much effort andresources have been spent to move theprocess along, but there is no end in sight.However, it is clear that most difficulties innegotiating new disciplines were because ofdisagreementsbetweenthemajoreconomiesnow represented in the G20, a group offinancially powerful countries. For example,many analysts blamed the failure of DohaRound talks in 2008 on an impasse betweenIndiaandtheUSaboutthenatureofthespecialsafeguard mechanism, an exception allowingan increase in tariffs in response to import surges or price depressions.17 If key players,suchastheG20,canfindcompromisesonthemost divisive issues, concluding the currenttrade round could come within reach of the153memberWTO.


4. ThE WAy FOrWArd

Thereisfarmorecoherenceinrespondingtoafoodcrisisatpresentthanatanytimeduringthelastthreedecades.However,therestillismuchroomforimprovementwhenitconcernscoordination and cooperation between themany international organizations working onfoodsecurity.Intheareaoftrade.Forexample,theWTOandFAOcouldworkmorecloselytoproducejointstudiesassessingchallengesandproviding analysis on food security. Theseorganizations regularly work with otherssuch as the OECD, and World IntellectualProperty Organization to collaborate onareas of interest. Additionally, as the WorldBank moves to disburse huge amounts forthe promotion of agriculture over the nextfiveyearsitcouldstrengthenitsexistinguseof FAO’s expertise and seek ways to expand its partnership

ItisnotclearwhatroletheUNHighLevelTaskForcecanplayinthelongrun.Itwas,afterall,intendedtobea“time-limited”entity.ItmaythereforebebestifitsrolewassubsumedbytheCFS.Atthesametime,theCFScouldbemade more independent of the Rome-basedagencies.ItsreportingmechanismcouldbetotheECOSOC(UNEconomicandSocialCouncil),which is the principal organ of the UnitedNations to coordinate economic, social, andrelated work of the various UN specializedagencies.However,ECOSOCwoulditselfneedtobethoroughlyreformedbeforeengagingtheCFS.TheroleofWTOCommitteeonAgriculture(CoA)maybereviewedtoplacefoodsecurityas a part of its mandate. The CoA could bemadeanactiveforumforfoodsecurityissuesresulting from any trade-related measures.There ishistoricalprecedentforsucharole,previouslyaWorkingGroupforTradeandFoodSecuritywasproposedattheWTO’sSingaporeMinisterial in 1996.18 Moreover, the terms ofreferenceoftheCoAarebroadandinclusive,insistingthatmemberscanconsulteachotheron“anymatter”relatingtotheimplementationof theAgreementonAgriculture (AoA).19 The AoA,thecharterestablishingtheCommittee,addressed public stockholding and export

restrictionsaselementsof the food securityneeds of its members.20 In the runupto theDoha Ministerial Conference in 2001, theWTO General Council instructed the CoAto examine the effectiveness of specificdecisionsonLDCsandNFIDCs,demonstratingparticular attention for the concerns of themostfoodinsecure.Consideringthatthelegalandpoliticalprecedentsexist,theCommitteecan serve as a forum where WTO membersregularly air their food security concerns, iftheysochoose.

While the CFS can tackle the broad issues,the CoA could focus on the trade aspectsof food security. The WTO’s Trade-RelatedaspectsofIntellectualPropertyRights(TRIPS)Council’s collaboration with the WIPO mightbe a useful model to examine. The CoAshould also regularly conduct peer reviewsofWTOmembersregardingtheiragriculturalpoliciesrelatingtofoodsecurityinamannersimilar to that of the organization’s TradePolicy Review Mechanism. The UniversalPeriodicReviewoftheHumanRightsCouncilmay also be another usefulmodel. Althoughmembersof theCouncil cannotbe forced tochange theirbehavior,public shamingof theworstviolationsmayhelpfocus internationalattention. The CoA’s mandate and theability of WTO members to press it furtherallows for similar functionality. Althoughthe WTO Secretariat may face constraintsin comprehensively addressing the matter,anythingresemblingaTradePolicyReviewisanexhaustivetask,memberscouldagreetoanappropriate resource allocation. The currentgovernancestructureallowsfoodsecurityandtradeissuestobepassedbetweenRomeandGeneva.Forexample,thismayhavebeenthecase with export prohibitions on wheat lastyear.Officialsfromsomeexportingcountriesreportedly opposed linking bans to pricespikesinthefindingsofanIntergovernmentalGroup onGrains andRice paper and impliedthattraderelateddiscussionsshouldbeheldin Geneva, not Rome.21 Strengthening thework of the Committee on Agriculture may


beausefulsteptowardsensuringthattrade-related aspects of food security do not slipthroughthecracks.

Ofthetradepolicyissueslikelytoaffectpricevolatility, export restrictions have perhapsbeendiscussedthemost in recent months at theWTO.ThecurrentDohaRoundagriculturedraftmodalitiesimprovetheabilityoftheCoAto monitor export restrictions by includinglanguagethatrequiresanotificationwithin90daysoftheuseofsuchmeasuresandrestrictstheirimpositiontooneyearoreighteenmonthsifauthorizedbyimportingmembers.22 A recent proposalfromNetFoodImportingDevelopingCountries has further developed language inthisareabycallingforlimitsontheabilityofexporterstorefusefoodtothem.23Similarly,areporttotheG20calledforcontrolsonexportrestrictionsiftheyaffecthumanitarianreliefefforts suchas thoseof theWFP.24However,thereisonlysomuchthatcanbedonesimplyon export restrictions. Other policy areassuch biofuels, stocks and risk managementtoolsshouldalsobeexplored.TheCoAshouldurgently examine all such measures to seethat they conform with the provisions ofthe Agreement on Agriculture and that theygivedueconsiderationtotheeffectsofsuchmeasures on other Members’ food security.Continuingtolookbeyondexportrestrictions,the Committee, for example, could beempowered with a simplified mechanismto look into trade and food security relatedcomplaintsbetweenMembers.

Perhaps most instructive of the challengesfacingtheCoAarethedelayednotifications of compliancewithmeasures of the Agreement

on Agriculture, a primary responsibility ofthe committee. Over the last fifteen years,submissions have been embarrassingly late.By 2007, six years into negotiating the DohaRound,USfarmpolicychangesin2002andEUreformsof2003hadnotbeennotifiedtootherWTOMembers.Beyonddelays,countriesoftennotify “measures in diverseways—categoriesare not uniform and neither is the approachtakentocalculatesupportlevels,”confoundingsimple comparisons and the monitoringfunctionofthecommittee.25 The notification systemneedstobeimprovedifMembersaretoensuretimelycompliance.Aneffectiveandvigilant Committee on Agriculture is in theinterestsofallWTOMembers.

Morebroadly,theWorldTradeOrganizationhasto considernewwaysonhow itnegotiates itstraderulesrelatingtoagriculture.Theinsistenceon a single insistence on unanimity, wherenothingisagreeduntileverythingisagreed,hasdriventhenegotiatingprocessintoastalemate.Members will need to challenge conventionalthinkingifadealistobereached.Thecriticalmassapproach,allowinganagreementtocomeintoeffectonlywhenasufficientpercentageofworld trade is coveredby itsmembers, calledforbytheWarwickCommission,maybeagoodplace to start.26MinisterialConferencesof theWTO,whichcanissuebindingresolutions,mayalsobeworthexaminingratherthananapproachthat places all bets on a trade round. A startcouldbetakenbyagreeingtoaDeclarationattheNovember2011WTOMinisterialConferencetoexcludehumanitarianpurchasesbytheWorldFoodProgramfromexportrestrictions.ThishasalreadybeenagreedbytheG20andshouldnotposeanyseriousproblems.


5. CONCLUSION

Inorder toensure food security foreveryone,allaspectsoffoodsecuritysupplychain,globalgovernance, investment and trade, will needtobeaddressed simultaneously.For improvingglobal governance, full support should begiven to theworkof the reformedCommitteeon World Food Security. This may involvemergingtheUNHighLevelTaskForcewiththeCommittee.At the same time, theCommitteemay need toworkmore independently of theRome-based agencies and report to the UNEconomic and Social Council. For enhancedinvestment,theWorldBankgroupmaycontinuetohaveapredominantrolebecauseofitsworkin other areas of poverty reduction.However,therewouldhavetobemorecoordinationthanhasexistedsofar.Toensureafunctionalglobalfood supply system, WTO members shouldconsider alternative mechanisms for adjustingtraderulesandexpandingthemandateof theCommittee on Agriculture according to thechangingglobal requirements.ThankstomanypositivedevelopmentssuchashavingareformedCFS, theGlobal Partnership on Food Security,substantial new funding and a much morecoordinated approach, the global communityis in a much better position to reduce global

hunger. Unfortunately trade rules are notkeeping upwith other developments andmayburdengainsmadeelse.

Whileresourcemobilizationforagriculturehasmadegoodprogressover the last threeyears,somegapsbetweeninternationalorganizationsand other players involved in food securitystill remain.TheG20,under the leadershipofFrance,hasdemonstratedthevalueofeffectivediplomacy in implementing specific reforms,particularlythroughtheactionplanproposedbyagricultureministersinJune2011.Still,ministersfell well short of the evidence based policyrecommendationsmade by a group of expertsfrom international organizations. For example,rather than championing reform in biofuelpolicy,astheexpertsrecommended,ministerswereableonlytocallformoreresearch,whentheproblemsarealreadywellunderstood.Sucha piecemeal approachwill make changes thatmeet the least resistance but are unlikely toridusofhunger.Tounravelthetangleofrules,organizationsandintereststhatunderminefoodsecurity, leaders in rich and poor countrieswillneedtodemonstrateresolveinthefaceofpoliticalexpediency.


ENdNOTES

1 TheUNsystemresponsetotheworldfoodsecuritycrisis(asofSeptember2008).UNHighLevelTaskforceontheGlobalFoodSecurityCrisis.-lastaccessed18May2011.

2 TheComprehensiveFramework forAction (2010).UNHigh LevelTaskforceon theGlobalFoodSecurityCrisis,Geneva.

3 FAO:TheChallengeofRenewal.ReportoftheIndependentExternalEvaluationoftheFoodandAgricultureOrganizationoftheUnitedNations(2007).C2007/7A.1-Rev.1.UNFoodandAgricultureOrganization,Rome.

4 Ibidpp.206

5 DirectionsforCollaborationamongtheRome-basedAgencies.JointMeetingoftheHundredandSecondSessionoftheProgrammeCommitteeandHundredandTwenty-eighthSessionoftheFinanceCommittee(2009).JM09.2/4.UNFoodandAgricultureOrganization,Rome.

6 CollaborationonadministrativeandprocessingworkbetweenFAO,WFPandIFAD-progressreport. Joint Meeting of the Ninety-ninth Session of the Programme Committee and theHundred-and-twenty-secondSessionoftheFinanceCommittee(2008).JM08.1/2.UNFoodandAgricultureOrganization,Rome.

7 ProposalfortheCreationofaGlobalFoodSecurityCluster.Inter-AgencyStandingCommittee77th Working Group Meeting (2010).WO/1006/3505/7.Inter-Agency Standing Committee,Geneva.-lastaccessed18May18,2011.

8 D.JohnShaw(2007).WorldFoodSecurity:AHistorysince1945.Palgrave,London.

9 Ibid.

10 Implementing Agriculture for Development. World Bank Group Agriculture Action PlanFY2010–2012.WashingtonDC.

11 “CGIAR Fund Donors.” http://www.cgiar.org/who/members/index.html - last accessed 18May2011

12 Worldagriculture:towards2030/2050(2006).UNFoodandAgricultureOrganization,Rome.;Farmingmustchangetofeedtheworld.4February2009,http://www.fao.org/news/story/en/item/9962/icode/-lastaccessed19May2011

13 Schmidhuber,Josef(2010).“FAO’sLong-termOutlookforGlobalAgricultureâ “Challenges,Trends and Drivers.” Policy Brief for May 2011 Seminar on “Agricultural Price Volatility:Prospects, Challenges and Possible Solutions.” International Agricultural Trade PolicyCouncil,WashingtonDC.

14 Themarketforriceisanoftenquotedexample.TheFAO’sworkinthisareaisnoteworthy.Calpe,Concepcion(2004).“InternationalTradeinRice,RecentDevelopmentsandProspects.”WorldRiceResearchConference.UNFoodandAgricultureOrganization,Rome.

15 Brown,Lester(2011).“TheNewGeopoliticsofFood.”ForeignPolicy.May/June2011.

16 Price Volatility in Food and Agricultural Markets: Policy Responses (2011). UN Food andAgriculture Organization, International Fund for Agricultural Development, InternationalMonetaryFund,OrganizationforEconomicCooperationandDevelopment,UNConferenceonTradeandDevelopment,WorldFoodProgram,WorldBank,WorldTradeOrganization,


InternationalFoodPolicyResearchInstituteandtheUNHighLevelTaskforceontheGlobalFoodSecurityCrisis.

17 “Agricultural Safeguard Controversy Triggers Breakdown in Doha Round Talks.” BridgesWeeklyTradeNewsDigest.7August2008.InternationalCentreforTradeandSustainableDevelopment,Geneva.

18 D.JohnShaw(2007).WorldFoodSecurity:AHistorysince1945.Palgrave,London.pp354

19 World Trade OrganizationWT/L/43 17 February 1995WTO COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTUREDecisionbytheGeneralCouncilon31January1995

20 UruguayRoundAgreementonAgriculture(1994).WorldTradeOrganization,Geneva

21 “FoodSupplyMatchesDemand,FAOTellsGovernments,Markets.”BridgesWeeklyTradeNewsDigest. 29 September2010. InternationalCentre forTradeandSustainableDevelopment,Geneva.

22 RevisedDraftModalitiesforAgriculture(2008).CommitteeonAgricultureSpecialSession.TN/AG/W/4/Rev.4.WorldTradeOrganization,Geneva.

23 “Agricultural Export Restrictions Spark Controversy at the WTO.” Bridges Weekly TradeNews Digest. 6 April 2010. International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development,Geneva.

24 Price Volatility in Food and Agricultural Markets: Policy Responses (2011). UN Food andAgriculture Organization, International Fund for Agricultural Development, InternationalMonetaryFund,OrganizationforEconomicCooperationandDevelopment,UNConferenceonTradeandDevelopment,WorldFoodProgram,WorldBank,WorldTradeOrganization,InternationalFoodPolicyResearchInstituteandtheUNHighLevelTaskforceontheGlobalFoodSecurityCrisis.

25 Orden,David,TimothyJoslingandLarsBrink(2011).“WTODisciplinesonAgriculturalSupport:Experience to Date and Assessment of Doha Proposals.” Research Brief 16. InternationalFoodPolicyResearchInstitute.Washington,DC.

26 TheMultilateralTradeRegime:WhichWayForward?(2007)TheWarwickCommission.

Selected IctSd ISSUe PAPeRS Agriculture trade and Sustainable development Risk Management in Agriculture and the Future of the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy. By Stefan Tangermann, Issue Paper No.34, 2011.Policy Solutions To Agricultural Market Volatility: A Synthesis. By Stefan Tangermann, Issue Paper No.33, 2011.Composite Index of Market Access for the Export of Rice from the United States. By Eric Wailes. Issue Paper No.32, 2011.Composite Index of Market Access for the Export of Rice from Thailand. By T. Dechachete. Issue Paper No.31, 2011.Composite Index of Market Access for the Export of Poultry from Brazil. By H. L. Burnquist, C. C. da Costa, M. J. P. de Souza, L. M. Fassarella. Issue Paper No.30, 2011.How Might the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy Affect Trade and Development After 2013? By A. Matthews. Issue Paper No. 29, 2010.Food Security, Price Volatility and Trade: Some Reflections for Developing Countries. By Eugenio Díaz-Bonilla and Juan Francisco Ron. Issue Paper No. 28, 2010.Composite Index of Market Access for the Export of Rice from Uruguay. By Carlos Perez Del Castillo and Daniela Alfaro. Issue Paper No. 27, 2010.How Would A Trade Deal On Cotton Affect Exporting And Importing Countries? By Mario Jales. Issue Paper No.26, 2010.Simulations on the Special Safeguard Mechanism: A Look at the December Draft Agriculture Modalities. By Raul Montemayor. Issue Paper No.25, 2010.competitiveness and Sustainable developmentThe Role of International Trade, Technology and Structural Change in Shifting Labour Demands in South Africa. By H. Bhorat, C. van der Westhuizen and S.Goga. Issue Paper No. 17, 2010.Trade Integration and Labour Market Trends in India: an Unresolved Unemployment Problem. By C.P. Chandrasekhar. Issue Paper No. 16, 2010.The Impact of Trade Liberalization and the Global Economic Crisis on the Productive Sectors, Employment and Incomes in Mexico. By A. Puyana. Issue Paper No. 15, 2010.Globalization in Chile: A Positive Sum of Winners and Losers. By V. E. Tokman. Issue Paper No. 14, 2010.Practical Aspects of Border Carbon Adjustment Measures – Using a Trade Facilitation Perspective to Assess Trade Costs. By Sofia Persson. Issue Paper No.13, 2010.Trade, Economic Vulnerability, Resilience and the Implications of Climate Change in Small Island and Littoral Developing Economies. By Robert Read. Issue Paper No.12, 2010.The Potential Role of Non Traditional Donors ‘Aid in Africa. By Peter Kragelund. Issue Paper No.11, 2010.Aid for Trade and Climate Change Financing Mechanisms: Best Practices and Lessons Learned for LDCs and SVEs in Africa. By Vinaye Dey Ancharaz. Issue Paper No.10, 2010.Resilience Amidst Rising Tides: An Issue Paper on Trade, Climate Change and Competitiveness in the Tourism Sector in the Caribbean. By Keron Niles. Issue Paper No.9, 2010.dispute Settlement and legal Aspects of International tradeConflicting Rules and Clashing Courts. The Case of Multilateral Environmental Agreements, Free Trade Agreements and the WTO. By Pieter Jan Kuijper. Issue Paper No.10, 2010.Burden of Proof in WTO Dispute Settlement: Contemplating Preponderance of the Evidence. By James Headen Pfitzer and Sheila Sabune. Issue Paper No.9, 2009.Suspension of Concessions in the Services Sector: Legal, Technical and Economic Problems. By Arthur E. Appleton. Issue Paper No.7, 2009.Trading Profiles and Developing Country Participation in the WTO Dispute Settlement System. By Henrik Horn, Joseph Francois and Niklas Kaunitz. Issue Paper No.6, 2009.Fisheries, International trade and Sustainable developmentThe Importance of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures to Fisheries Negotiations in Economic Partnership Agreements. By Martin Doherty. Issue Paper No.7, 2008.Fisheries, Aspects of ACP-EU Interim Economic Partnership Agreements: Trade and Sustainable Development Implications. By Liam Campling. Issue Paper No.6, 2008.Fisheries, International Trade and Sustainable Development. By ICTSD. Policy Discussion Paper, 2006.Intellectual Property Rights and Sustainable developmentSustainable Development In International Intellectual Property Law – New Approaches From EU Economic Partnership Agreements? By Henning Grosse Intellectual Property Rights and International Technology Transfer to Address Climate Change: Risks, Opportunities and Policy Options. By K. E. Maskus and R. L. Okediji. Issue Paper No.32, 2010Intellectual Property Training and Education: A Development Perspective. By Jeremy de Beer and Chidi Oguamanam. Issue Paper No.31, 2010.An International Legal Framework for the Sharing of Pathogens: Issues and Challenges. By Frederick M. Abbott. Issue Paper No.30, 2010.Sustainable Development In International Intellectual Property Law – New Approaches From EU Economic Partnership Agreements? By Henning Grosse Ruse – Khan. Issue Paper No.29, 2010.trade in Services and Sustainable developmentFacilitating Temporary Labour Mobility in African Least-Developed Countries: Addressing Mode 4 Supply-Side Constraints. By Sabrina Varma. Issue Paper No.10, 2009.Advancing Services Export Interests of Least-Developed Countries: Towards GATS Commitments on the Temporary Movement of natural Persons for the Supply of Low-Skilled and Semi-Skilled Services. By Daniel Crosby, Issue Paper No.9, 2009.Maritime Transport and Related Logistics Services in Egypt. By Ahmed F. Ghoneim, and Omneia A. Helmy. Issue Paper No.8, 2007.environmental Goods and Services ProgrammeHarmonising Energy Efficiency Requirements – Building Foundations for Co-operative Action. By Rod Janssen. Issue Paper No.14, 2010Climate-related single-use environmental goods. By Rene Vossenaar. Issue Paper No.13, 2010.Technology Mapping of the Renewable Energy, Buildings, and transport Sectors: Policy Drivers and International Trade Aspects: An ICTSD Synthesis Paper. By Renee Vossenaar and Veena Jha. Issue Paper No.12, 2010.trade and Sustainable energyInternational Transport, Climate Change and Trade: What are the Options for Regulating Emissions from Aviation and Shipping and what will be their Impact on Trade? By Joachim Monkelbaan. Background Paper, 2010.Climate Change and Trade on the Road to Copenhagen. Policy Discussion Paper, 2009.Trade, Climate Change and Global Competitiveness: Opportunities and Challenge for Sustainable Development in China and Beyond. By ICTSD. Selected Issue Briefs No.3, 2008.Intellectual Property and Access to Clean Energy Technologies in Developing Countries: An Analysis of Solar Photovoltaic, Biofuel and Wind Technologies. By John H. Barton. Issue Paper No.2, 2007.Regionalism and ePAsQuestions Juridiques et Systémiques Dans les Accords de Partenariat économique : Quelle Voie Suivre à Présent ? By Cosmas Milton Obote Ochieng. Issue Paper No. 8, 2010.Rules of Origin in EU-ACP Economic Partnership Agreements. By Eckart Naumann. Issue Paper No.7, 2010SPS and TBT in the EPAs between the EU and the ACP Countries. By Denise Prévost. Issue Paper No.6, 2010.Los acuerdos comerciales y su relación con las normas laborales: Estado actual del arte. By Pablo Lazo Grandi. Issue Paper No.5, 2010.Revisiting Regional Trade Agreements and their Impact on Services and Trade. By Mario Marconini. Issue Paper No.4, 2010.Trade Agreements and their Relation to Labour Standards: The Current Situation. By Pablo Lazo Grandi. Issue Paper No.3, 2009.Global economic Policy and InstitutionsThe Microcosm of Climate Change Negotiations: What Can the World Learn from the European Union? By Håkan Nordström, Issue Paper No.1, 2009.

These and other ICTSD resources are available at http://www.ictsd.org

ICTSD’s Programme on Agricultural Trade and Sustainable Development aims to promote food security, equity and environmental sustainability in agricultural trade. Publications include:

• FoodReserves inDevelopingCountries:TradePolicyOptionsfor ImprovedFoodSecurity.By C. L. Gilbert, Issue Paper No. 37, 2011.

• GlobalFoodStamps:AnIdeaWorthConsidering?ByTimJosling,IssuePaperNo.36,2011.

• RiskManagementinAgricultureandtheFutureoftheEU’sCommonAgriculturalPolicy.ByStefan Tangermann, Issue Paper No. 34, 2011.

• PolicySolutionsToAgriculturalMarketVolatility:ASynthesis.ByStefanTangermann,IssuePaper No. 33, 2011.

• CompositeIndexofMarketAccessfortheExportofRicefromtheUnitedStates.ByEricWailes.IssuePaperNo.32,2011.

• CompositeIndexofMarketAccessfortheExportofRicefromThailand.ByT.Dechachete.Issue Paper No. 31, 2011.

• CompositeIndexofMarketAccessfortheExportofPoultryfromBrazil.ByH.L.Burnquist,C.C.daCosta,M.J.P.deSouza,L.M.Fassarella.IssuePaperNo.30,2011.

• How Might the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy Affect Trade and Development After2013?AnAnalysisoftheEuropeanCommission’sNovember2010Communication.ByAlanMatthews.IssuePaperNo.29,2010.

• Food Security, Price Volatility and Trade: Some Reflections for Developing Countries. ByEugenioDíaz-BonillaandJuanFranciscoRon.IssuePaperNo.28,2010.

• CompositeIndexofMarketAccessfortheExportofRicefromUruguay.ByCarlosPerezDelCastillo and Daniela Alfaro. Issue Paper No. 27, 2010.

• HowWouldATradeDealOnCottonAffectExportingAndImportingCountries?ByMarioJales.IssuePaperNo.26,2010.

• Simulations on the Special Safeguard Mechanism: A Look at the December 2008 DraftAgricultureModalities.ByRaulMontemayor.IssuePaperNo.25,2010.

• HowWouldaTradeDealonSugarAffectExportingand ImportingCountries?ByAmaniElobeid.IssuePaperNo.24,2009.

• ConstructingaCompositeIndexofMarketAcess.ByTimJosling.IssuePaperNo.23,2009.

• Comparing safeguard measures in regional and bilateral agreements. By Paul Kruger,WillemienDennerandJBCronje.IssuePaperNo.22,2009.

• HowwouldaWTOagreementonbananasaffectexportingand importingcountries?ByGiovanniAnania.IssuePaperNo.21,2009.

• Biofuels Subsidies and the Law of theWorld Trade Organisation. By Toni Harmer. IssuePaperNo.20,2009.

• BiofuelsCertificationandtheLawoftheWorldTradeOrganisation.ByMarshaA.Echols.IssuePaperNo.19,2009.

Forfurtherinformation,visitwww.ictsd.org

ABOUT ICTSD

Foundedin1996,theInternationalCentreforTradeandSustainableDevelopment(ICTSD)isanindependentnon-profitandnon-governmentalorganizationbasedinGeneva.Byempoweringstakeholdersintradepolicythroughinformation,networking,dialogue,well-targetedresearchand capacity building, the centre aims to influence the international trade system such that it advances the goal of sustainable development.

www.ictsd.org

Documents

Improving the International Governance of Food Security ... · PDF file... (FAO) in 1945 and the food ... food security cycle, all of the initiatives ... Governance of Food Security